Syria conflict: 'Chemical attacks kill hundreds'

[Feuer Frei!]

New lows have been reached it seems.


Chemical weapons attacks have killed hundreds on the outskirts of Damascus, Syrian opposition activists say.
Rockets with toxic agents were launched at the suburbs of the Ghouta region early on Wednesday as part of a major bombardment on rebel forces, they say.


SOURCE (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23777201)

[Skybird]

Never really understood the outcry about chemical weapons here. Is burning crowds with white phosphorus or having them massacred by machine guns less heavy in blood toll? Or German outcry about drones: where is the difference about a missiles dropped on a target by a fighter, or a drone? Except that the latter saves own guys to put themselves at risk and denies the enemy to equal the score by having them shot, too.

War is war. It's always dirty. Massacre is massacre, it's always "low".

[Feuer Frei!]

So you are saying there is no distinction between using nerve gas or chemical weapons and machine gun bullets?

Apart from the fact that you can direct machine gun bullets and cannot direct the effects of nerve gas or chemical radiation, ie not discriminating and, like in this case, killing babies and children.

I think it says a lot, when a combatant choses to use cowardly methods to inflict losses upon the other.

In fact, what is the primary objective of the use of chemical warfare?

Certainly the answer is not indiscriminately killing off your enemy.

There are a raft of reasons why chemical warfare is frowned upon in the world.
A raft of reasons.

[Skybird]

I'm saying that a massacre not committed by chemicals but machetes or bullets is not any nicier.

In acts like here, bullets would be used without discriminating between civilian and combatant either. That's why we call such things not a battle, but a massacre.

So what i am pointing at is our hypocrisy when arranging ourselves with slaughtering done with bullets or machetes - but we yell when they use chemicals.

Some people in the West even want us actively supporting the so-called "rebels". But what if they have done this latest massacre, like they have done others before, like their counterparts in Assad's hordes? Not to mention that the majority of these "rebels" factions are ultra-fundamentalist and propose "values" that any civilised person would avoid at all cost to get associated with?

[Feuer Frei!]

The question of why the use of Chemical warfare, and let's stick with that one, because this is what allegedly happened here, is different than using a bomb has been asked many times.

Not many have answered it.

I think 2 words come to mind. Intimidation vs Eradication.

The use of chemical weapons is 2-fold.

Controversial and immoral.

Chemical weapons are classed as unconventional threats.

Stopping such activity is becoming increasingly more difficult with the continued development of chemical and biological weaponry by rogue parties and states.

Chemical bombs have the potential to reach far outside the impact zone, given the right weather conditions for example.

Compare that with the spray of a machine gun or even a nuclear bomb.

The use of weapons comes down to whether or not it is morally acceptable and ethically responsible. The destruction of human life is unacceptable – as should be the use of chemical and biological weapons.

[Skybird]

By your arguments you should be more concerned with the use of submunition bombs and cluster ammunition, as well as mines. These lay around for months and years after the fighting has been done. Chemical weapons that so far got used in wars have short living times only, the agents are gone after short time and are difficult to be brought to focused, amassed effect.

To me, the difference is made by targets selection (or no target selection):

The intended targeting of persons not supporting directly or indirectly the enemy and not participating in actual fighting and not being a member of the enemy force, or abusing them as human shields

versus

targeting enemy combatants, and non-combating but still supporting "helpers" and sympathizers, also mentioning here the victims falling to "collateral" damage where the victim is not targetted as the shot's objective but just unluckily happens to be in in the wrong place, at the wrong time.

The weapon does not make the moral difference. The intention of aim, the purposes of a war - these make the moral difference.

What makes a difference is to intentionally bombard and mass-kill civilian crowds as a tool to terrorize them for the purpose of terrorizing them, or blaming the other side. In Rwanda, the genocide was committed by machetes (delivered by the Chinese). Whether children and women and men, old and young, get mutilated my machetes and blood to death, get burned to deathn by white phosphorus, get mowed down by machine guns, or get ripped apart by cluster ammunition- is that method of doing the killing really the standard by which to assess the severity of the event?

[Feuer Frei!]

As far as i understand it, reading news articles and otrher subject matter, is that it's not the severity of the event that is being questioned, but the means by which the death toll has been reached.

[Wolferz]

Is it really being done by the accused parties?
The military industrial machine needs conflict in order to propagate itself.
What better way to proliferate weapons of war is there than by disseminating news of chemical weapons use in order to stir a populace toward military action and intervention?

We need a Department of Peace. Not a Department of defense, aka the War department.:sunny:

[Jimbuna]

If irrefutable proof is obtained that Assad is responsible I'm wondering what if anything President Obama will do.

[August]

If irrefutable proof is obtained that Assad is responsible I'm wondering what if anything President Obama will do.


I'm thinking little or nothing Jim.

[AVGWarhawk]

If irrefutable proof is obtained that Assad is responsible I'm wondering what if anything President Obama will do.

Jim, BO is golfing. Please leave a message. :up:

[Skybird]

Israeli minister for strategic affairs, Juval Steinitz, is quoted in German news that the Mossad says the attack has been carried out by Assad's troops.

France indirectly has threatened French intervention even without green light from the UN.

The UN - does what it usually always does. Nobody is as competent in doing that as the UN.

[nikimcbee]

If irrefutable proof is obtained that Assad is responsible I'm wondering what if anything President Obama will do.

I'll guess go on vacation or golf.

[nikimcbee]

Jim, BO is golfing. Please leave a message. :up:

Just saw this.:haha: I see a trend here.

I saw on the news that France was calling for action. I say go for it.:salute: But, we've had our quota of Mideast fighting, so I say we sit this one out.

[the_tyrant]

So you are saying there is no distinction between using nerve gas or chemical weapons and machine gun bullets?

Apart from the fact that you can direct machine gun bullets and cannot direct the effects of nerve gas or chemical radiation, ie not discriminating and, like in this case, killing babies and children.

I think it says a lot, when a combatant choses to use cowardly methods to inflict losses upon the other.

In fact, what is the primary objective of the use of chemical warfare?

Certainly the answer is not indiscriminately killing off your enemy.

There are a raft of reasons why chemical warfare is frowned upon in the world.
A raft of reasons.

The whole fear of poison gas is an irrational fear from an earlier era.

I can understand how, in the trenches of WWI, you would wet yourself at the sight of a gas slowly drifting towards you, knowing that it would kill you.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/09/Poison_gas_attack.jpg/400px-Poison_gas_attack.jpg

But in this day and age, chemical weapons are not too hard to come by, especially when you can see things like this:

http://gizmodo.com/5847985/feuding-women-inadvertently-create-toxic-gas-in-the-middle-of-a-wal+mart


truth is, small scale chemical weapon creation is easily doable in your home, its arguably easier to create chlorine gas in small scales than it is to create gun powder.

With a few trained chemists and a chemicals facility (ex. a fertilizer factory). Its not too difficult to create a wide variety of chemical weapons. it is probably easier to convert a chemical factory into a factory for chemical weapons than it is to convert a manufactory into artillery production.

The use of poison gas is just like the use of any other weapon with an area of effect, and should not be feared as the end of the world.

[Jimbuna]

I'm thinking little or nothing Jim.

Jim, BO is golfing. Please leave a message. :up:

I feared/thought as much :yep:

[eddie]

I'm sure BO is aware of what has happened over there. We've been fighting so damned long in the ME already, why should we get involved. We have spent trillions on the ME, isn't that enough? We've lost a lot of soldiers and have thousands of wounded, isn't that enough?

Unless of course you are part of that crowd who says war is good for business. American Defense Contractors are just waiting to get going into Syria, the sick bastids! They know where they can go, as far as I'm concerned!:down:

[Oberon]

I think a lot of the fear is not so much the effects of the chemical weapons on a military level, but the fact that it's a new stage in the already bloody Syrian civil war, and it's going to cause even more fatalities than before.

Now, you take the average Scud missile, it has a payload ability of between 600-1000kg, that's about 2000lb, give or take a few hundred lb. Ironically, about the same size warhead of a V2 missile from WWII. So we can probably use this video as a fairly accurate representation of the blast effects of a conventional Scud:

http://vimeo.com/50445690
(About 17 minutes in)

And this video from Aleppo purports to show the impact of a Scud:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TezehvLMqkk

Now, with a conventional explosive blast there is a chance, in some cases, a very slim chance of survivors, especially if you're in a basement or some such place, which is where a lot of the casualties of this recent attack were. With a chemical attack, the basement is the worst place to be, and the likelihood of survival without protective equipment is lower.

Assad knows he can get away with pretty much anything because the West won't intervene because the general public of the West doesn't have the stomach for it, nor indeed do they really know which side to support.

Things fall apart, the centre cannot hold
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world

[Wolferz]

From the news reports of this alleged use of chemical weapons, well that's the word the talking heads have been using, "alleged"...
It must be some cheap Sarin gas, because even a small drop of Sarin on your skin is enough to make you do the dying cockroach dance and kill you if you don't have an Atropine injector handy. There shouldn't be any video of sickened survivors at all. That's why I think the reports are bogus BS. They're just trying to stir the public into backing a military incursion into Syria and by association, Iran. The public is so damned gullible it's ridiculous and the warmongers will use it to their advantage.:down:

[Dowly]

And this video from Aleppo purports to show the impact of a Scud:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TezehvLMqkk

Wonder what's that fire that flares few seconds before the explosion in the same
exact spot. :hmmm:

[Oberon]

From the news reports of this alleged use of chemical weapons, well that's the word the talking heads have been using, "alleged"...
It must be some cheap Sarin gas, because even a small drop of Sarin on your skin is enough to make you do the dying cockroach dance and kill you if you don't have an Atropine injector handy. There shouldn't be any video of sickened survivors at all. That's why I think the reports are bogus BS. They're just trying to stir the public into backing a military incursion into Syria and by association, Iran. The public is so damned gullible it's ridiculous.:down:

Sarin isn't the only chemical weapon in the world. The Syrians have Tabun, VX and Mustard Gas as well as Sarin. Also, bear in mind that in a few of the videos you see the victims being sprayed with hosepipes in an attempt to dilute and wash away the chemical agent, furthermore, it's likely that Syrian chemical agents don't have the same shelf life that Western and Russian Sarin does because of impurities in its creation, Iraqi Sarin, for example, only persisted for a couple of weeks, whereas advanced Sarin can linger between weeks and months.
It's pretty much accepted that a chemical incident has occurred, the unknown factor is who did it. Assad to attack the enemy, or the FSA to frame Assad? That's the question, and by stopping the UN inspectors from visiting the area and independently evaluating the situation, Assad is making himself look guilty in the way that Saddam did when he played roulette with IAEA inspectors.

[mapuc]

Every one have his believe in things and every one picks the words that is said in a news program a.s.o. Every one also collect what he or she sees on the news.

Now that it is said I continue

Heard an expert on a danish radio show today

and he said something interesting.

Take a look at some of the victims from Saddam's attack on the Kurds in the 80'ies and then take a look at the victims from Syria- you will see a huge different.

He also said: It would be wrong things to do by Assad, now that he has good fortune on the battlefield.

So this is those words I picked up.

I doubt that there have been used chemical weapons in this attack

Markus

[Wolferz]

I'm with Markus.

If it was actually Sarin, they would all be dead.
If it was mustard gas, the victims would be choking on their own bodily fluids and would show signs of chemical burns on their skin.

The reports are a false flag manipulation attempting to make Assad look guilty. If that's even possible the way that scum bag has been acting.

There are a number of scenarios that could be at work here. Each as unlikely as the next.

[Oberon]

I'm with Markus.

If it was actually Sarin, they would all be dead.
If it was mustard gas, the victims would be choking on their own bodily fluids and would show signs of chemical burns on their skin.

The reports are a false flag manipulation attempting to make Assad look guilty. If that's even possible the way that scum bag has been acting.

There are a number of scenarios that could be at work here. Each as unlikely as the next.


So...what? Was there a sudden mass outbreak of epilepsy captured on film?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmB6sBvAbJk&feature=player_detailpage#t=64

Syria must have some damn good child actors... :yep:

[mapuc]

So...what? Was there a sudden mass outbreak of epilepsy captured on film?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmB6sBvAbJk&feature=player_detailpage#t=64

Syria must have some damn good child actors... :yep:


Then enlight me here. What kind of nervgas has been used here? -If it has been used.

Markus

[Oberon]

Then enlight me here. What kind of nervgas has been used here? -If it has been used.

Markus

I'm not a weapons inspector, but those reactions are not those of conventional weapons are they? You don't see mass outbreaks of convulsions from a standard explosion do you?

EDIT: If I had to guess I'd say it was either Sarin or VX. Now bear in mind that most chemical agents are water soluble, that's why the US dumps their chemical stockpiles at sea. So, the weapon hits the area, effects a set number of people (last estimate was in the low thousands), some die within minutes, others on the outskirts get a lower dosage and develop symptoms of exposure. They spread out from the impact site and are taken by friends to a hospital, bear in mind that most of this footage is coming from either in a hospital or outside a hospital, NOT in the actual impact zone. Some of the victims are washed down with hose pipes, that lessens the amount of chemical residue on them. Some of the people who have been exposed to the survivors of this attack may well develop complications over the coming weeks, some will no doubt die.
Now, short of either some very good child actors, special effects and make-up, or perhaps some sort of massive shock-wave cannon, I do not see a way to create that many blood-less victims without using chemical weapons. If the casualties were purely adult, then I would perhaps be skeptical that they were paid to act like that, but when you get children that cannot be much more than four or five, then it becomes harder to create that level of authenticity.
Could it be a fake? There is a chance, I cannot deny it, and I'm sorry if my tone is hostile but you cannot watch that footage and not get a little emotional about it. Honestly though, what advantage would the West gain from making such footage? What advantage would we gain from overthrowing Assad? What advantage have we gained in Libya, Iraq or Afghanistan? I don't think any of the Western governments particularly want to get involved in another war in the Middle East, because let's face it, all politicians care about is their popularity scores, and wars in the Middle East are a sure-fire way to sink your popularity, but I don't think that they can keep out of it, and whether this attack was the FSA trying to frame Assad to get the West to come to their aid, or Assad trying to break a stalemate in the area, I do not know, but I am very sure that some sort of chemical attack has taken place here, either that or this is some sort of elaborate ruse, far beyond the abilities of Syria, and if it is by the West then for what purpose would it serve? Another expensive war in a time of financial austerity that will sink their popularity and make them unelectable, and whilst it may remove a Russian ally, it won't remove the Russian base, it won't remove a threat to Israel, and it won't make the new Syrian government necessarily any more favourable towards the West, if anything it will probably just result in another breeding ground for Al'Qaeda. Not that the current situation in Syria isn't conducive to Al'Qaeda operations.
So why?

EDIT EDIT: It could equally be Chlorine gas, it's been used before and it doesn't have the longevity of modern gases but it's still potent and it doesn't necessarily kill straight away:

From the British Official History of the attack on Hill 60, 1915.
90 men died from gas poisoning in the trenches or before they could be got to a dressing station; of the 207 brought to the nearest dressing stations, 46 died almost immediately and 12 after long suffering

Furthermore it has supposedly been used in Syria already, by the FSA which means that it's likely that the Syrian army has it too.
http://edition.cnn.com/2013/03/24/world/meast/syria-chemical-weapons

http://world.time.com/2013/04/01/syrias-civil-war-the-mystery-behind-a-deadly-chemical-attack/

[mapuc]

Every military expert that I have seen on danish tv, say that it would be the most wrong thing by Assad to do, now that he have won a lot on the battlefield.

Have been thinking and I could be wrong.

Could it be that Assad is so coldhearted that he did it and knows that Russia and China is going to prevent any military intervention by the nato?

Just a thought.

Markus

[mapuc]

I'm not a weapons inspector, but those reactions are not those of conventional weapons are they? You don't see mass outbreaks of convulsions from a standard explosion do you?

They have been hit by something, that for sure.

From what I know Syria has a huge amount of Saringas and if I'm not wrong a lot of mustard gas and none of these two seems to have been used here.

I'm like you not an expert on this.

We have to remember one important thing- The first victims in a war is the truth and the winner is the propaganda.

I say that we await the UN-report then we can discuss whatever our response should be.

It could be true(look at my post above)

Markus

[Oberon]

They have been hit by something, that for sure.

From what I know Syria has a huge amount of Saringas and if I'm not wrong a lot of mustard gas and none of these two seems to have been used here.

I'm like you not an expert on this.

We have to remember one important thing- The first victims in a war is the truth and the winner is the propaganda.

I say that we await the UN-report then we can discuss whatever our response should be.

It could be true(look at my post above)

Markus

I agree (and apologise for the mass-editing of my post whilst you were typing your response) and there are certainly going to be inflated casualty figures and lots of lingering shots on dying children just before the family dinner time meal, it's the same sort of tactic used by charities for raising money for Darfur and places like that, but in both situations something has occurred, it's just how it's reported, and I am dubious whether Assad conducted this latest attack, because as you have stated, it doesn't make political sense, although given that the Syrian army started bombarding the same area the day after the incident then perhaps it was a prelude to an offensive to try and retake Ghouta.
There's been talk of 'Agent 15' or BZ being the chemical used in the attacks, certainly it does bear some of the marks of BZ, however the Syrian army is not known to possess BZ, so if it is BZ, and given the situation in Syria and the inability of the UN inspectors to do their job, we are likely to never know, then the question is where did they get it from?
One thing is for certain that it wasn't a Blister agent, since none of the victims had skin blisters, so it rules out Mustard gas, but IIRC Nerve agents do not create blistering.

[mapuc]

Have read your edited post and this one.

I agree in everything you wrote.

I myself will await the UN-report. If it comes.

Maybe we have to look at the informal channels to get the truth, ´cause I doubt that the UN gets the clearence to access this area(thinking of Russia and China blocking for a demand by UN)

Markus

[eddie]

Assad destroying the evidence?

http://news.msn.com/world/syria-bombs-area-of-alleged-chemical-attack

[mapuc]

Found this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerve_agent

especially this caught my eyes


Initial symptoms following exposure to nerve agents (like sarin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarin)) are a runny nose, tightness in the chest, and constriction of the pupils. Soon after, the victim will then have difficulty breathing and will experience nausea and drooling. As the victim continues to lose control of his or her bodily functions, he or she will involuntarily salivate, lacrimate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tears), urinate, defecate, and experience gastrointestinal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gastrointestinal) pain and vomiting (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vomiting). Blisters (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blister) and burning of the eyes and/or lungs may also occur.[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerve_agent#cite_note-2)[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerve_agent#cite_note-3) This phase is followed by initially myoclonic jerks followed by status epilepticus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status_epilepticus). Death then comes via complete respiratory depression, most likely via the excessive peripheral activity at the neuromuscular junction (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuromuscular_junction) of the diaphragm (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoracic_diaphragm).[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerve_agent#cite_note-4)
The effects of nerve agents are very long lasting and increase with successive exposures. Survivors of nerve agent poisoning almost invariably suffer chronic neurological damage. This neurological damage can also lead to continuing psychiatric (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychiatric) effects.[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerve_agent#cite_note-5)


Markus

[Jimbuna]

Assad destroying the evidence?

http://news.msn.com/world/syria-bombs-area-of-alleged-chemical-attack

That wouldn't surprise me in the least....the west should push as hard as they can diplomatically to get inspectors in there (and I mean in short time...a month at most).

Failure to do so as a consequence of Syrian refusal then put a no fly zone in place similar to that in Libya previously and live by their morals....otherwise stop moaning and keep out of the whole affair.

Obama must be getting embarrassed by his previous 'red line' comments.

[Wolferz]

Obama should be embarrassed because he can't overtly help his Muslim brethren without pissing off all of us citizen types. He better stick to his campaign to usurp us.

See through you we can.:stare:

[Skybird]

It is counter-intuitive to think Assad ordered the use of chemical weapons now that weapon inspectors already are underway in Syria, although being held on a very short line by the Syrians. But does this really mean anything? He could as well just think that he nevertheless could get away with it if doing this publicity stunt right under the nose of the inspectors and the UN. And who would accuse him for assuming that? Obama and the EU and the UN all have so far given extremely weak reactions to the whole Syrian bloodshed, and Assad knows he has the Russians behind him. Probably also the Chinese. Even the Israelis have an interest to see him staying, instead of having to deal with a chaotic breed of several rivalling factions and ultra-fundamentalists who in case of victory will have access to those weapons.

I don't bet a cent on who committed that chemical strike. That the rebels did it, is as possible as that Assad ordered it. It even is possible that there was a break in the chain of command, or that local military commanders overstepped their responsibility. Heck, it is even possible that the strike was ordered from somebody in Assad's camp who wanted to struck the beloved Fuhrer from behind to improve his own cards when weakening or removing Assad, or to settle an open bill.

I still recommend to do the same as we did in reaction to the genocide committed by the Janjaweed, or the genocide committed in Rwanda, and so many other massacres that we witnessed: let's do nothing. We do that often, so what makes Syria so precious that now we should change it? Syria is not worth our tax money and the defense budget it finances, nor the health and life of our soldiers. In the thread on Egypt I recently linked an article "Nobody needs a democratic Egypt". What was written in that, in principle is true for Syria as well. Especially the part about the nature of mentality and ideological basis of those on whose behalf some now want to intervene.

And btw, in reality we do not have money anyway. What our nations have, is debts. Plenty of them. Implicit debts that are several, many times as high as our nations' yearly GDPs.

[eddie]

That wouldn't surprise me in the least....the west should push as hard as they can diplomatically to get inspectors in there (and I mean in short time...a month at most).

Failure to do so as a consequence of Syrian refusal then put a no fly zone in place similar to that in Libya previously and live by their morals....otherwise stop moaning and keep out of the whole affair.

Obama must be getting embarrassed by his previous 'red line' comments.

I agree about the No-fly zone! But, a couple of things to ponder-

How would the Russians react about foreign aircraft near their sea base that they have in the area?

Would love to see Iranian aircraft turned back at the Syrian border, but again, who would be involved with enforcing it?

[Feuer Frei!]

that weapon inspectors already are underway in Syria

Underway? They are situated in Damascus, but thats about it.

They need to get access to be able to verify if Nerve gas (and that is what is alleged to have been used) was used. Which it is almost certainly the case.

So far, no access for them.

[Tribesman]

Underway? They are situated in Damascus, but thats about it.

They need to get access to be able to verify if Nerve gas (and that is what is alleged to have been used) was used. Which it is almost certainly the case.

So far, no access for them.
And as such is the situation they need the approval of the government and the various rebels, also whichever specific armed group holds that particular area and whichever specific armed groups hold the neighbouring areas.
It takes a lot of negotiating with a lot of groups to allow a bunch of foreigners to go poking around the neighbourhood in any degree of safety.

[Feuer Frei!]

And as such is the situation they need the approval of the government and the various rebels, also whichever specific armed group holds that particular area and whichever specific armed groups hold the neighbouring areas.
It takes a lot of negotiating with a lot of groups to allow a bunch of foreigners to go poking around the neighbourhood in any degree of safety.

Indeed.

Never mind about not letting them in because (possibly) you have something to hide.

[Feuer Frei!]

Under Analysis:

as a clearer picture begins to emerge of the alleged attack and its consequences, some experts say they are becoming more convinced that a nerve agent may have been used.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23806491

23 August 2013 Last updated at 01:22 GMT

[kraznyi_oktjabr]

I think VX was possibly used. If I remember correctly it in sufficient dose causes paralysis in whole body and especially in muscles around lungs. Latter causes death by suffocation.

This is based completely on memory though so I maybe wrong... Its also possible that I mix up symptoms with some other nerve agent.

[Feuer Frei!]

I think VX was possibly used. If I remember correctly it in sufficient dose causes paralysis in whole body and especially in muscles around lungs. Latter causes death by suffocation.

This is based completely on memory though so I maybe wrong... Its also possible that I mix up symptoms with some other nerve agent.

This will jog your memory perhaps?

http://www.bt.cdc.gov/agent/vx/index.asp

As for other forms:

https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/emergencypreparedness/guides/nerve.html

[Skybird]

Underway? They are situated in Damascus, but thats about it.

They need to get access to be able to verify if Nerve gas (and that is what is alleged to have been used) was used. Which it is almost certainly the case.

So far, no access for them.

their mission was planned and decided long before, they are not there to examine recent events, they also are on such a short line that their mission probably is pretty much useless.

Why are people expecting Assad to act stupid? Anyone here really believing that if latest massacre was him, he would help to reveal it? I think politicians should not make even greater fools of themselves and should not demknstrate their helplessness so exhibitionalistically . If you do not have the power and strength to put your hands where your mouth is - shut the hell up. Don't be so eager to draw attention to your own helplessness and cluelessness.

Assad should allow examination of his crime. And the thief in the team should raise the hand please and hand nimself over without need. Hilarious. Whom do these idiots believe they are dealing with? A weakling and retard?

[MH]

their mission was planned and decided long before, they are not there to examine recent events, they also are on such a short line that their mission probably is pretty much useless.

Why are people expecting Assad to act stupid? Anyone here really believing that if latest massacre was him, he would help to reveal it? I think politicians should not make even greater fools of themselves and should not demknstrate their helplessness so exhibitionalistically . If you do not have the power and strength to put your hands where your mouth is - shut the hell up. Don't be so eager to draw attention to your own helplessness and cluelessness.

Assad should allow examination of his crime. And the thief in the team should raise the hand please and hand nimself over without need. Hilarious. Whom do these idiots believe they are dealing with? A weakling and retard?

The evidence and data is out there.
Surly US goverment knows exactly what happend.
The thing is that nobody in the west want to know- as it seems.
So it all can be left to UN then which is known for its uselessness.
By the time UN comes up with something nobody will be interested and this thread will be on page 100.




.

[Tribesman]

The evidence and data is out there.

Being "out there" is meaningless without access to "out there".
If they don't get access all they are going to be able to say is along the same lines as last time. Which in the end was .....Two people at an unknown time and unknown location are confirmed to have been exposed to chemical agents from an unknown source by unknown people.
Which when it comes to data and evidence is pretty worthless.

[MH]

No there was three and there was this one who had a beer.

[kraznyi_oktjabr]

This will jog your memory perhaps?

http://www.bt.cdc.gov/agent/vx/index.asp

As for other forms:

https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/emergencypreparedness/guides/nerve.htmlThanks! :up: It has been quite long time since I last read of this stuff. :salute:

[Skybird]

It is interesting to remember that there is some inside-Syria observer group - I forgot the name but it often gets mentioned in news reports when reporting from Iraq, I just read it this morning again - with known close ties to the rebels, that this group so far still is hesitant to confirm that there has been a chemical event at all.

Could be because they know it was not Assad, but their friends. Could be because they still have no final verdict. Could be the deliver the evidence right now while I'm typing. Could be that there indeed was no event. Well, an event it was, but maybe not what is claimed it was.

The inspectors in Syria right now, as far as I remember form the news have permission to go to three places, all of which are low in priority and possibility to create evidence against Assad. That is what I mean when laughing about politicians demand that Assad and the rebels should allow inspections. It reminds me of one scene from the movie "V Vendetta" where the masked man asks Natalie Portman whether she doesn't find it amusing herself that she asks a masked man who he is. That question is pointless in itself, and the demands to allow inspectors in are pointless in themselves. One could as well ask on TV who the bank robber is, and tell him that he should raise his hand voluntarily and hand himself over to the police. One could also declare crime illegal, and forbid lying. Certainly would help a lot. :haha:

[Mr Quatro]

If irrefutable proof is obtained that Assad is responsible I'm wondering what if anything President Obama will do.

I also am wondering what he will do ... at first I thought our country had no proof that Syria was using these types of weapons. So I discerned that President Obama was right in his usual approach of fence sitting, which cost us one US ambassador already (unproven of course, but more information will be forth coming).

Any fence sitting that protects US forces is okay with me. Now I suspect he is waiting for the UN to decide if chemical weapons have been used and while he waits he is using the phones to stir up international action against the Russian backed Syrian forces.

Notice that even President Bush did not act alone in Iraq, but used several international countries armed forces to intercede with them on the final push for Bagdad. Using a consortium provided cover for everyone being strictly against the USA.

I hope USA boots on the ground would be more in line to secure such chemical weapons from ever being used again and then leave the area in a hurry ... leaving the conflict to played out between the Syrian forces and the rebels that were reported to be in control of the eastern parts of the city that were bombarded with these chemical weapons.

If these weapons should fall into the wrong hands Israel will be the next nation with photos of children wrapped in white lien.

Can't figure out why Syria would do this with UN observers already in the city?

but hey I'm just a arm chair CNN observer lol

[mapuc]

Let us presume that Assad have used chemical against his own people:

Do you think it's all USA/NATO need to start bombing in Syria.

They need a lot more information before they can bomb syria

Markus

[Wolferz]

Doesn't all of this sound profoundly similar to the pre-invasion of Iraq rhetoric?

The sheeple are distracted by the dancing puppet show while their pockets get picked by the real criminals.:hmmm:

[CaptainMattJ.]

Chemical weapons are horrendously more cruel than a bullet. Have you never seen all the pictures of horribly disfigured people, who's skin is falling off and in unbearable pain? Nerve agents, biological warfare, mustard gas, all much, much worse than getting shot.

Aside from being burned alive or brutally tortured, chemical weapons easily top the horror of being shot or dying in an explosion. If you're in the kill radius, explosions are quick and easy. Chemical agents can take days to kill, and assuming you survive it, you can easily be left with permanent disfiguration and health issues.


As for a response, it would be a very bad idea to put any kind of significant number of boots on the ground. Many of our "short-term" conflicts started with "well only be here a few weeks, with a few thousand men".

[eddie]

The so called experts from the West finally guess as to what happened.

"They suspect an organophosphate agent, most likely sarin gas, was involved in Wednesday's attack. However, the basic chemical agent may have been mixed with other substances acting as preservatives and perhaps also to alter or add to the effects of the gas.
"Because they are non-persistent agents, they dissipate very quickly," said Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, a former head of Britain's military counter-nuclear, biological and chemical warfare force and now a private contractor.
"In pure military terms, the idea is to drop these things on a population, kill lots of people very quickly, and then your own forces can go in without suffering consequences."

http://news.msn.com/world/rockets-with-nerve-agent-seen-behind-syria-attack

[Feuer Frei!]

The so called experts from the West finally guess as to what happened
The so-called experts know little more than we do.
Unless of course you were there and had taken blood samples and urine samples of the victims. And investigated the outfall areas. And taken samples. And analyzed those samples and confirmed that that is what happened.
So-called experts do however have more expertise in these matters than you or i.
Even from afar.
Which makes them much more qualified....and.....experts in the subject.

It seems there is movement from the US:


The Pentagon is moving forces closer to Syria as the US weighs its options in the conflict there, Defence Secretary Chuck Hagel has suggested.
He gave no details, but media reports say the US Navy is strengthening its presence in the eastern Mediterranean.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23822440


24 August 2013 Last updated at 07:10

[Oberon]

There are ways, I would be very surprised if there are not certain people in Syria monitoring the situation and pushing it in one way or the other. No, I do not mean Illuminati, before someone starts on that. :shifty:
I would not be surprised if western governments do, in fact, have a sample of the gas used, and have perhaps leaked information through back channels to certain international agencies what has happened.
Of course, without proof, and that proof cannot be used for fear of compromising agents, then all these agencies can do is 'speculate'.

[Skybird]

Looks to me as if the Americans are mulling some sort of air strike(s) and missile strike(s). But no ground intervention, of this I am still convinced. Which is good.

I would keep risks to Western personnel as low as possible and use missiles exclusively, no aircraft, and send the bills for their costs to the Europeans. In the end, Europe is closer to this than America, with some even wanting to share borders with this battlefield and the other one in Iraq (Turkish membership in the EU).

The claimed chemical incident is still unconfirmed to have been a chemical incident indeed. Mossad says it was, but hey, Mossad is a secret service, so caution weighs heavier than trust.

[Skybird]

Background analysis: the rift between France and Germany.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/germany-deviates-from-france-and-asserts-itself-on-foreign-policy-a-918211.html


But Germany's goals differ markedly and signal a counter-revolutionary stance against French activist zeal. None of the Merkel-led coalitions to come out of September's elections are likely to judge things differently. In addition to the 50 years of the Elysée Treaty, this October also marks the 200th anniversary of the war liberating Prussia from Napoleonic occupation.

:D

[Feuer Frei!]

Background analysis

Didn't think frogs could get hot heads.

[Oberon]

Background analysis: the rift between France and Germany.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/germany-deviates-from-france-and-asserts-itself-on-foreign-policy-a-918211.html


:D

To be fair, I think the Prussians kind of got their own back in the next century...twice... :hmmm:
(Not to mention once already in the same century during the 1870s)

[Jimbuna]

If these weapons should fall into the wrong hands Israel will be the next nation with photos of children wrapped in white lien.



If that were to happen I should imagine the Israeli response would be swift and decisive.

[eddie]

Doctors without Borders reported this concerning these gas attacks-

"Three hospitals supported by Doctors Without Borders reported to the global humanitarian group that they received roughly 3,600 patients showing neurotoxic symptoms in the less than three hours Wednesday — 355 of whom reportedly died, according to a statement released by the group on Saturday.
Although the group “can neither scientifically confirm the cause of these symptoms nor establish who is responsible for the attack,” the reported symptoms “strongly indicate mass exposure to a neurotoxic agent,” said Dr. Bart Janssens, Doctors Without Borders’ director of operations, according to the statement."

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/08/23/20156849-us-officials-believe-syria-used-chemical-weapons-weigh-military-response?lite

[Wolferz]

Fixing bayonets already too, before even finding out who was responsible.

I don't think the feds should go rushing into the middle of a civil war, if at all. There will need to be a collateral damage event with a neighbor before they can get the international blessing to cut the head off the snake. Until then, let the Arab states sort it out. Assad is an idiot. Who will he rule if he kills them all?

[Skybird]

Fixing bayonets already too, before even finding out who was responsible.

I don't think the feds should go rushing into the middle of a civil war, if at all. There will need to be a collateral damage event with a neighbor before they can get the international blessing to cut the head off the snake. Until then, let the Arab states sort it out. Assad is an idiot. Who will he rule if he kills them all?

And who will rule and keep the Shariasticas in check when he is gone?

[Tribesman]

And who will rule and keep the Shariasticas in check when he is gone?
Good point, if Assad is done away with Syria might be ruled by someone who aligns himself with theocracies and supplies Islamic terrorists with weapons:rotfl2:

[Wolferz]

It is now purported that the rebels were supplied a chemical agent by Saudi Arabia and were supplied chemical agent antidote by Qatar.

Draw your own conclusions.

[Platapus]

Draw your own conclusions.

Without any objective evidence? No thank you. :nope:

[Jimbuna]

What a bloody mess :nope:

[Tribesman]

What a bloody mess :nope:
Did you expect any different?
History provides hundreds of similar examples from all over the world.
Its just part of a cycle that's part of a cycle that's part of a cycle, its way too early to see which way this finally spins out.

[Jimbuna]

Well whichever way it goes I can't really see any positive outcomes, just more of the same old.

[Tribesman]

Well whichever way it goes I can't really see any positive outcomes, just more of the same old.

Time will tell, the regional players are backing different sides against each other to try and push their own dominance in the area, but those players are also struggling in their own countries to control their own population.

[eddie]

A new PR campaign by Assad,lol Nothing more then the same old crap, with a lot of finger pointing!

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/08/24/20167606-syrian-state-tv-government-soldiers-enter-rebel-tunnels-find-chemical-agents?lite&lite=obinsite

[Skybird]

UN. claims Assad agreed to let inspectors go to the site in question.

Should I trust my ears here?

Question is, when.

If it is true, than somebody must have had the means to put a whole lot of pressure onto him.

[Tribesman]

That's got weird.
After all the shouting for access, now they are getting it they say they don't want the evidence.:hmmm:

[MH]

If it is true, than somebody must have had the means to put a whole lot of pressure onto him.

Its been five days.
Enough time to put on some little show like this Saudis supplied chemicals for example .:doh: "made in S.A" lol.
Who ever wants evidence already has it the rest is just a show.

[Mr Quatro]

UN. claims Assad agreed to let inspectors go to the site in question.

Should I trust my ears here?

Question is, when.

If it is true, than somebody must have had the means to put a whole lot of pressure onto him.

I also just heard this news a few hours ago, that Assad at first said "no" to going into the claimed chemical war zone and has now reversed his decision to a "yes".

Very strange indeed :yep:

I would personally like to see US special forces be air dropped into the middle of the conflict on to the air field that these chemical weapons are being stored to secure them ... bring in the big air transports using fighter air cover ... off load bullet proof 18 wheelers to transport them via land across to Jordan or even Lebanon to safe guard these weapons for disposal later.

Sounds too Hollywood though ... like the "A team" movie, uh?

I would code name it with signs on the back of the trucks;
"Kiss my ass with a RPG and we all die"

but they have been training for something like this:


US training Syrian opposition forces in Jordan for months, … (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/03/25/us-training-syrian-opposition-forces-in-jordan-for-months-sources-say/)


www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/03/25/us-training-syrian-opposition...
American Special Operations forces and Special Force troops
tasked to work with U.S. intelligence
agents are training small groups of Syrian …

[Jimbuna]

Its been five days.
Enough time to put on some little show like this Saudis supplied chemicals for example .:doh: "made in S.A" lol.
Who ever wants evidence already has it the rest is just a show.

I suspect you may well be right :hmm2:

[Feuer Frei!]

Should I trust my ears here?


You should:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23833912


As for your qstn of when: Monday. Source above.

[Jimbuna]

UK Foreign Secretary William Hague warned that evidence could have been tampered with, degraded or destroyed in the five days since the attack.


"Much of the evidence could have been destroyed by... artillery bombardment; other evidence could have become degraded over the last few days, and other evidence could have been tampered with," he said.


Most likely IMHO.

[Oberon]

Well, the drums are beating. The papers this morning were giving it at fortnight at least. Missiles and airstrikes.
Dave is cutting short his holiday and coming back to the UK for a meeting with the National Security Council. Hague has stated that 'Diplomacy has failed' and that the UNSC has not 'shouldered its responsibilities'.
So, basically the clock has been started.

[darius359au]

UN inspectors start out to check the sites and end up turning back as the lead vehicle is shot up by "unknown snipers" ,funny that...

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-26/assad-warns-us-against-military-action-in-syria/4912532

[Dowly]

Playing for time, but which side? :hmmm:

[Feuer Frei!]

Highly doubtful air strikes will occur. Syria has actually a pretty sophisticated air defense.
Unlike Libya.

The US had it fairly easy there.

The French and British may assist.

The rest? No shows.

And Iran will assist Syria of course.

My prediction: Guided missile attacks, targeting air fields and other strategic points.

EDIT: And let's not forget us public opinion. 60% of US Citizens are against any military intervention by the US.

The big O would have to do some big magic to start military action.

[mapuc]

Highly doubtful air strikes will occur. Syria has actually a pretty sophisticated air defense.
Unlike Libya.

The US had it fairly easy there.

The French and British may assist.

The rest? No shows.

And Iran will assist Syria of course.

My prediction: Guided missile attacks, targeting air fields and other strategic points.

Here in Denmark, they are talking about sending two (can't remember the name of it) 6+6 F-16 to assisst. Guess it's going to be less than these 12 plane.

I'm afraid that Syria is going to attack Israel or Turkey.

Markus

[BossMark]

And here is how it could end
http://i1224.photobucket.com/albums/ee374/rothwellwhite1/yeso1b_zps19274df6.jpg

[Alex]

Looks like Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse didn't pay enough, the civilian thinking is just willing to bring peace through war yet again. :haha:

By the way, what do the united states of America have to gain in that ? Who's really about to enjoy the destruction of this great Arab state Syria is ? And later Iran's ?

Nooooooooooo ! Let me out of that please. I didn't say anything anyway. :subsim:

[Jimbuna]

Here in Denmark, they are talking about sending two (can't remember the name of it) 6+6 F-16 to assisst. Guess it's going to be less than these 12 plane.

I'm afraid that Syria is going to attack Israel or Turkey.

Markus

If Syria were to be so foolish it would be the beginning of a swift end game resolution.

I think Assad has enough on his plate within his own country atm.

[MH]

Looks like Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse didn't pay enough, the civilian thinking is just willing to bring peace through war yet again. :haha:

By the way, what do the united states of America have to gain in that ? Who's really about to enjoy the destruction of this great Arab state Syria is ? And later Iran's ?

Nooooooooooo ! Let me out of that please. I didn't say anything anyway. :subsim:

Great arab state indeed.:doh:
Very caring guy you are , worrying about well being of its citizens lol.
How much one can be hypocrite to rationalise the fantasies.:o

No you did not lol.

[Sailor Steve]

A little more discussion and a little less name-calling, please. :sunny:

[Skybird]

I miss a clear definition of what should be achieved by a military strike, what the military objective is, and how to pull out of the situation once the objective has been achieved or can no longer be achieved.

I see only one objective that could justify to invest tens and hundreds of millions and more of our taxes and to put our warriors at risk: destroying as many of Syria'S chemical weapons arsenals (and biological weapons if they have them) as well as destroying their means to produce them, as well as destroying Iran's weapons deliveries and Hezbollah's stockpiles of missiles, because both actors could assist Assad by turning against Israel.

Obviously that is a relatively advanced and complex, longer lasting air campaign I am talking about. Sending some dozen Tomahawks over one or two days and leave it to that, is just a useless symbolic act achieving not much. It serves the calming of western bad consciousnesses. In other words: it is "Gefühlsduselei".

But some may feel great when the loud Booms! and bright lights start again. "Look, at least we did something, we tried!" - Who cares for what the attempt is worth, as long as it is the shine only that counts!?

BTW, the majority, a very robust majority of Syrians wanmt a Sharia-.based state and support racism, antisemitism and medieval punsihement for crimes. What do we owe them to help them bringing these wonderful things into power in Syria, eh? We owe them nothing.

Syria itself is not worth a single Western soldier's life. Take the chemical and biological weapons out, for that is our interest indeed, and leave it to that. Once the objective has been accomplished, get out.

And send the bill to Saudi Arabia. The money you save them from paying is money they are free to pump into the missionising of Europe. Tell them to stop that and help their precious beloved wonderful Muslim brothers and female halflings instead.

[August]

Forget your commando raids.

To eliminate Syria's chemical weapons capability would require a full scale invasion and thorough search of the country. We're not talking about a single building that can be destroyed by a cruise missile or two.

It is munitions dumps and research facilities and assembly plants, many widely flung and probably no more pinpointed than Saddam's stockpiles were. It ain't like they advertize where they keep all off this stuff.

No this would have to be on the scale of the Iraq war to be successful. Anything less would be just useless posturing.

[Skybird]

Not often that August and me agree on something so completely. :timeout:

[soopaman2]

Forget your commando raids.

To eliminate Syria's chemical weapons capability would require a full scale invasion and thorough search of the country. We're not talking about a single building that can be destroyed by a cruise missile or two.

It is munitions dumps and research facilities and assembly plants, many widely flung and probably no more pinpointed than Saddam's stockpiles were. It ain't like they advertize where they keep all off this stuff.

No this would have to be on the scale of the Iraq war to be successful. Anything less would be just useless posturing.

You are right. (edit: This cannot be solved with a few airstrikes and a commando strike)
But that Iraq thing worked out really well.

I say let them kill each other, takes the attention off trying to kill us, and if we do invade, it will just be more of us dying, and endearing them towards harsher ideals.

Let them be, no one helped America break free from Britain (Shut up French, you jumped in at the end, after we started winning)

Let them discover their own independance.:salute:

Forcing it breeds contempt, and gives them something to unify against.

[kranz]

Let them be, no one helped America break free from Britain (Shut up French, you jumped in at the end, after we started winning)



seems like someone has to re-take a few lessons of history.
Kosciuszko, Pulaski - do these names sound familiar?

[Mittelwaechter]

During the first Gulf War - Iraq vs. Iran - the US backed the Tabun and Sarin attacks of Saddam Hussein and even showed him - provided satellite data - where to drop the stuff, to hinder an Iranian counterattack in 1987 or 1988.

At least 70% of the Syrian people back Assad, 20% are neutral and 10% back the aggressors - according to NATO data. Who do we want to believe, if not our own side?

http://www.worldtribune.com/2013/05/31/nato-data-assad-winning-the-war-for-syrians-hearts-and-minds/

So what do we do over there? We simply want to hit Iran again. Syria is just a piece of the puzzle. We (US/NATO/Mossad/Arabian Sunni States) are responsible for the 'revolts' against Assad. We would like to see a Sunni administration, to isolate Iran. That's in the favour of Sunni Saudi Arabia and Quatar - who support the revolts, because they don't even accept Assad's Alewites religion as Islammic, and because they want to weaken Iran.

Iran turned evil when the Iranian people got rid of their dictator, who was a reliable partner in western oil business. Carter's Teheran drama is still not forgiven and Iran sells oil for Rubel and Yuan. They break the rules to use the US-Dollar as world key currency - formerly accepted by the OPEC as the only valid payment. It was the ultimate advantage of the US, because all the world needed US-Dollars to pay their oil. They sold their stuff cheaply to the US, providing a comfortable American Way of Life.

Iraq and Libya wanted to end the Dollar dominance and use Euro or Gold. We know what happend. And the US attacks the Euro - greetings from Standard & Poor’s, Moody’s und Fitch.

US fracking is a symtom of the loss of the US-Dollar superiority. What if not weapons or genfood could the US sell, to get some foreign currency for their oil demand? The green papers are worthless and the world gets out of US control.

But the US military is a mighty tool for politics, so Iran is next - and Syria just an obstacle to progress.

[Sailor Steve]

Let them be, no one helped America break free from Britain (Shut up French, you jumped in at the end, after we started winning)
General Rochambeau and Admiral deGrasse would disagree.

seems like someone has to re-take a few lessons of history.
Kosciuszko, Pulaski - do these names sound familiar?
Von Steuben, LaFayette. :yep:

[Alex]

@ Mittel' : Ah !
Finally things start getting interesting.
Pleasant to see someone making use of his brain so spotting what's taking place there roughly.

Anyway... One must do something else than raising his flag dumbly while just listening to tv to figure out who's the real greatest enemy of peace in that area.

[kranz]

Von Steuben, LaFayette. :yep:

he has to re-take more than I thought.

[soopaman2]

seems like someone has to re-take a few lessons of history.
Kosciuszko, Pulaski - do these names sound familiar?

Dammit ya got me, kinda. We did this alot on our own burden, you can even cite Von Steuben, for teaching European style tactics to what was basically a guerrilla army.


We got major roadways in my area named after both of them.


Kosciuszko Bridge in Queens NY.

Pulaski Skyway in N jersey.

I am not saying we did it absolutely alone, but we had to earn outside confidence with the merit of our soldiers and leadership. Let them earn it, and choose what they want. Not have it forced on them in exchange for help. Then they feel "vassalized" and rebel, much like Iraq and Afghanistan, then it becomes a drawing point for extremists to kill the infidel invader Americans.


You want it done? Let someone else do it, America has had enough foolish funerals over foolish wars.

Look at Iraq and Afghanistan... Two wars that cost many lives on both sides, and nothing is better, it is worse.
Who is the west to choose their fate, is my point

[nikimcbee]

Not often that August and me agree on something so completely. :timeout:

omg, the Mayans were right. The end is near.:O:

So where are the cries "no blood for Syrian oil?"

[MH]

Last time thing like this happened in syria Assad's father killed tens of thousand in matter of weeks.
You need to understand that whatever is going on in Syria is a matter of long internal history of this country.
Who takes which side and why or neither in current conflict is another thing but not great conspiracy.

[soopaman2]

omg, the Mayans were right. The end is near.:O:

So where are the cries "no blood for Syrian oil?"

The end was near last year, this is just business as usual.


Sooooo anyone else wish to call me stupid in a condescending tone?

Have at it, just don't get red assed when I do it to you later.

I acknowledged I was wrong, but not fully wrong, Americans died for what we got, and we had the balls to do so, no one can take that away.

But no outside power influenced us to do what we did, my point.

[mapuc]

If Syria were to be so foolish it would be the beginning of a swift end game resolution.

I think Assad has enough on his plate within his own country atm.

I could be wrong, had this thought that in some cases a country at war could try to expand it, when attacked and by doing this hope that an allied would occur, in this Iran and maybe a third country.

However I really can't understand it, I really can't. His forces have won many battles in the latest few month. They have gain controlled over some stragetic important cities and crossroad.

Some month ago I read in a danish newspaper saying that if those who was fighting Assad and his regime wouldn't get more help. it would maybe take 1-1½ year for Assad to win the war.

That's the reason I ask myself WHY!!

Markus

[Wolferz]

The U.S. government just wants to create another enemy as a tool for achieving military dominance and cash flow to the contractors.
Every time a perceived enemy is eliminated, another one almost immediately takes its place.
They have been doing this a long time and have become exceedingly efficient at it.
If you can't find one, create one is their creed.

[eddie]

I wonder what it would be like to go 10 years without being involved in some worthless war?

[Jimbuna]

Less jobs/employment in the armament industry.

[soopaman2]

I wonder what it would be like to go 10 years without being involved in some worthless war?

Worthless. Pretty much.

Worthless to me or you, except we get nice funerals and and perfectly folded flag. That makes it worth it.

But wars are always over resources and not ideology, otherwise America would defend (against) African holocausts, and move on in.... as they (we) did fake weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

Colin Powell with his vial of baby powder scaring everyone with anthrax at a UN meeting...:huh:

Perpetual war crap annoys me, bring back the draft, no rich boy exemptions, watch this crap disappear.

[Mittelwaechter]

London, Jan 30 (ANI): The Obama administration gave green signal to a chemical weapons attack plan in Syria that could be blamed on President Bashar al Assad's regime and in turn, spur international military action in the devastated country, leaked documents have shown.

http://in.news.yahoo.com/us-backed-plan-launch-chemical-weapon-attack-syria-045648224.html

We better get on the streets to stop our governments.

[Dowly]

According to Infowars.com, the December 25 email was sent from Britam's Business Development Director David Goulding to company founder Philip Doughty.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA :haha:

Yeah.. sure. :har:

[Mittelwaechter]

Text of Email:

‘Phil.We’ve got a new offer. It’s about Syria again. Qataris propose an attractive deal and swear that the idea is approved by Washington.”

” ‘We’ll have to deliver a CW to Homs, a Soviet origin g-shell from Libya similar to those that Assad should have.’ “

” ‘They want us to deploy our Ukrainian personnel that should speak Russian and make a video record.’ “

” ‘Frankly, I don’t think it’s a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous. Your opinion?’ “

” ‘Kind regards, David.’

;)


The Daily Mail has been forced to pay more than £100,000 in damages and apologise for a story linking a UK defence company with the use of chemical weapons in Syria.

http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/daily-mail-%C2%A3110k-libel-payout-over-syrian-chemical-weapons-story

So better stay at home and let your government do what they are after.

EDIT: http://www.globalresearch.ca/pentagon-preparing-for-war-on-syria/5346926

Just if you are interested in some other information than our mainstream media provides for our motivation.

[Tribesman]

Lets see if I am getting this right Mittlewaechter, you are going off a story a frothing at the mouth loon is repeating, two months after the Daily Fail said it was complete bollox?:hmmm:

[Dowly]

Text of Email:

‘Phil.We’ve got a new offer. It’s about Syria again. Qataris propose an attractive deal and swear that the idea is approved by Washington.”

” ‘We’ll have to deliver a CW to Homs, a Soviet origin g-shell from Libya similar to those that Assad should have.’ “

” ‘They want us to deploy our Ukrainian personnel that should speak Russian and make a video record.’ “

” ‘Frankly, I don’t think it’s a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous. Your opinion?’ “

” ‘Kind regards, David.’

;)


http://i.imgur.com/ajvDvZG.jpg

My god! Santa's real!!!!

(Seriously, if you track down the DailyFail article, again they cite Infowars.com, so yeah...)

[Mittelwaechter]

The Singapore hack happened (there is/was a crime investigation) 'and it is believed dozens of emails from high ranking members of the firm may have been intercepted by cyber criminals or terrorists'.

Possibly terrorists involved - ALAARM!

Making the case a top secret and high priority matter for the British and US governments, because the claim would make especially the US administration a complicit in a war crime. So, if there was an email conversation about their wheelings and dealings, they would have made it public for sure. (Not!)

Or they would have kept it under the carpet and 'won' the Daily Mail to withdraw the statement and fully cooperate with the investigation efforts - for the sake of the nations in their strugle against terror - and according to the Patriot Act and its British counterpart.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-oqR7axJmKB0/UQYdLcgFCCI/AAAAAAAAG3c/31MdR6W9VN8/s1600/email.png

Then there was a settlement between Britam and Daily Mail Online.

:hmmm:

[Mr Quatro]

Forget your commando raids.

To eliminate Syria's chemical weapons capability would require a full scale invasion and thorough search of the country. We're not talking about a single building that can be destroyed by a cruise missile or two.

It is munitions dumps and research facilities and assembly plants, many widely flung and probably no more pinpointed than Saddam's stockpiles were. It ain't like they advertize where they keep all off this stuff.

No this would have to be on the scale of the Iraq war to be successful. Anything less would be just useless posturing.

No, I don't agree ... as a presidential advisor (of course neither one of is)
I would say go for it ... for the peoples sake alone. You know the ones they keep showing on TV being buried in white cloths with dirt being shoveled over them.

Who will interceded for them ...?

They, the peoples of Syria, say they don't want the US to inter the war they just want the war to stop.

Firing a few tomahawk missiles is not going to win any war in Afghanistan or Libya, because it didn't ... plus it cost 1.4 million dollars per missile and the US fired over two hundred in the Libyan conflict alone.

Just go in a get the chemical weapons out of harms way no matter what it takes ...

it won't be like Iraq I'm sure of this.

Boots on the ground yes, but not to stay ... keep them moving make a highway to the Med and control it on both sides to escort the weapons out of the country.

Number one priority is not to stay ... no fortresses ... no Alamo's.

Let them finish their war hasn't this been going on for years now ... someone said Assad's father killed ten's of thousands.

Remember Bush wanted to go to war and Obama doesn't ...
he's sort of being forced into this, but as everyone says,
look who's watching us go for it or back down.

Iran :yep:

[Oberon]

Singapore! It's always Singapore!

Where's Castout when you need him? :nope:

[Dowly]

@Mittelwaechter:
Yes, I believe you are correct in that the breach happened. Doesnt mean the emails are genuine though.

The .eml files of two emails are still available on pastebin, shall we compare them?

First, the files:
Syrian Issue (http://pastebin.com/QkWVJuDC)
Iranian Issue (http://pastebin.com/Di2Fwtuj)

Let's start with the timestamps, on line 11 is the first one.
Syrian Issue: 24 Dec 2012 23:57:29
Iranian Issue: 16 Oct 2012 23:57:29

That's odd.. but hey, it might be a coincidence, right?

Line 16.
Syrian Issue: 24 Dec 2012 15:57:18
Iranian Issue: 16 Oct 2012 15:57:18

Oh... :88)

Also, I do believe the message ID should be unique to every email, but on line 32.
Syrian Issue.: Message-ID: <001801cdd3ca$5f0833c0$1d189b40$@com>
Iranian Issue: Message-ID: <001801cdd3ca$5f0833c0$1d189b40$@com>

:88)


Was there anything else?

[Platapus]

Singapore! It's always Singapore!

Where's Castout when you need him? :nope:

Yikes, that's a name from the past.

That guy was a hoot.

[Tribesman]

Was there anything else?
Yes, 9/11troofers and the global Zionist conspiracy.
Its amazing what you find if you follow the links:har:

[Mittelwaechter]

Check line 279! http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif

[Dowly]

That's just cruel. :-?

[Ducimus]

I wonder, at what point does disbelief of conspiracy theories turn into denial, and acceptance of conspiracy theories turns into crackpot crazy?

[Skybird]

Firing a few tomahawk missiles is not going to win any war in Afghanistan or Libya, because it didn't ... plus it cost 1.4 million dollars per missile and the US fired over two hundred in the Libyan conflict alone.

Just go in a get the chemical weapons out of harms way no matter what it takes ...

it won't be like Iraq I'm sure of this.

Boots on the ground yes, but not to stay ... keep them moving make a highway to the Med and control it on both sides to escort the weapons out of the country.

Number one priority is not to stay ... no fortresses ... no Alamo's.

You see it too rosy. You do not go into a hostile country which already is a battlezone, guard a few highways without being engaged in heavy combat, know where their chemicals are, role them out of the country, and get out.

It is simplifications like these that has caused - and costed - the Iraq and Afghanistan war already.

---

I assume the Mossad has some pretty good estimations on some weapons storage sites. Take them out from the air. Maybe US satellites can contribute a couple of ideas - if so, take their considered targets out, too.

More objectives probably cannot be achieved without a full scale ground invasion - and that would be madness, and not supported by any people in the West, no matter the nationality.

Let's be realistic.

[Bubblehead1980]

Absolutely disgusted.Have we learned nothing with Iraq? The war drums are being pounded. Why should more American military men and women die? We must be absorb more debt? We are not supposed to be the beat cops of the world. :/\\!! This was wrong under Bush, it's wrong under Obama and wrong under anyone else who pursues this course.

[Wolferz]

Absolutely disgusted.Have we learned nothing with Iraq? The war drums are being pounded. Why should more American military men and women die? We must be absorb more debt? We are not supposed to be the beat cops of the world. :/\\!! This was wrong under Bush, it's wrong under Obama and wrong under anyone else who pursues this course.

Time for another constitutional convention?
That would shake the monkeys out of the tree.:rock:

[Bubblehead1980]

Time for another constitutional convention?
That would shake the monkeys out of the tree.:rock:

Oh absolutely, it's time for amendments the restrict federal power and especially those of the executive. The presidency needs to be neutered since no man, even those who claim they will will voluntarily surrender the power. I believe a Rand Paul Presidency would curb much of it but not in the meaningful, permanent way it should. No one man or woman should have the power that the presidency currently enjoys. Once congress delcares war, sure their powers should increase but the crap that has went on since korea must stop. Now, if Syria started firing on US ships or was funding terror attacks etc, maybe but this is just us playing world police and it's ridiculous.

[Oberon]

Got to admit, I find myself in the Bubblehead1980 court here, and I never thought that'd happen. :haha:
This strike, is a bad idea, and I think everyone down to the lowliest street cleaner can see that. It's not going to do much against the well hidden Syrian chemical installations, and it's just going to annoy everyone in the region, and you can bet anything that the strike will conveniently miss the FSAs chemical weapons, because you know, they're never going to use chemical weapons because they're the good guys (sarcasm).

Obama has, through some pretty muddled foreign policy, painted himself into a corner, he called Assads bluff, and Assad called it right back.
There are only two reasons I can see a semi-rational leader going ahead with these strikes, 1) Is to try to level the playing field a bit so that this civil war continues indefinitely, because no matter who wins in this war, the US and its allies will lose, so the only way the US can win is to keep it going, however to do that they'd need to hit BOTH sides chemical weapons, and I can't see that happening and 2) is to try to prove after the diplomatic disaster that is Egypt that America still has some power in deciding matters in the Middle East, but unfortunately all its going to prove is how little power they have there.

The only way Obama can back out of this with only a minimal amount of loss of face is to put it to Congress, Congress will shoot it down, this much is pretty certain, and if they don't then the blame can be shared, but they will shoot it down and then Obama can turn around and say "Well, I tried, but they won't let me." and walk away.
Can't see that happening though, either. So it'll be another executive decision.
Can you say "Our government is united in its determination to take all necessary measures in support of freedom and in defence of peace in south-east Asia?" :/\\!!

[Bubblehead1980]

Got to admit, I find myself in the Bubblehead1980 court here, and I never thought that'd happen. :haha:
This strike, is a bad idea, and I think everyone down to the lowliest street cleaner can see that. It's not going to do much against the well hidden Syrian chemical installations, and it's just going to annoy everyone in the region, and you can bet anything that the strike will conveniently miss the FSAs chemical weapons, because you know, they're never going to use chemical weapons because they're the good guys (sarcasm).

Obama has, through some pretty muddled foreign policy, painted himself into a corner, he called Assads bluff, and Assad called it right back.
There are only two reasons I can see a semi-rational leader going ahead with these strikes, 1) Is to try to level the playing field a bit so that this civil war continues indefinitely, because no matter who wins in this war, the US and its allies will lose, so the only way the US can win is to keep it going, however to do that they'd need to hit BOTH sides chemical weapons, and I can't see that happening and 2) is to try to prove after the diplomatic disaster that is Egypt that America still has some power in deciding matters in the Middle East, but unfortunately all its going to prove is how little power they have there.

The only way Obama can back out of this with only a minimal amount of loss of face is to put it to Congress, Congress will shoot it down, this much is pretty certain, and if they don't then the blame can be shared, but they will shoot it down and then Obama can turn around and say "Well, I tried, but they won't let me." and walk away.
Can't see that happening though, either. So it'll be another executive decision.
Can you say "Our government is united in its determination to take all necessary measures in support of freedom and in defence of peace in south-east Asia?" :/\\!!

Haha.Well, this is not a left or right issue really, it is about right and wrong. Our government is out of control on almost every level(has been but its upped the game last 4-5 years) This need to play beat cop has more to do with one man's(the president, not just obama either) ego and postering than anything.Sure, it's awful what is happening in Syria and i am not against arming the rebels and sanctions etc but strikes that put american servicemen/women and equipment in harms way, risking more of our money, and risking igniting a regional conflict(this is how bigger wars get started) is just outrageous to pretty much anyone but those in D.C. The US is not supposed to be the world's beat cop. Only when our interests are directly threatened should we go to war with congressional approval. Sad that the next constitutional amendments need to be those to curb executive power, the nature of man, eh.

Watch things escalate and a "peacekeeping" ground force has to go in, of course with mostly US troops.Iraq etc all over again but maybe even worst. This will just piss more muslims worldwide off and spark more violence. We are a world and diplomacy etc is fine but playing beat cop is just an outrage. We learned this with Iraq, well the people did.

[kraznyi_oktjabr]

You see it too rosy. You do not go into a hostile country which already is a battlezone, guard a few highways without being engaged in heavy combat, know where their chemicals are, role them out of the country, and get out.

It is simplifications like these that has caused - and costed - the Iraq and Afghanistan war already.

---

I assume the Mossad has some pretty good estimations on some weapons storage sites. Take them out from the air. Maybe US satellites can contribute a couple of ideas - if so, take their considered targets out, too.

More objectives probably cannot be achieved without a full scale ground invasion - and that would be madness, and not supported by any people in the West, no matter the nationality.

Let's be realistic.Completely agree with this!

[Packlife]

A quick side note- If the FRENCH are calling for action you know it's bad really really bad lol. Ok now my 2 cents on this. I've been watching the Syrian revolution since it kicked off w/ Assad's troops shooting an beating peaceful protesters in the street. This guy would have somebody's head cut off behind a curtain an tell you that they just stubbed their toe. Now when it comes to the use of chemical weapons, it's not the same as machine guns, artillery, etc like somebody said earlier, they say bullet has no name but gas/nerve agent's simply have "to whom it may concern" meaning everybody, I've heard even some of Assad's troops got hit w/ it when the wind shifted an brought it back on some of them. Gas/nerve agent's represent's the nastiest an ugliest side of war seeing people bent in wrong directions foaming at the mouth unable to breath will scar you deep, it did today when I saw video's of lines of dead kids not a scratch on them flat dead, I watched a little boy try to take 2 breaths before he died. That is not war it's murder an its butchery an should not be tolerated period. An what's worse is innocent women an children can't tell the difference between the regular Monday morning shelling an a Monday morning "special" shelling from good ol uncle Assad. These people do that natural thing when they hear incoming rounds or airstrikes an take cover in their basement's, an before they know it their basement is filling up w/ gas. There's of right after the shells hit an you can see the gas cloud taller than the buildings an was probably a city block or two long moving w/ the wind, it wasn't some home made recipe it was BIG. If these attacks were small in scale I'd say ok maybe it could be some hardcore rebels but seeing how big this attacked look an the casualties were 3,600 affected an 355 died from it, that came from doctors without borders. Assad's troops don't care who they kill. I watched a little documentary called the battle for Syria, w/ english subtitles and a english speaking narrator. One of the rebel leader's described the normal tactics of the SAA (Syrian Arab Army) since the rebel's have RPG's an some other anti-armor weapons the SAA started pulling their tank's way back an sending sniper's in large number's, line's of sniper's as the leader said. The snipers take out as many rebel soldiers as possible then the tanks move up an then the snipers move ahead of them again. They took the camera man to one of these area's by a park an showed pointed in the direction from where the sniper's fire from. A second later a bullet rips right over the camera mans head, the rebel's though they had cleared them all out. These snipers target every an anybody, 1 sniper killed a cleric an would shoot at anybody who tried to retrieve the body. An this rebel leader had been an officer in the SAA, an was explaining how hard it is to fight their revolution since he doesnt have soldiers, he has regular people taxi drivers plumbers, an he explained they dont listen to directions he said if they followed even 15% of what their told to do it's a success. To me it's amazing how long the rebels have been able to hold out against a professional army, not too mention the Hezbollah fighters that have been coming in from Lebanon helping Assad, Hezbollah is actually the reason the rebels have been loosing ground, but we all know that Iran has trained a majority of Hezbollah's fighters in urban warfare. You can go on youtube an find all kind's of video's of the fighting. I've heard some say or its a civil war let both sides work it out, but is it still a civil war considering that Russia is providing Assad w/ all kinds of goodies, Hezbollah is providing fighters, an Iran is providing some kind of aid as well doesn't really seem like a civil war to me. Now I'm not calling for boot's on the ground, but why can't we do what we did in Libya?? Send in jets an tomahawk missiles, take out Assad's air power, an carve out a area for a no fly zone so that innocent civilians have somewhere to go w/ out having to leave the country, as of right now there are 1.9 million refugees an 1 million children refugees, an god knows how many are dead. What worries me most is something like Al-Qaeda coming in an linking up w/ the rebels that want to turn Syria back into a more old school religious traditional country. An Al-Qaeda would have a new warm cozy home to fester an grow strong again, an their payment would be those chemical weapons an a lotta pissed off people who will end up mad that the US didn't come an help them. America is suppose to be the country that sticks up for the little guy, personally I think we've let this thing get way out of hand. It would be one thing if it was an even type match an the rebels could win it on their own, but w/ these gas attacks, an Hezbollah fighters coming in an Russia giving Assad all kinds of equipment takes it in a whole new direction. Sorry if it seemed like I rambled some but I cant stand seeing innocent people being butchered

[Skybird]

Anyone still remember? Obama won the peace Nobel prize at the very beginning of his presidency, and for nothing he had accomplished but things one wanted hiom to accomplish in the future.

:haha:

I do not mock him for this at least, it was not his fault, but that of those hopeless idiots in Oslo who totally overestimated themselves and the influence they could cast on world affairs.

Then there was the hilariously reality-distorting Cairo speech which distorted en passant a not unimportant part of history, on the fly so to speak. Here Obama tried on others what Oslo had tried on him.

And of course the red line curse he now is haunted by.

Doomed if he bombs and doomed if he bombs not. Well, that is karma. Fate self-made. Next time shut up a while, sucker, while you still can.

I'm against any action over Syria. And one day more has passed, and still they have not said a single word on what the objective, the solid material realistic objective of this now rumored two days bombing campaign should be. To punish Assad? Define "punishment", please. How many tanks destroyed is "punishment", hoe man fuel trucks blown up? If the number is met, then this punishment has been accomplished, yes? And in how far means blowing military stuff and infrastructure up - in how far means this punishment of those making decisions? Is Assad getting a heavy heart over the bloodbath he causes? Hardly.

In war, you do not fight against tanks and planes and trucks, but ideologies, plans, ambitions, enemy efforts. Weapojns are just the tools. It helps to redcue them, but only when their reduction has a meaning concerning a higher mission objective. Else it is meaningless. Your obstacle lay in tactics and strategy, not in numbers of rifles. You define the goal of your effort by objectives to be met, may it be mere survival, may it be "take city A", "deny enemy access to area B", "wipe out division C". It may not always go according to such plans, nevertheless if you start to rumble without having ideas like this about what you want to achieve, you invite trouble for yourself.

It is a known symptom of newbies in chess. They move the pieces back and forth and left and right, but without a plan that adds perspective and strategy to their moving. They do not focus on anything, becasue they have no clue on what that focus could be: they have no plan, no objective which then could be used to focus on, phase by phase. Experienced players indeed put it in words like this: "they do not play chess - they move pieces around". Doing that in conformity with the rules, is still no strategy, still no plan.

So, Mr. Cameron and Mr. Obama, may I ask you for what your objectives are, your strategy, your plan? So far we have not heard a single word on that except pathetic rhetorics, morally obedient proclamations of indignation, and expressions of your wishful thinking.

P.S. And another small detail: still no evidence has been shown and presented that allows to say that indeed Assad's troops have committed the massacre. It could as well have been the rebels. Many of their factions give as much for civilian lives as Assad, and martyrdom ranks high in their ideologic book. I see it as very likely that it were chemicals used, yes. But no word on what sort of weapons or agents. That it was one side or the other I see as a 50:50 case so far. Because we do not know.

That would be a nice story. NATO bombs on behalf of the rebels, and later it turns out that it were the same rebels committing that massacre to fool NATO into the ring.

[soopaman2]

Anyone still remember? Obama won the peace Nobel prize at the very beginning of his presidency, and for nothing he had accomplished but things one wanted hiom to accomplish in the future.

:haha:

I do not mock him for this at least, it was not his fault, but that of those hopeless idiots in Oslo who totally overestimated themselves and the influence they could cast on world affairs.




I think that was more about awarding the man who so called pushed America forward past its racist past by becoming the first black man to win the presidency.

Sadly that is a fairy tale.

America will always have this problem, and a man as weak as the president will not be the one to "unify" the races.

I do not want to interfere in Syria, no matter the outcome it will simply breed more hate for America, imperialistic accusations. etc...

There was a time when other countries respected us, now they just fear us. I do not want that.

[Skybird]

I think that was more about awarding the man who so called pushed America forward past its racist past by becoming the first black man to win the presidency.



Which is a violation of Noble'S intent, who clearly said that the Nobel peace prize is to be awared for accomplishments acheived regarding ending wars and demilitarisatioin in general. Women'S rights, ending genocides, ecology, racism porojects - all this is nothing that the Nobel prize has been founded for by Nobel. Many of the past nominations, are abuses. If I were Nobel, I would raise from the grave and end the hijack. Because that is what the Oslo freaks did in their megalomaniac well-meaningness: they hijacked the Nobel founded peace prize and instrumentalized it for causes that Nobel did not wish to engage on. Many Nobel peace prize wionners, are no real winners, but impostors of a kind. And many get the prize not for what they have acieved, but what a small Oslo circle thinks they should try to achieve in the future. In the end, it often is about this circle's intention, not so much about that prize winner's accomplishments. And by raising that expectation, you gain power and control over the winner's decision: he has to justify the vote made by the committee. If I were mean, i would say that is kind of a blackmailing, or pressing.

I have learned to despise the Nobel peace prize very much. Would not like to end up on that list, it would be an offence and a disgrace when reading some of the names.

BTW, Obama, is no black. ;) He is a mixed-blood. And he has no achievement that he accomplished himself for ending racism in the US. Neither did he achieve it, nor is racism abolished. To say he is black (father from Kenya) makes as much sense as to say he is white (mother was).

[There was a time when other countries respected us, now they just fear us. I do not want that.

Oh, being feared allows you to achieve more good stuff than just meaning it well but being weak. I prefer being feared to depending on the good will of others any time. You must not act like a monster, if you do not want to. But to make others believe you are, can be extremely helpful. And to know that you can be, if you want, is reassuring.

[Ducimus]

As just reading some news and i needed to vent:

We're about to hit our debt ceiling again in a month and a half, we're already 16 trillion in debt, and these asshats in washington are probably going to send us into another war. I'm starting to wonder if the petrodollar conspiracy theories have validity to them.

[Sailor Steve]

Time for another constitutional convention?
That would shake the monkeys out of the tree.:rock:
Be careful what you ask for. A new Constitutional Convention would be wide open for any changes they wanted to make, with no restrictions. Considering the things you're complaining about and the current strength of the Left, you would probably end up with a much worse situation rather than a better one.

Oh absolutely, it's time for amendments the restrict federal power and especially those of the executive.
I agree with amendments, but don't cofuse them with a new Constitution. The main reason the president has the power he does is that the members of the original convention knew that George Washington would be the first president, and they trusted him implicitly. That power came back to haunt them, and is still with us today.

On the other hand for all your complaints about the current president, he really doesn't have the kind of power you think he does. He gets a lot of what he wants because Congress is on his side for the most part. The President can suggest and influence all he wants, but he has no power at all to make laws.

Just out of curiosity, exactly what amendments would you propose?

[Tribesman]

Until the politicians can answer questions about the aftermath they shouldn't push their ideas for intervention.
None have made any real sounds on the "then what?" question

[Ducimus]

Be careful what you ask for. A new Constitutional Convention would be wide open for any changes they wanted to make, with no restrictions. Considering the things you're complaining about and the current strength of the Left, you would probably end up with a much worse situation rather than a better one.

Too true. The first thing that would get put on the chopping block, is all the things on the Bill of Rights that the left does not agree with. In their ignorance and arrogance they would make things far worse.


I agree with amendments, but don't cofuse them with a new Constitution. The main reason the president has the power he does is that the members of the original convention knew that George Washington would be the first president, and they trusted him implicitly. That power came back to haunt them, and is still with us today.

On the other hand for all your complaints about the current president, he really doesn't have the kind of power you think he does. He gets a lot of what he wants because Congress is on his side for the most part. The President can suggest and influence all he wants, but he has no power at all to make laws.

Just out of curiosity, exactly what amendments would you propose?


I know your not talking to me, but i figured i'd offer this up anyway. I personally would propose anything that would get rid of the professional politicians that have become a ruling class that should not exist. Mainly, TERM LIMITS. All seats in the house, and the senate should have a 2 term limit. Chief justices should have term limits. Every position in government should have term limits. Continuity be damned.

We currently have the best government money can buy, and THAT needs to change, and it really needed to change decades ago. Go after ALL (yes all) special interests, and do whatever it takes to remove them from politics. The only people congressman should be listening to is their constitutes from their districts from which they were elected. Dream a little dream.

Of course, none of that will happen. What will happen is the "ruling elite" will further cement themselves more power, the "war on terrior" will continue perpetually without end, our government will continue to be bought and paid for investment by the "real owners", and "we the sheeple" will continue to have our civil liberties taken out from under us as we sit on our asses watching "Ow my balls" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAg1r6zw7Bg)

[STEED]

Lets get in there and kill them all.

^Thats what you get reading the Mail/express in the UK, just one of many crass comments I have heard made.

Looks like the saying, the only thing the human raced has learnt it has learnt nothing.

For flips sake we have a big problem in the West that is...DEBT! War adds to the debt you morons.

[BossMark]

Lets get in there and kill them all.

^Thats what you get reading the Mail/express in the UK, just one of many crass comments I have heard made.

Looks like the saying, the only thing the human raced has learnt it has learnt nothing.

For flips sake we have a big problem in the West that is...DEBT! War adds to the debt you morons.
Some how STEED me thinks toff boy and that bald headed bastard Hague could not give a toss about the debt or the loss of live.

[STEED]

Some how STEED me thinks toff boy and that bald headed bastard Hague could not give a toss about the debt or the loss of live.

Feel free to re-post that one.

[MH]

P.S. And another small detail: still no evidence has been shown and presented that allows to say that indeed Assad's troops have committed the massacre. It could as well have been the rebels. Many of their factions give as much for civilian lives as Assad, and martyrdom ranks high in their ideologic book. I see it as very likely that it were chemicals used, yes. But no word on what sort of weapons or agents. That it was one side or the other I see as a 50:50 case so far. Because we do not know.


That is more of a reason to blow up whatever stockpiles they can drop their bombs on.
Syria may go its own way but with less chemicals in its backyard.
A point can be made here as well , Mr Obama and other western powers deliver what is promised.
Something that has become a very questionable issue lately.

[BossMark]

Feel free to re-post that one.
??
Lets hope Ed tells his MPs to vote the right way and say no to toff boy when they vote on Thursday and the same with bottom wiper Clegg, but will he listen??
Syria: Parliament recalled to discuss UK's response

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23851292

[Skybird]

Lets get in there and kill them all.

^Thats what you get reading the Mail/express in the UK, just one of many crass comments I have heard made.

Looks like the saying, the only thing the human raced has learnt it has learnt nothing.

For flips sake we have a big problem in the West that is...DEBT! War adds to the debt you morons.
Since our paper money is no real money in the original meaning of the word, but from a banker's POV are debt titles, one could argue - and Keynesians do that in a way - that you cannot have enough debts, because the higher your debts, the richer you are! :D :yeah:

I love the German word game. In German, a banknote or paper money is "Scheingeld". Schein=banknote. Schein also has a different meaning: appearance, semblance, meant to point at the illusory nature of something.

Scheingeld=paper money=illusory money. ;)

[Wolferz]

Be careful what you ask for. A new Constitutional Convention would be wide open for any changes they wanted to make, with no restrictions. Considering the things you're complaining about and the current strength of the Left, you would probably end up with a much worse situation rather than a better one.


I agree with amendments, but don't cofuse them with a new Constitution. The main reason the president has the power he does is that the members of the original convention knew that George Washington would be the first president, and they trusted him implicitly. That power came back to haunt them, and is still with us today.

On the other hand for all your complaints about the current president, he really doesn't have the kind of power you think he does. He gets a lot of what he wants because Congress is on his side for the most part. The President can suggest and influence all he wants, but he has no power at all to make laws.

Just out of curiosity, exactly what amendments would you propose?

First things first, impeach Obama! Bring Bush up on war crimes and perjury charges.
Toss out every currently sitting senator and congressman just to be sure we get all of them who went along with this insanity called the Patriot Act and start all over.
Repeal the Patriot Act!
Do away with all of these overly expanded, redundant departments and agencies that have been given carte blanche to do as they will like the NSA, DHS etc, etc.
Clean house at the CIA.
Audit the treasury.


I'm not looking for a constitutional rewrite per se. Just add some modern language to it. After all, it was written for the 18th century and the founding fathers couldn't have possibly seen what our government would become in 237 years. A bloated morass of little Napoleons in departments and agencies without end. A nation tangled up in red tape and a government that is competing with its citizens, instead of doing the will of the citizens. They have done too much to create a government run by corporate influence and special interest groups. Running us way beyond broke with war after war after war.
Obama seems to be looking to start world war III and his cronies in congress are going along with it. Do they really think they could win a global thermonuclear conflict while they all hide out under ground in their bunkers?
Armageddon may be closer than you think and we don't get a golden ticket invite to the bunker. Surviving the first strike will still carry a death sentence down the road. Albeit, a long and lingering one.:down:
It would take care of the global warming problem.
Though, from what I've been reading, we may not need to worry about it if we get hit with a kill shot CME from the sun next month.:huh:
Talk about rendering all of this crap moot!:sunny:

[Ducimus]

That is more of a reason to blow up whatever stockpiles they can drop their bombs on.


Just FYI, dropping bombs on a chemical stockpile, is an inherently bad idea.

[MH]

Just FYI, dropping bombs on a chemical stockpile, is an inherently bad idea.

Depends..you don't keep chemicals in active(deadly) state in your backyard.

[Wolferz]

Depends..you don't keep chemicals in active(deadly) state in your backyard.
Who's to say that they don't have the activating chemicals stored in the same stockpile?:huh:

It's their civil war and the rest of us should keep our noses in our own bees wax.

You don't swing at a piñata that has Hornets going in and out of it.:hmmm:

[Ducimus]

It's their civil war and the rest of us should keep our noses in our own bees wax.


I agree, and I think many American's would agree as well. But we both know, that isn't how it's going to pan out. Our government will get us involved somehow, as sure as the sun rises and sets.

[Jimbuna]

I'm hoping the west don't get involved and especially the UK.

Cameron says the austerity measures currently in place are here for at least another two years so where would the hundreds of millions come from to fund British intervention?

I suspect it would fall on the shoulders of the tax payer and cause even more closures of vital services.

[STEED]

Since our paper money is no real money in the original meaning of the word, but from a banker's POV are debt titles, one could argue - and Keynesians do that in a way - that you cannot have enough debts, because the higher your debts, the richer you are! :D :yeah:

I love the German word game. In German, a banknote or paper money is "Scheingeld". Schein=banknote. Schein also has a different meaning: appearance, semblance, meant to point at the illusory nature of something.

Scheingeld=paper money=illusory money. ;)

Send them a copy of.."When Money Dies".

I know paper money is nothing more than a I.O.U

[STEED]

I'm hoping the west don't get involved and especially the UK.

Cameron says the austerity measures currently in place are here for at least another two years so where would the hundreds of millions come from to fund British intervention?

I suspect it would fall on the shoulders of the tax payer and cause even more closures of vital services.

The economy bailed out the banks there for the economy can pay. As for the banks they win win win.

[eddie]

I can't believe we are going to do this and for what? Its going to cause a lot of problems down the road, but the idiots in Washington don't care.

Russia will replace any military equipment the Syrians lose. And if you think Russia is hard to deal with now, its going to get worse. More NSA leaks will be forthcoming too, the Russians will see to that.

Iran and Syria will push Hezbollah to strike at Israel. That's just what the area needs.

I don't believe our country can survive endless wars, why do we have to be involved in every conflict that comes along!?!

BTW, make sure you top off your gas tanks, gasoline is about to go way up!

[MH]

I agree, and I think many American's would agree as well. But we both know, that isn't how it's going to pan out. Our government will get us involved somehow, as sure as the sun rises and sets.
It most likely will not be anything serious.
In terms of costs not much more than a big scale exercise.

[Onkel Neal]

I'm hoping the west don't get involved and especially the UK.

Cameron says the austerity measures currently in place are here for at least another two years so where would the hundreds of millions come from to fund British intervention?

I suspect it would fall on the shoulders of the tax payer and cause even more closures of vital services.

Same here, why can't we stay out of these regional squabbles. The US has no real interests here.

[soopaman2]

Same here, why can't we stay out of these regional squabbles. The US has no real interests here.

Exactly. There is nothing to gain, but alot to lose, even if we win.

I get Afghanistan, and kinda get Iraq, but feel we really need to stop and go back to pre WW1 isolationism, alot of social issues at home not being addressed, yet we can sell 8 helos to indonesia for 500 mil, and do nothing for the people who built and bought those things (taxpayers)

[Ducimus]

I can't believe we are going to do this and for what? Its going to cause a lot of problems down the road, but the idiots in Washington don't care.


If the conspiracy theorists are correct, it's all about the Petrodollar and control of the worlds economy. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HP7L8bw5QF4)

It most likely will not be anything serious.
In terms of costs not much more than a big scale exercise.

I hope you are correct, but I am not as optimistic. What I am hoping for is that Obummer becomes paralyzed with indecision and ultimately does nothing, or makes a decision so late in the day that any window for US involvement has closed.

EDIT:
Exactly. There is nothing to gain, but alot to lose, even if we win.

I get Afghanistan, and kinda get Iraq, but feel we really need to stop and go back to pre WW1 isolationism, alot of social issues at home not being addressed, yet we can sell 8 helos to indonesia for 500 mil, and do nothing for the people who built and bought those things (taxpayers)

I agree that we have a lot of social issues that need to be addressed. In this day and age, we need to turn our attention inward. As for pre WW1 isolationism, I'm not sure that is possible given the amount of trading between nations. Rather, I think maybe we should adopt a policy of non-interventionism.

[Betonov]

One thing will be interesting. The Russian reaction.

[mapuc]

Russia !?

Where do they stand after an attack?

I know they support Assad and his regime

After? That's my thoughts

Per Stig Møller a danish politician and some other public people are afraid that it could end with a war between The west and Russia.

I'm not an expert on this, but I wouldn't go so far. Or???

Markus

[Oberon]

I can't see how the West intervening in Syria would affect the petrochemical industry in any other way but to make the prices go up, and the petrochemical bosses have got to realise that eventually they will hit the glass ceiling and demand will drop as governments activate their fuel rationing plans. :hmmm:

[Betonov]

Putin won't let himself be shown that a russian bear is only a paper tiger when it comes to supporting Assad. But a full scale war is out of the question.
Unless both sides start to escalate. Two dying empires showing off, not good :nope:

[eddie]

I don't believe we will end up in a war with Russia, but trying to work out deals with Putin on different issues will be twice as hard. Same with China.

[Catfish]

Well there is no real evidence for 'real' chemical weapons.

I do not much like Assad, but when i hear the media and governments talk of the alleged use of weapons of mass destruction it makes me wonder .. especially why i have difficulties believing them.

Cui bono ?

:03:

[mapuc]

Putin won't let himself be shown that a russian bear is only a paper tiger when it comes to supporting Assad. But a full scale war is out of the question.
Unless both sides start to escalate. Two dying empires showing off, not good :nope:


Support in form of more advanced weapons, such as newest SAM system a.s.o, that could be the answer from Russia

Our journalist is speculating on the raid. They estimate that it will be 2-4 days campaign.

Here's a thought that I see very unlikely

Russia send 2-3 division of their most modern fighers to assisst Assad in defending Syria against an attack.

Edit:

Have just been talking with some of my friends on Facebook. They are from or live in Israel

They are afraid that Syria would attack them. Have also been told that the authorities in Haifa have tested the alarm and tested the shelters so they are ready if needed.

Markus

[Betonov]

That's why you should rethink your targets and send missiles.
A modern russian SAM system operated possibly by russians is something that will get your pilots killed.

[MH]

Well there is no real evidence for 'real' chemical weapons.

I do not much like Assad, but when i hear the media and governments talk of the alleged use of weapons of mass destruction it makes me wonder .. especially why i have difficulties believing them.

Cui bono ?

:03:

:doh:

You must be traumatised.
....but you believe everything about drones.

Not that i like the idea about this whole war because the ricochets may end up here BW.

....

[eddie]

Here come the effects of possible military action. They sure didn't waste any time, did they!?!

http://money.msn.com/business-news/article.aspx?feed=AP&date=20130827&id=16840794

[Catfish]

:doh:
You must be traumatised.
....but you believe everything about drones.....

Huh? Sry for OT here:

Why do i 'believe everything about drones' ?

You mean the US does not kill alleged insurgents (even if they are US citizens) and sometimes bystanders with drones ?
And i should better believe in Iraq's WMDs, because Cheney and Powell told me so back then ?
Like the media tells me now? :hmm2:

Ok now i believe, this time they ARE right, and we should invade Syria with all we have. Oh, wait ...

[Wolferz]

Here come the effects of possible military action. They sure didn't waste any time, did they!?!

http://money.msn.com/business-news/article.aspx?feed=AP&date=20130827&id=16840794

Makes you wonder exactly who is pulling the puppet strings, do it?:-?
Especially when you consider who will gain from the proposed action. As if Syria is some major lynch pin in the world economy. Who are they trying to fool other than themselves?
Looks like Saudi oil will be lucrative, along with every other oil producer and the old pebble in the pond ripple effect through every economy on Earth.:down:

It sure won't be any gains for us.

I think I'll go buy a Moped or a horse.:shifty:

For some odd reason, I keep hearing a Beach Boys tune in my head. The lyrics are modified though..
Bomb bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran

[MH]

Huh? Sry for OT here:

Why do i 'believe everything about drones' ?

You mean the US does not kill alleged insurgents (even if they are US citizens) and sometimes bystanders with drones ?
And i should better believe in Iraq's WMDs, because Cheney and Powell told me so back then ?
Like the media tells me now? :hmm2:

Ok now i believe, this time they ARE right, and we should invade Syria with all we have. Oh, wait ...


Ok ok got you....I mistook you for someone else.:haha:

Makes you wonder exactly who is pulling the puppet strings, do it?:-?
Especially when you consider who will gain from the proposed action. As if Syria is some major lynch pin in the world economy. Who are they trying to fool other than themselves?
Looks like Saudi oil will be lucrative, along with every other oil producer and the old pebble in the pond ripple effect through every economy on Earth.:down:

It sure won't be any gains for us.

I think I'll go buy a Moped or a horse

Reverse logic again.

[Ducimus]

Think im gonna go top off the gas tank and buy some emergency food from costco tonight when I'm done with work. :shifty:

[mapuc]

Here's the newest from that area

http://www.algemeiner.com/2013/08/26/iranian-official-israel-will-be-first-victim-of-u-s-strike-in-syria/

Don't know if this is going to make it more tense as it is.

Markus

[Catfish]

Guess i should finally buy an IBC container with 1000 liters of canola (rape seed) oil, should be enough for a year.
Still have the old Diesel with the Elsbett engine.

I know it is no real solution, but we will not run on hydrogen until the last mineral oil lobbyist has been shot :nope:

[Wolferz]

Reverse logic again.


It's still logic.:)
Something the NATO dweebs lack in abundance.

Why should we care what a sand lot dictator does to his own people?

For all any of us knows, Assad's battling the same enemy we are. Al Qaida.
Arming these alleged rebels will be equal to arming Al Qaida. Just to keep the conflict and chaos machine humming along.
If they're really serious about removing Assad, drop a cruise missile in his lap and be done with it.
Any other course of action is...

SUSPECT!!!!

[Mr Quatro]

Who's to say that they don't have the activating chemicals stored in the same stockpile?:huh:

It's their civil war and the rest of us should keep our noses in our own bees wax.


This is why we should just remove the chemical weapons ... hell I would rather the present administration consider a buy back program for the darn things.

Where did they get such a huge stock pile anyway? If Iraq gave away jet fighter planes to Iran before we got there what else did they give away to Syria before the US forces arrived?

As for bombing the stored weapons that is a bad idea. That would be like cherry bombing an outhouse with terrible results.

Plus whatever happened to all of those US stockpiled chemical weapons that were caught leaking in Utah and killing sheep?

One thing will be interesting. The Russian reaction.

This is the biggest question Obama as commander in chief has to face ...

The UN inspectors are scheduled to leave this Sunday (labor day weekend for the USA) and the Russian G20 summit meeting in Saint Petersburg is scheduled for September 5th and 6th which is just one week from this Thursday by the way.

President Obama has already cancelled a meeting with President/Premier (whatever he has elected himself to be) Putin over the Snowden NSA leaker problem.

Perhaps President Obama should reconsider his meeting with the Russian hard liner on the topic of chemical weapons use in Syria.

A little co-operation wouldn't hurt a thing ...

The USA can't go in or come out of that meeting with smoke coming out of Syria from airstrikes.

Leaves the next ten days in limbo :yep:

A car bomb the rebels get credit for is the least messy of all options :o

[Wolferz]

Obama has a tee time. No time for considering anything else.
Maybe he could do the world a big favor and just go on vacation until his term has expired. Let Biden bungle it.:haha:

[BossMark]

As every one is saying how will the Russians and Iranians react? Obama and Cameron(I hope parliament vote against military action) and the rest of Western allies might want to consider this, although I bet they have but will they consider they actions as it all could and probably will all end in tears..........

[Skybird]

Hard to believe it, but they really seem to be determined to walk straight into th trap.

In case of crime, it is good to ask who benefits from it, and who has what motive.

Assad:

may think the West is weak and Obama is a mouth hero, but must nevertheless be in knowledge (fed by his advisors) about the US military's capabilities. He knew that there is the risk that the US will get engaged against himself if he steps over that famous red line.

And why should he want to do that, now, at this time? The war is running well for him. The Syrian army is in attack mode since months, with help by Hezbollah, Iran, and deliveries received from Russia, North Korea, and verbally supported (if not more?) by China. A lot of important strategic key places have been recaptured, the rebels are running in many places.

He also had the weapon inspectors under his nose, they have been in the country to investigate three other places when the incident now leading to this hype was staged by somebody.

Conclusion:

Assad has no interest to launch a massive chemical attack right now. He has no military or other need to so so. The timing speaks against it. A lot of risk is involved. He can get no compensation for the costs of it. In other words: he has had nothing to win from it now. He has no motive for it right now. Everything speaks against it. Assad is cold-blooded, ruthless and unscrupulous - stupid or insane he is not. At least not that we know

The opposition: Al Quaeda, terrorists, rebels, extremists, jihadists:

are in the defense, and have been hunted around in the recent weeks, been driven out of many strongholds they had taken before. Their situation doe snot allow to achieve military progress currently. They have only to win from chemical attacks taking place and claimed to have been ordered by Assad: a wavering, hesitant West could come to their support. They have no scruples to sacrifice civilians for their cause, as have the extremists of many factions in the ME have demonstrated over the years. The greater the horror being called out in the headlines of the world's newspapers, the better for them. The greater the bloodshed, the louder the call becomes to run to their rescue and assist them.

The timing of the attack is highly suspicious. The inspectors already in the country to examine three other locations - and right then during their visit this latest attack takes place!? How nice, timing could not have been any better!

Conclusion:

the rebels have only to win from staging a gas attack and claiming it to have been ordered by Assad. No risk for their cause is involved, the worst that could happen is that nothing happens and nobody reacts. Its a free bidding round for them.

Approaching this with reason and logic only, comparing the motives and situations of both sides, necessarily recommends the conclusion that the massacre has been conducted by the rebels.

In other words, NATO is about to embark on military assistance for a gang of medieval barbarians, West-hating jihadists, murderers not any better than Assad and Hezbollah are, and Al Queda-liking terrorists. Great service for NATO's reputation! Iran must love it.

The Russians probably see it right. Like it or not: they probably see it right.

The current inspectors' mission is only to examine whether or not a chemical attack took place. Trying to clear who conducted the attack if it was one, is not part of there mission. They also have not the time and options to do that. It is beyond their mandate.

Nobody so far has shown evidence for the claim that it was Assad. Britain, France and the US only presented claims so far. Modern history shows that it is imperative to not just trust mere American claims when it comes to excusing wars.

I think the rebels did it.

The US, Britain and maybe France once again walk straight into the giant trap that is called the Middle East. Especially the US seem to have a natural, inbred immunity to learning about the ME. And the British? Once again run and try to find the stick that their master has thrown. Must be great to be a poodle, considering how passionately they fill that role time and again. France cooks its own supper. It's about widening francophone influence and status around the Islamic mediterranean theatre. It's a long-lasting geostrategic ambition of theirs, to somehow compensate for their economic inferiority to Germany. Holland's vision of supersocialism is falling apart under the pressure of financial realities in France. Distracting a displeased public by running an external war is a proven tactic for desperate politicians, since eons.

[Mr Quatro]

Here's the newest from that area

http://www.algemeiner.com/2013/08/26/iranian-official-israel-will-be-first-victim-of-u-s-strike-in-syria/

Don't know if this is going to make it more tense as it is.

Markus

This is fear itself thrown at Israel and of course has to be taken seriously, but look at the last paragraph in the same article:

Stars and Stripes said the Jordanian military, which boasts 120,000 troops, has deployed many of its combat units to its northern border with Syria in an effort to prevent a spillover of the ongoing fighting between rebel groups, and the regime of President Assad. Jordanian officials said about 560,000 Syrians have already fled across the frontier.

[Catfish]

Can't say that often enough:

There is no evidence of chemical weapons having been used.

So WTF ?



Edit:
Google says: "No results found for +evidence +chemical +syria +2013."
:rotfl2:

[Ducimus]

Just watched Kerry's address about it. Judging by the language he used, language typical of his party in recent months, there is not a doubt in my mind they're gonna do it.

[BossMark]

Just watched Kerry's address about it. Judging by the language he used, language typical of his party in recent months, there is not a doubt in my mind they're gonna do it.
Guess there not going to wait for UN inspectors test results then :nope: sad really sad indeed :nope::nope:

[soopaman2]

America will do what the far right MIC wants them to do and will accept it or get the Patriot act sicced on them. The people and their will, face devouring at the hands of our so called protectors.

Syria, got oil, close to people with oil...

INVADE NOW, MY COMPANY WILL MAKE BUKU BUCKS OVERCHARGING FOR MY SERVICES, AND BECAUSE IT COMES FROM THE TAXPAYER i CAN COUNT ON NEARLY INFINITE MONEY FOR ME AND MY FRIENDS.


Ahhhh, capitalism at its best. Crony capitalism that is.

[eddie]

Not proud at all of what our Government is about to start!

[Catfish]

And there still is no evidence of chemical weapons having been used.


Some suspect some Pookah mission though, would fit the usual action of the war mongers.

[Ducimus]

Guess there not going to wait for UN inspectors test results then :nope: sad really sad indeed :nope::nope:

Now, I could very well be wrong. However, the instant i see the language used starting at about 3:20 on this video:
http://youtu.be/NOS9EQG73FA?t=3m15s

"Our understanding"
"Grounded in facts"
"Informed by conscious"
"guided by common sense" (I REALLY shudder when i hear "common sense" coming out of a democrat)

That's the same language that his party uses on issues like gun control where they have demonstrated the conviction to follow through on what they think; and he is clearly convinced.

So yeah, they're gonna do something. It's just a question of when.

edit:

America will do what the far right MIC wants them to do and will accept it or get the Patriot act sicced on them.

It's not just the right. We have the best government money can buy. Democrat or Republican It doesn't matter. Obama is proof of this. He's doing alot of the same crap Bush did. Different puppet, same puppeteers. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjZSCi2MSc4)

[Dowly]

That escalated quickly...

[Garion]

Looks like the Boy Scouts, The Army Cadets. Sea Scouts and Sea Cadets are getting their call up papers....

I don't think we have anyone else to send...:nope:

Cheers

Gary

[Ducimus]

That escalated quickly...


I believe kerry speech is a couple days old. I'm just assuming everyone else but me has seen it already.

[Jimbuna]

Not proud at all of what our Government is about to start!

Total madness....and any other country that follows suite :nope:

[Jimbuna]

One thing will be interesting. The Russian reaction.

I doubt they will do much more than sit back and view from the sidelines....which makes a lot more sense than what the west appear to be contemplating.

[Madox58]

Armagettin a bit nervous over this.

[Wolferz]

I shudder when I hear any politician use the words "common sense." :hmmm:

[Ducimus]

I shudder when I hear any politician use the words "common sense." :hmmm:


Good point. The words "common sense" coming out of a professional liar of any stripe is cause for concern.

[Mr Quatro]

I know Mrs Assad use to do a lot of online shopping :D
but I didn't even know that Syria had a electronic army (SEA)

http://www.businessinsider.com/twitter-syrian-electronic-army-2013-8


Pro-Assad hacker group Syrian Electronic Army (SEA) claims it now has control over the Twitter.com domain.

The group bragged about the takeover in a tweet. The SEA was able to change some of the basic information in Twitter's domain registry.

Changes include the admin name and the email address for contact.
A Twitter spokesperson told Business Insider the company is looking into the issue and will update later.

The New York Times website is also down today. A Times spokesperson told Reuters that the site is down due to a malicious external attack. Some are speculating the SEA is involved too.

[Madox58]

"common sense".
That was mostly removed with litigation.
Example... Don't spill hot coffee on your lap is common sense.
Example of removal of said... sue McDonalds because coffee is hot!

I think that one should be required to stand up in Court and state they have no common sense and are, infact, idiots.

[Tribesman]

That escalated quickly...
I suppose they have to act quickly before the weapons inspectors produce any evidence, just in case it doesn't support what they claim to "know" is true.

[August]

That was mostly removed with litigation.
Example... Don't spill hot coffee on your lap is common sense.
Example of removal of said... sue McDonalds because coffee is hot!

No, sue McDonalds because they sell scalding hot coffee in weak-ass cups.

I think that one should be required to stand up in Court and state they have no common sense and are, infact, idiots.So which idiots are you talking about Brother?

The poor elderly lady with 2nd and 3rd degree burns all over her lap,
or,
the mega-rich corporation that used substandard packaging for their products?

[Ducimus]

What I love the most about this bit so far, is how all too familiar it is with our government placing blame on the existing regime without rock solid evidence.

I remember this:
http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/About/General/2011/2/15/1297785986782/Colin-Powell-makes-his-pr-007.jpg

I hope regime change isn't their real goal. We can't do this again.

[Bubblehead1980]

Be careful what you ask for. A new Constitutional Convention would be wide open for any changes they wanted to make, with no restrictions. Considering the things you're complaining about and the current strength of the Left, you would probably end up with a much worse situation rather than a better one.


I agree with amendments, but don't cofuse them with a new Constitution. The main reason the president has the power he does is that the members of the original convention knew that George Washington would be the first president, and they trusted him implicitly. That power came back to haunt them, and is still with us today.

On the other hand for all your complaints about the current president, he really doesn't have the kind of power you think he does. He gets a lot of what he wants because Congress is on his side for the most part. The President can suggest and influence all he wants, but he has no power at all to make laws.

Just out of curiosity, exactly what amendments would you propose?

Oh Obama has as much power as he thinks, he disregards law or "interprets" it to his liking.Things obviously need to be more clearly spelled out to prevent future presidencies such as his or that of his predecessor and those before even but the last two seem to have abused their power as well.

Amendment wise. Term limits for one. We managed to get one through limiting the Presidency because many saw how dangerous Roosevelt had become.I think Roosevelt was a good man overall but he was a man and let power corrupt him, his radical social policies opened the door and was the foundation of where we are today.I will praise him for his leadership in the war and his inspiration but his policies on the economy were crap, the war saved the economy, not his domectic policies.Keynesianism just never works.Anyways, such term limits should be imposed for Senators and Congressmen. One six year term for Senators, may run for a second after sitting out for six years, two terms maximum. Two 2 year terms for reps, that is it.Ten year term for supreme court justices and 6 years for all other federal judges, they are part of the problem as well.Amendment cutting pay and benefits of congress and president and all federal employees.They are way over compensated. Basically an amendment to curb what has become an elite political class in this country.

Amendment that would get the money out of politics. strict, clear laws on donations, gifts, trips, etc. to lawmakers. No lobbying by business or special interests.Private citizens may protest, show up to talk to members etc but absolutely nothing of value may given etc.

Repeal of the 16th amendment is also needed, starve the beast of it's funding, we won't have such a problem and it would solve the immorality of taxing people's income directly.The language of this amendment would also prevent the bloodsuckers from creating an outrageously high VAT tax etc. Perhaps replace the amendment with a low flat tax of 8 percent, with few exemptions, perhaps for elderly and low income.

Amendments that hold those who create, pass, sign and have ANYTHING to do with laws that obviously violate the constitution of the united states a felony offense. Drone strikes on US citizens without a trial? felony. Indefinite detention of a US citizen no matter what the charge? Felony.

An amendment to clarify the commerce clause since the supreme court botched that one. The amendment would state that under no circumstances may the federal government force citizens to purchase a product or service from any entity whatsoever, be it private, public, or a combination.

An amendment that abolishes the NSA and strictly prohibits the activities revealed by snowden. This amendment would also make a real FISA court, not the facade there is now.

A transparency amendment that demands transparency at all levels of government.No secrets from the public.period.

Basically, we need a series of amendments to correct some mistakes and address the long term institutional problems of the is nation. I agree, we have to be careful, don't want a new constitution created with undue left wing influence.

I disagree, the Presidency has immense power now days, esp when you have someone who like the current one who has a penchant for ignoring the law and doing as he wishes in many instances.Unfortunately, this is the nature of man, to seek as much power as possible and it is too much power for one man to have. The moment it was revealed obama ordered a drone strike on a US cititzen which is tantamount to a summary exectuon, he should have been impeached.The presidential power to pardon should be abolished as well. I would say this is Bush did it(never did it to a US citizen to my knowledge) or if Rand Paul were to do it(we know he never would)

[Skybird]

I do not see them wanting regime chnage by military engagement like in Iraq, I indeed think this time they "just" act stupid and walk into a stupid situation open-eyed, for the reasons I mentioned one or two pages earlier. It just makes no sense that Assad wanted this chemical strike that is claimed to have been done by him, it just makes no sense - while it makes a lot of sense that the rebels did it.

And another possibility has not been mentioned: a rivalry between officers, or a failure or mishap in the command chain of the Syrian army, resulting in an unwanted order reaching the lower level, and carrying out the attack although Assad did not want it.

I hate to sound as if I defend Assad, I have no intention to do so. But fact remains: this attack makes no sense. And I think it is stupid, braindead and irresponsible that the US and Britain, apparently not knpwing for sure who it was, allow nevertheless to get so easily drawn into assistance of factions that are hostile to them and us all in return. The US engaging in air strikes of which Al Quaeda and jihadists and those terrorist the claimed American war against terror is directed against, do benefit! Think of it - is that queer, or is that queer? :nope: What's next? A jihad support treaty between the US and AQ?

[Mittelwaechter]

Did you know that Syria hasn't signed any convention that prohibits the use of chemical weapons against its own people?

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2013/08/2013827123244943321.html

The US used chemical weapons in Vietnam and they sold it to Saddam Hussein to fight Iran. They showed him where to drop it in Iran, to gain maximum effect. Hussein gased the Kurds in northern Iraq too.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/08/25/secret_cia_files_prove_america_helped_saddam_as_he _gassed_iran

This, and the huge advantage of an gas attack for the aggressors and rebels in Syria should make us think twice.

[Archangel]

In a way its sad to say so but I find it hard to believe in basically anything that comes out from that conflict, the sources are all over the place and conflicting.

Personally it does strike me as strange that Assad would order an attack using chemical weapons, I have not followed the conflict with eagle eyes but as far as I know the war has been swinging in Assad's favor lately, and with the UN inspectors coming into the country in addition to that it strikes me as the worst strategic decision ever, especially considering that the US has drawn the "red line" by the use of weapons of mass destruction in terms of intervention.

[Oberon]

Whoa...Whoa...Whoa...

People are getting a bit excited around here, like it's The Day After or something. Calm down a bit folks!
For one thing, oil hasn't been below $100bbl for a few months now, look:

http://www.infomine.com/ChartsAndData/GraphEngine.ashx?z=f&gf=110537.USD.bbl&dr=1y

(http://www.infomine.com/investment/metal-prices/crude-oil/1-year/ in case the picture doesn't show)

It spiked in January, probably because of the Mali situation and the spillover into Algeria, came down a bit and just dipped below 100 in April, but then when Egypt started up again and Syria has gotten worse it's creeping back up again. The highest the prices have gone so far has been $146, so we've still got a way to go, and when that happened in 2008 the world did not end.
Syria puts out at most 20k bbl/day, OPEC has been upping their quota (producing the most in seven months back in May) so that any shortfall from Syria is covered by the other Gulf states. Yes, Syria is in a rather strategic location in regards to oil access, however since Syria has not been particularly friendly to western interests, most of the infrastructure has yet to be built.
That is not to say that there will not be problems ahead, there are a million and one things that could go wrong in the coming weeks, many of them dependent on what Russia does in response, what happens to the Suez Canal and whether Assad is crazy enough to launch on Israel.
I can't see Iran actually stepping up to the plate for Syria, they have too much to lose, I can't see their new leader being in favour of it, but as we all know with Iran it's what the Ayatollah says that matters, so they might just do something but it would surprise me.
I also don't see the UK doing anything until next week at the earliest, the US might go first if Obama wants to skip congress and the UN report, it would be a stupid thing to do, but painting himself into a corner like he has done is also a stupid thing to do. Parliament is going to have a chin wag about it on Thursday, I hope that it's an open session because it should be quite interesting to watch. Hopefully some of our MPs have learnt since the Iraq war, although I see old Tony Blair is in support of an attack on Syria...no real surprises there, if anything the fact that Blair has put his support behind the attack should be a clear example of why we shouldn't do anything! :haha:

I also can't see the military involvement being any more than a few TLAMs on certain targets, and maybe the B2s might get a chance to play...heck, if the US is feeling risky it might even take the golden bird into combat (F-22) but anything that doesn't have the RCS of a gnat (and not the Folland kind) will stay firmly on the ground until the SAM sites have been nailed.

I can't see Russia getting militarily involved but they will definitely respond in some manner, most likely economically or diplomatically. They might turn the pipes into Europe off again, not that that does much to the US but it'd certainly screw up things over here, and might well just domino into the US markets.

At times like this though, I always think of that ancient Chinese curse, 'May you live in interesting times', and these sure are interesting...but we're not quite in doomsday territory yet.

Yet.

[Mittelwaechter]

Just to balance the information - the aggresors have some supporting media too.

http://www.thenational.ae/news/world/middle-east/syrian-chemical-attack-spurs-finger-pointing-inside-assad-regime

They claim to have well informed, networked informants telling the CWs were used without knowledge of the Syrian forces gunners.

Do you think the gas rockets should be marked somehow, even only to avoid shooting them into the incoming wind direction?

[Onkel Neal]

Well, being a motorcycle salesman, I'm hoping for some action to get oil prices up there. :D

[Ducimus]

Whoa...Whoa...Whoa...

People are getting a bit excited around here, like it's The Day After or something. Calm down a bit folks!


Knowing our government, and its track record, I think being worried about this is well justified.

[Oberon]

Knowing our government, and its track record, I think being worried about this is well justified.

Well, yeah, but there's being worried, and then there's panic-buying and the sky is falling in being worried.

Mittel may also have a point, there was someone, if not in this thread, then somewhere I saw that mentioned the possibility that a random general conducted this attack in order to try and advance his position in the Assad regime. Reminds me a bit of the film version of 'The Sum of All Fears'.

No...wait...I'm trying to calm people down here...that doesn't help. :dead:

[eddie]

Take a deep breath Oberon, it will be alright,lol Just think, in another parallel universe, this isn't happening,hopefully.:D

[Wolferz]

Watch this boys and girls....
http://i205.photobucket.com/albums/bb295/Wolferz_2007/puppettheater.jpg

Pay no attention to the cruise missiles behind the curtain.

[Packlife]

Impeach Obama??? WOW you dont impeach a president just because you dont like him, there a hard far right republicans who are shooting that idea down. Remember a guy named Bill Clinton??? They tried impeaching him for having sex an it blew up in their faces, Obama has not committed any high crime or serious misdemeanors, if Obama had broken the law I assure you the republican held congress would have him strung up on impeachment charges so fast it'd break your neck. An to say he has all kinds of power because congress agree's with him???? Where do you live I'd like to visit sometime the current congress HATES Obama, they held meetings when he was elected the first time on how to screw him which lead to 5 years of obstructionism from congress that's why the congress's approval rating is like 6%. Now Bush War Crimes??? put your self in that mans shoes sitting in a Florida classroom on 9/11/01. Maybe he over reacted some but he said it in his book best, the same people in October of 01' who hailed him as a hero an genius for these different things like the Patriot act, turned on him not even 2 years later. No one had a problem w/ it when the wounds were fresh an everyday we turned on the tv we saw the smoldering ruins of the twin towers an pentagon an the torn up field in Pa, but after Bin Laden gave us the slip in Tora Bora an the debris cleared people changed their minds. I agree on something's like limiting terms some of these guys still thing their in the Joe McCarthy era. But don't forget what America has always stood for, sticking up for those who cant stand up for themselves.

[Packlife]

Decided to do this in 2 post's. Some say we shouldn't do anything because what's happening in Syria doesn't affect us or our interest's, but it does on both account's. Assad is going to fall it's just a matter of time an the number of dead before he falls. Here are my reasons on how not doing something eventually hurts America. 1 there are reports of some checkpoint's flying the Al-Qaeda flag, so they are there, obviously supporting the factions that support turning Syria into a hard core Islamic state like Afghanistan was. If that side wins w/ the help of Al-Qaeda their payment will be in chemical weapons an a large group to recruit from which can lead to a chemical weapon being set off somewhere in the US or at least an attempt to do it. 2nd Israel is an interest of ours since their friends of ours, they share a border Israel already did 1 airstrike stopping Syrian weapons being payed to Hezbollah for helping Assad. An the biggest reason I think we should do something is, when I see row upon row of dead little kids an their mothers from gas it makes my blood boil. You don't go after women an children, that's even a big rule among the Arab people an Assad crossed that line like he was signing a check, this guy went from arresting protesters, to beating them, to shooting them, to finally bombing, shelling, an now gassing them. To say well to shoot that missile will just add to our debt is such a cop out, your saying that innocent kids an women aren't worth helping because their not Americans is a shame an is not what this country was built on. We fought against a tyrant for our freedom as well, lucky for us they didn't have jets an chemical weapons. An that's why people ask us for our help because we know what it means to want to live free. To stand by an let Assad to keep on using chemical weapons on his own people especially the innocent one's is just wrong. What should we do?? Airstrikes an missile strikes, now I'd love to see us straight up pound Assad into dust with our air power I have no sympathy for tyrants dictators or butchers, an I don't feel bad knowing that his future is probably going to be short an painful.

[Oberon]

Decided to do this in 2 post's. Some say we shouldn't do anything because what's happening in Syria doesn't affect us or our interest's, but it does on both account's. Assad is going to fall it's just a matter of time an the number of dead before he falls. Here are my reasons on how not doing something eventually hurts America. 1 there are reports of some checkpoint's flying the Al-Qaeda flag, so they are there, obviously supporting the factions that support turning Syria into a hard core Islamic state like Afghanistan was. If that side wins w/ the help of Al-Qaeda their payment will be in chemical weapons an a large group to recruit from which can lead to a chemical weapon being set off somewhere in the US or at least an attempt to do it. 2nd Israel is an interest of ours since their friends of ours, they share a border Israel already did 1 airstrike stopping Syrian weapons being payed to Hezbollah for helping Assad. An the biggest reason I think we should do something is, when I see row upon row of dead little kids an their mothers from gas it makes my blood boil. You don't go after women an children, that's even a big rule among the Arab people an Assad crossed that line like he was signing a check, this guy went from arresting protesters, to beating them, to shooting them, to finally bombing, shelling, an now gassing them. To say well to shoot that missile will just add to our debt is such a cop out, your saying that innocent kids an women aren't worth helping because their not Americans is a shame an is not what this country was built on. We fought against a tyrant for our freedom as well, lucky for us they didn't have jets an chemical weapons. An that's why people ask us for our help because we know what it means to want to live free. To stand by an let Assad to keep on using chemical weapons on his own people especially the innocent one's is just wrong. What should we do?? Airstrikes an missile strikes, now I'd love to see us straight up pound Assad into dust with our air power I have no sympathy for tyrants dictators or butchers, an I don't feel bad knowing that his future is probably going to be short an painful.

Morally and ideologically that is a sound move, however there are a number of very practical problems in the way.

Assad is not Saddam, although it's almost an anagram, although the Syrian army has been battered and bruised by a long and bloody civil war, it is still a potent weapon, in particular the troublesome S-300 Surface to Air Missile system which can be compared to early Patriot SAM batteries. If you start flying F-15s and the like over there, they are going to start being shot at, and eventually the law of averages dictates that one or more of them are going to be shot down.
So, cruise missiles, certainly that is an option and it's most likely the option that's going to get used when this does kick off, however unless you have tags on every single chemical weapon that Assad has then you're going to miss some, and this whole thing is going to happen again. This is the reason (well, one of the official ones anyway) that the coalition put boots on the ground in Iraq, because at the end of the day, the only way to be sure that you've got all the chemical weapons is to get in there and have a good look about, and you can't do that from a UAV or a cruise missile, or even a spy satellite. That we are aware of, anyway.
Then there's the opposition, the Free Syrian Army and all the myriad groups that make up the people fighting against Assad, including Al'Qaeda. They also have chemical weapons, it is entirely possible that they have used these chemical weapons already, it is also entirely possible that it was they who carried out this attack, not Assad. How do you get rid of the chemical weapons that they have? Bomb both sides?
You hope that if Assad is removed by the west that someone who isn't Al'Qaeda linked will get into power in Syria. I think that that hope may be quite misplaced, Al'Qaeda are the biggest and strongest anti-Assad forces in Syria at the moment, they pretty much ARE the FSA, just as Iran and Hezbollah are pretty much the footsloggers for the Syrian army. This Syrian war isn't just a civil war, it's a proxy war for the dominant powers of the Middle East, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Al'Qaeda and Hezbollah.
The whole Arab Spring is the conclusion to an event that started nearly a hundred years ago in the Sykes-Picot agreement, where we arbitarily decided the borders of the Middle East based upon our asessments rather than the wishes of the inhabitants, a dying tendril of the old imperialist ways one could say. Now, we could get involved again, to try and hammer out some new status quo, to force the square pegs into the round holes, but who knows what kind of disaster that would create further down the line?
I too am repulsed by the footage I have seen, only scant pages further back in this thread I was arguing most vehemently against those who thought (and some still think) that this footage was made up. I can still in my minds eye see the spasms and the shaking, but we can't just go wading in, guns blazing, and not expect any serious consequences to our actions. Look at Afghanistan, look at Iraq, whilst their governments may be different and arguably their people enjoy greater freedoms, all of that is overshadowed by the complete and utter lawlessness that pervades all levels of society, from the corrupt government officals down to the Al'Qaeda enforcers that shoot little girls. This would be what would await Syria through western intervention...in fact, it's what awaits Syria outside of western intervention, as you have already realised.
Then there is the big question of Russia, the same Russia that owns a naval facility in Syria, is an ally of Syria and has supplied Syria with the weaponry being used by both sides to kill each other. Russia is not likely to take too well to American forces bombing their allies, and whilst I think it extremely unlikely that they would retaliate in a military fashion, Russians have long memories and their global influence cannot be underestimated. The last thing we need is another Cold War, and we've been dancing on the edge of one for at least a decade, despite attempts by Russia to thaw the ice.

Believe me, I would dearly love to see the end of the Syrian civil war, to know that there will be no more chemical attacks. I have read Wilfred Owen, I have seen photos from the trenches, I detest chemical and gas warfare, but I fear the consequences of western action may be greater than we can afford.

[Oberon]

Meanwhile that Bastion of British reporting genius, the Daily Express has a sub-headline stating that Missile strikes could start as early as tomorrow with this picture next to it:

http://www.boeing.com/assets/images/companyoffices/gallery/images/missiles/harpoon/images/C70-81-7.jpg

I haven't the heart to tell them that that is a Harpoon ASM, not a Tomahawk TLAM.... :/\\!!

The Times has a much nicer picture of the USS Ramage with the sun behind her, and then David Cameron in an insert picture below doing his best 'running Jason Bourne' impression. Very dramatic.

[Packlife]

First I'd like to clear 1 thing up, the FSA is not Al-Qaeda, the FSA is 1 of the only factions that want a country like ours, they're the ones who have been asking for our help. An yeah your right they do have some air defenses, but they're from the 70's if a F-22 Raptor cant knock out a 1980's era piece of equipment we've got a problem. An I think the general idea is not to attack the chemical weapon storage sights, because like you said it's too hard to pin them down on a map especially since we've waited as long as we've had an the reports are that a good portion of them have been dispersed at brigade level. Not to mention you'd have to drop something like napalm or WP or thermite something that would burn fast an hot enough to eradicate the chemical agents with out actually turning a storage sight into 1 big bomb that backfires an kills thousands. So the next question is well what do we bomb then?? You go after their ability to use those weapons, wipe Assad's airfields off the map, an pound any artillery positions that aren't dug into a civilian area, which they probably aren't since the rebels don't have air power. Some have said on tv the goal isn't to tip the balance on the battlefield but that's just dumb doing something to limit what Assad can do tips the scales, even though the goal is to stop or limit his ability to launch chemical attacks will at the same time limit his ability to run normal airstrikes an to shell the rebels as well as civilians it's a 2 for 1 type deal. I've seen the video's on the new's an the videos on youtube that the news doesn't show, an to those who think those are made up videos I'm sorry your wrong my mom is a nurse of 20 plus years an when I showed her the videos she called it right out that the foaming of the mouth the crazy jerking of the bodies etc are all signs of attacks on the the body's nerve system, plus can you imagine trying to get that many kids to lay still an play dead for that long I don't think so. An what makes me think that this is Assad doing the gassing an not the rebels is, who is showing the aftermath?? You don't see Assad's people releasing video an pictures of dead SAA troops that have been hit w/ gas, even some of his own people are starting to think he is responsible. Assad's propaganda machine goes 24/7 they actually send texts to rebel commanders daily. The 1 text was "Look out Aleppo he we come". Something has to be done it is immoral to stand by an let these people be butchered. We did it in Kosovo in the 90's, we just did it in Libya I don't know why it cant be done again. Like I said in a earlier post I'm not calling for boots on the ground because that would just get nasty an out of hand. In all likely hood Syria is on a long long road, regardless of who wins, whether it be the extremists or the more western friendly groups. But I think if we don't try to help the consequences will eventually come back to haunt us an then a lot of the same people who were against helping out now will be the same ones saying "why didn't we do something back then". I'd rather reduce the chance of terrorists being able to profit from Syria an cause the deaths of Americans down the road. Oh an Russia has said it's not willing to go to war of Syria so I doubt there would be too much blow back from them, the most they're willing to do is vote NO at the UN.

[Packlife]

LOL at Oberon, actually I think Thursday is the day it's suppose to happen

[Bubblehead1980]

Impeach Obama??? WOW you dont impeach a president just because you dont like him, there a hard far right republicans who are shooting that idea down. Remember a guy named Bill Clinton??? They tried impeaching him for having sex an it blew up in their faces, Obama has not committed any high crime or serious misdemeanors, if Obama had broken the law I assure you the republican held congress would have him strung up on impeachment charges so fast it'd break your neck. An to say he has all kinds of power because congress agree's with him???? Where do you live I'd like to visit sometime the current congress HATES Obama, they held meetings when he was elected the first time on how to screw him which lead to 5 years of obstructionism from congress that's why the congress's approval rating is like 6%. Now Bush War Crimes??? put your self in that mans shoes sitting in a Florida classroom on 9/11/01. Maybe he over reacted some but he said it in his book best, the same people in October of 01' who hailed him as a hero an genius for these different things like the Patriot act, turned on him not even 2 years later. No one had a problem w/ it when the wounds were fresh an everyday we turned on the tv we saw the smoldering ruins of the twin towers an pentagon an the torn up field in Pa, but after Bin Laden gave us the slip in Tora Bora an the debris cleared people changed their minds. I agree on something's like limiting terms some of these guys still thing their in the Joe McCarthy era. But don't forget what America has always stood for, sticking up for those who cant stand up for themselves.

Yes impeach him and it has nothing to do with my dislike for him.The man has ordered us citizens executed via drone strikes without trial.This violates their due process rights under the constitution as its tantamount to a summary execution, so yes he should have been impeached for that among several other things but that mainly.Violating a citizen's right to due process and having them summarily executed, which is what he has done repeatedly, is a "high crime".Let us not forget indefinite dention of US citizens per the NDAA.Also violating the constitution, another high crime. Congress does not impeach him because they are afraid of the backlash, they are waiting for him to really do something that just cant be defended, hoping he will hang himself essentially.

Congress has not been out to screw obama, drop the victim mentality. Obstructionism? They fight him on his idiotic agenda that does not work, so they get labeled obstructionists.The president is not supposed to get everything he wants.Obama is a buffoon, it's been amateur hour since day one, it's a prime example of what happens when an unqualified person gets elected.

I have sympathy for Bush, he is overall a decent man but was in over his head, he let the neocons like Cheney and Rumsfeld influence him after 9/11. If Bush ordered drone strikes on Us citizens that had not had their day in court, he summarily executed them and would be as guilty as obama but as far as i know, he never went that far.Only non us citizens were targeted with drones.Again another reason to impeach obama, he constantly disregards the constitution and other laws.



No, they impeached Clinton for lying, not having sex. The President should be held to a standard, letting them get away with lies etc is one reason we have so many problems.

Well it turns out McCarthy was right, so McCarthyism is a good thing.The Left loves to invoke his name and whine about it but McCarthy was right about communists and othe radical left wing types infiltrating the government and society.unfortunately, 50 years later, they run our universities and currently, our government.They also infest entertainment industry like roaches they are.

[Bubblehead1980]

Decided to do this in 2 post's. Some say we shouldn't do anything because what's happening in Syria doesn't affect us or our interest's, but it does on both account's. Assad is going to fall it's just a matter of time an the number of dead before he falls. Here are my reasons on how not doing something eventually hurts America. 1 there are reports of some checkpoint's flying the Al-Qaeda flag, so they are there, obviously supporting the factions that support turning Syria into a hard core Islamic state like Afghanistan was. If that side wins w/ the help of Al-Qaeda their payment will be in chemical weapons an a large group to recruit from which can lead to a chemical weapon being set off somewhere in the US or at least an attempt to do it. 2nd Israel is an interest of ours since their friends of ours, they share a border Israel already did 1 airstrike stopping Syrian weapons being payed to Hezbollah for helping Assad. An the biggest reason I think we should do something is, when I see row upon row of dead little kids an their mothers from gas it makes my blood boil. You don't go after women an children, that's even a big rule among the Arab people an Assad crossed that line like he was signing a check, this guy went from arresting protesters, to beating them, to shooting them, to finally bombing, shelling, an now gassing them. To say well to shoot that missile will just add to our debt is such a cop out, your saying that innocent kids an women aren't worth helping because their not Americans is a shame an is not what this country was built on. We fought against a tyrant for our freedom as well, lucky for us they didn't have jets an chemical weapons. An that's why people ask us for our help because we know what it means to want to live free. To stand by an let Assad to keep on using chemical weapons on his own people especially the innocent one's is just wrong. What should we do?? Airstrikes an missile strikes, now I'd love to see us straight up pound Assad into dust with our air power I have no sympathy for tyrants dictators or butchers, an I don't feel bad knowing that his future is probably going to be short an painful.

We can't play beat cop for the whole world.Life is tough, it bothers me to see the suffering of the syrians but you are allowing emotions to influence judgement, a big no no.No one thinks clearly when using emotion.

The United States has spilled enough blood in the middle east and spent enough money. We are not supposed to be the world's police department, syria is in a civil war, we have no business there.Now, if Assad got froggy and attacked us somehow? Ok but until then, we must stay out.We can send them weapons and even a few CIA types to train them but direct military involvement, NO way.

I think of Charlie Wilson's War. We couldn't intervene in Afghanistan directly against the soviets, so we send the afghans plenty of weapons, they won.Assad is horrible and his time will come but it is not our role and not worth risking our troops, aviators, etc and spending our money when we re about to hit the debt ceiling yet again.We must stop spending money on other people, plenty of people in the US need help.

[Dowly]

Assad's brother ordered the attack?
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-08-27/assad-s-brother-seen-linked-to-syria-chemical-attack.html

Anonymous source, so...


We are not supposed to be the world's police department,

And no one is asking you to be the world PD. It's your leaders who keep the image up with all the
knight in a shining armor fighting any and all injustice in the world talk. :O:

But yeah, better stay out of Syria if you ask me. :hmmm:

[Vince82]

I do not see them wanting regime chnage by military engagement like in Iraq, I indeed think this time they "just" act stupid and walk into a stupid situation open-eyed, for the reasons I mentioned one or two pages earlier. It just makes no sense that Assad wanted this chemical strike that is claimed to have been done by him, it just makes no sense - while it makes a lot of sense that the rebels did it.

And another possibility has not been mentioned: a rivalry between officers, or a failure or mishap in the command chain of the Syrian army, resulting in an unwanted order reaching the lower level, and carrying out the attack although Assad did not want it.

I hate to sound as if I defend Assad, I have no intention to do so. But fact remains: this attack makes no sense. And I think it is stupid, braindead and irresponsible that the US and Britain, apparently not knpwing for sure who it was, allow nevertheless to get so easily drawn into assistance of factions that are hostile to them and us all in return. The US engaging in air strikes of which Al Quaeda and jihadists and those terrorist the claimed American war against terror is directed against, do benefit! Think of it - is that queer, or is that queer? :nope: What's next? A jihad support treaty between the US and AQ?

I got to agree with this.

What evidence proves that Assad is behind the attack? Some reports state that there were rebels in that area that did have chemical weapons.

[Ducimus]

Obama has not committed any high crime or serious misdemeanors,

You haven't been paying attention.

[Skybird]

Decided to do this in 2 post's. Some say we shouldn't do anything because what's happening in Syria doesn't affect us or our interest's, but it does on both account's. Assad is going to fall it's just a matter of time an the number of dead before he falls.

So thought I, a year ago. I underestmated the difference the help by Hezbollah, Irean and the Russian deliveries make. There is no reason you can found your noptimism on. Much speaks for Assad staying in power in s smaller core region, and Syria being split, with a situation like in Lebanon in the 80s following next.


Here are my reasons on how not doing something eventually hurts America. 1 there are reports of some checkpoint's flying the Al-Qaeda flag, so they are there, obviously supporting the factions that support turning Syria into a hard core Islamic state like Afghanistan was. If that side wins w/ the help of Al-Qaeda their payment will be in chemical weapons an a large group to recruit from which can lead to a chemical weapon being set off somewhere in the US or at least an attempt to do it.

Then you should not bomb Assad, but the rebel side. What you say on AQ also is true for Hezbollah and Iran.


2nd Israel is an interest of ours since their friends of ours, they share a border Israel already did 1 airstrike stopping Syrian weapons being payed to Hezbollah for helping Assad.

Why support any of the two sides then, because both sides are hostile to Israel!? Assad is just more predictable and the better bet for getting kind of a stable regime again that can be calculated and is not eager as Hezbollah is to get engaged with Israel.


An the biggest reason I think we should do something is, when I see row upon row of dead little kids an their mothers from gas it makes my blood boil.
In that empotionally aroused state, you do not deice, but you get decided. And ask yourself one, no: two questions: why is the fate of the Syrians so dear to you but those people getting massacred in Kongo, Nigeria, Somalia and so many other places not? Are you really willing to enter a state of multiple wars simultaneously all around the globe for the coming decades to adress all crisis of the kind that "make your blood boil"? And can you debt-drowning, bancrupt country (assuming your are American) afford that, and has it really those unlimited military resources needed for that? Consider Iraq and Afghanistan, and what it has done to the structure of the globla US military. The drain is to be felt everywhere.


You don't go after women an children, that's even a big rule among the Arab people an Assad crossed that line like he was signing a check, this guy went from arresting protesters, to beating them, to shooting them, to finally bombing, shelling, an now gassing them.
You kmight be surpsied about the stance oif Muslim arabs regarding slavery and the treatement of women and children if they are of the wrong faith. And women in Islam have drawn the a$$ card anyway. Fact is that strength and iron fist are highly respected principles in Arab history, and their societies are very forgiving towards dictators as long as they act as if they are honouring the cause of Islam. Saddam played on that flute with big mastery.


To say well to shoot that missile will just add to our debt is such a cop out, your saying that innocent kids an women aren't worth helping because their not Americans is a shame an is not what this country was built on.

War costs money. Your money, in this case. Money you do not have, in reality. Your explicit national debts have exceeded your GDP, your implicit national debts multiply your explicit debts ya a factor likely being between 5 and 10: you are bancrupt, you live on tick, your fiscal situation is absolutely hopeless, you will never get out of your debts, but drown in it. Your next fiscal cliff is looming for mid-october, and your onlyl option to buy some more time is to raise your debt level. Your powergrid is a medieval mess, your infrastructure, especially bridges and streets, is collapsing and falling apart. What has remained of your heavy industry, to huge parts is globally not competitive and needs to be heavily protected by the state from international competition. Your education system is aching under the burden of being underfunded. You already live on tic, and steal time from the future of your own children. I do not list this to ridicule your country or to bash the US, but to show you that even the US has limits, limits that it already has overstepped. You are no nation of supermen, and you are not in possession of the infinite-money-cheat. Still eager to pay for just another war?

The principles your country was founded on are not the principles Syria was founded on by the post-war Anglosaxons almost a century ago. It was an imperial aftermath, like the whole ME nations' borderline-drawing is: a mess. Those borders were drawn in explicit ignorration of language and ethnic structures, they forced together what did not match, and separated what belonged together. Since the days of a hopelessly idealistic (and naive!) Lawrence of Arabia, the Anglosaxons demonstrate a comple inability to understand the rules the Arab civilization is functioning by. Arabia really is the Anglosaxon'S personal nemesis, it seems. And like that it is until today: the "two-days war" now coming just proves that America's politicians have learned nothing, absolutely nothing (while surveys say 60% of US citizens want no US strike. Whether that is due to insight or due to general tiredness of war, is something different) . Obama has not learned as well, he should have kept his mouth shut one year ago.

Idealism leads you nowhere if you ignore reality over it. And reality trumps. It simply IS, and idealism and optimism and pessimism never have bent it.


We fought against a tyrant for our freedom as well, lucky for us they didn't have jets an chemical weapons. An that's why people ask us for our help because we know what it means to want to live free. To stand by an let Assad to keep on using chemical weapons on his own people especially the innocent one's is just wrong.
Prove it. There is no evidence that it was Assad, and as I have argued earlier, much speaks against it and nothing speaks for it. See here:

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=2106508&postcount=177


The rebels had much greater interest in committing it.


What should we do?? Airstrikes an missile strikes, now I'd love to see us straight up pound Assad into dust with our air power I have no sympathy for tyrants dictators or butchers, an I don't feel bad knowing that his future is probably going to be short an painful.

You will not get what you want there. The strikes will be short and limited, and they will not hit Assad, but his military only. By achieving that, you help right that Al Quaeda and all the enemies of Israel that you mentioned earlier.

The bad guys have more than nine lives (Germans know that better than any other, considering how many attempts there have been against Hitler: dozens).

You emotional arousal leads you nowhere. Calm down. ;)

[Skybird]

Ach nee!

http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/08/27/exclusive_us_spies_say_intercepted_calls_prove_syr ias_army_used_nerve_gas


But the intercept raises questions about culpability for the chemical massacre, even as it answers others: Was the attack on Aug. 21 the work of a Syrian officer overstepping his bounds? Or was the strike explicitly directed by senior members of the Assad regime? "It's unclear where control lies," one U.S. intelligence official told The Cable. "Is there just some sort of general blessing to use these things? Or are there explicit orders for each attack?"

Nor are U.S. analysts sure of the Syrian military's rationale for launching the strike -- if it had a rationale at all. Perhaps it was a lone general putting a long-standing battle plan in motion; perhaps it was a miscalculation by the Assad government. Whatever the reason, the attack has triggered worldwide outrage, and put the Obama administration on the brink of launching a strike of its own in Syria. "We don't know exactly why it happened," the intelligence official added. "We just know it was pretty ****ing stupid."


Compare:


And another possibility has not been mentioned: a rivalry between officers, or a failure or mishap in the command chain of the Syrian army, resulting in an unwanted order reaching the lower level, and carrying out the attack although Assad did not want it.


If the US intercept of Syrian comms is true, then the responsibility lies with the side of Assad, although the massacre was not wanted (this time at least) and may be the result of a communication meltdown within the chain of command.

But this does not change my stand on it: we have no interest in seeing Assad winning, and we have no interest in seeing the rebels winning. We should not get engaged. For us, it is a lose-lose situation. Let's stay out of this mess.

[Skybird]

German media now quote reports saying that it was Assad's brother who ordered the attack in an intellectual "shortcut", and against strategic order of Assad. His brother commands the Revolutionary Guards and 4th division of the Syrian army. It got implied both brothers are currently a bit upset over each other.

Anyhow, if the West still thinks it must do this strike, then at least the formality of answering the question of which side was responsible for the chemical attack may find an answer. The contradiction that led me to saying that the rebels have greater interest in committing this attack, may find solution. For whatever that is worth.

But still I think, we should not get engaged.

[Skybird]

Israel mobilizes it's reservists.

[Sailor Steve]

No, they impeached Clinton for lying, not having sex. The President should be held to a standard, letting them get away with lies etc is one reason we have so many problems.
I've been hearing that one since the day it happened. They didn't impeach Clinton for lying or for sex. They impeached Clinton for the crime of being a Democrat. It was a Right-Wing witchhunt from the start, and they used whatever they could get on him, much the same as the Oliver North trial was a Left-Wing witchhunt attempting to hang something on Reagan. It was political game-playing and nothing more.

Well it turns out McCarthy was right, so McCarthyism is a good thing.The Left loves to invoke his name and whine about it but McCarthy was right about communists and othe radical left wing types infiltrating the government and society.unfortunately, 50 years later, they run our universities and currently, our government.They also infest entertainment industry like roaches they are.
You seem to have no clue what you are talking about here. Perhaps Tailgunner Joe was right, perhaps not. The horror of the McCarthy era wasn't that there may or may not have been Communist infiltration in our government. Everybody was spying on everybody. The horror was that McCarthy conducted his own terrorist campaign with "lists" that didn't exist, and accused anybody and everybody with even the slightest hint of socialist tendencies of being a Commie Spy. The blacklists were a blight on a free society and ruined a lot of good people's lives. Joe McCarthy was one of the most vile, evil people ever to get himself insinuated into the United States government.

[Skybird]

First I'd like to clear 1 thing up, the FSA is not Al-Qaeda, the FSA is 1 of the only factions that want a country like ours,
Oh no, not that again please. That assumption was made about the youth protests in Iran in the mid-90s (I was there), it was repeated about the electorate two elections ago in Iran again, it was made about the tunisian opposition, the Libyan opposition, the Egyptians, and now you do it for the Syrian opposition. The truth still is that a majority of the Syrian people want a Sharia-grounded constitution, and are perfectly okay with Sharia-style punishment as the way to go with everyday crime. Possible that they want some more freedom to move, and access to global media. And that pretty much sums it up what they want. It's a big jump to say they want a country like yours. Sharia and Islam and Western ideals of humanitarian and social and free and liberal democracies, are incompatible. They do not want these in this fashion you are used to from your own home living standards - you want them to want it, I suspect. You want to bring it to them. Well, neither will it work, nor will it go that way anyway. It has been tried many times now, until recently, and the result always was unpleasant. Let's learn a bit from our record of failed expectations.


they're the ones who have been asking for our help.
So have the other radicals that have come to power in the Arab Spring. I remind of how Turkey's sultan Erdoghan I. has put it in the mid-90s: democracy is like a train. You board it to get to your destination, but once you reached your destination, you get off that train and leave it behind again.


An yeah your right they do have some air defenses, but they're from the 70's if a F-22 Raptor cant knock out a 1980's era piece of equipment we've got a problem.

Syria is said to have one of the most robust air defences in the region, it does not compare to Libya. F-22'S ar4e fighters and interceptors, no bombers. Underestimating your enemy is the first step towards your defeat.


An I think the general idea is not to attack the chemical weapon storage sights, because like you said it's too hard to pin them down on a map especially since we've waited as long as we've had an the reports are that a good portion of them have been dispersed at brigade level. Not to mention you'd have to drop something like napalm or WP or thermite something that would burn fast an hot enough to eradicate the chemical agents with out actually turning a storage sight into 1 big bomb that backfires an kills thousands. So the next question is well what do we bomb then?? You go after their ability to use those weapons, wipe Assad's airfields off the map, an pound any artillery positions that aren't dug into a civilian area, which they probably aren't since the rebels don't have air power.

During the Kosovo war, the Serbian army fooled NATO'S smart ammountiion into dropping armopur-killing porecision guided amonution onto fake targets. The BBS reprted by referring to the ministry of defence within 24 hours after the ccease fire that over 90% of NATO'S attacks on tanks and armoured vehicles fell for fake targets. The Serbian army retreated from Kosovo almost intact, disciplined and in order. Their losses in tanks and armour was said to have been suprrisngly light, considering the effort that was staged to kill them. A strike on Syria now is rumoured to be led by Tomahawks and maybe some bombers, it is limited in scope, allocated resources, and timeplan. Go figure. What will be targetted? Where they have Israeli intel, chemical sites and advanced air defences, airfields, the air force. If it becomes clear that it was Assad's brother responsible, then the focus will shift on the Revolutinary Guards and the fozurth army. If it remains claimed that it was Assad, the general army: soft targets, local command centres, supply nodes.


Some have said on tv the goal isn't to tip the balance on the battlefield but that's just dumb doing something to limit what Assad can do tips the scales, even though the goal is to stop or limit his ability to launch chemical attacks will at the same time limit his ability to run normal airstrikes an to shell the rebels as well as civilians it's a 2 for 1 type deal. I've seen the video's on the new's an the videos on youtube that the news doesn't show, an to those who think those are made up videos I'm sorry your wrong my mom is a nurse of 20 plus years an when I showed her the videos she called it right out that the foaming of the mouth the crazy jerking of the bodies etc are all signs of attacks on the the body's nerve system, plus can you imagine trying to get that many kids to lay still an play dead for that long I don't think so. An what makes me think that this is Assad doing the gassing an not the rebels is, who is showing the aftermath?? You don't see Assad's people releasing video an pictures of dead SAA troops that have been hit w/ gas, even some of his own people are starting to think he is responsible. Assad's propaganda machine goes 24/7 they actually send texts to rebel commanders daily.

It takes two to tango a propaganda war. ;) The rebels are swinging that wand professionally, too.


The 1 text was "Look out Aleppo he we come". Something has to be done it is immoral to stand by an let these people be butchered. We did it in Kosovo in the 90's, we just did it in Libya I don't know why it cant be done again. Like I said in a earlier post I'm not calling for boots on the ground because that would just get nasty an out of hand. In all likely hood Syria is on a long long road, regardless of who wins, whether it be the extremists or the more western friendly groups. But I think if we don't try to help the consequences will eventually come back to haunt us an then a lot of the same people who were against helping out now will be the same ones saying "why didn't we do something back then". I'd rather reduce the chance of terrorists being able to profit from Syria an cause the deaths of Americans down the road. Oh an Russia has said it's not willing to go to war of Syria so I doubt there would be too much blow back from them, the most they're willing to do is vote NO at the UN.

I strongly think you have quite some illusions about the nature of the Syrian opposition alliance. I recommend closer study of what currently happens in Libya. Tunisia. The situation in Egypt. None of these places is on the way towards a Western-styled democracy.

None of the combatting sides in Syria deserves our sympathy.

[Oberon]

First I'd like to clear 1 thing up, the FSA is not Al-Qaeda, the FSA is 1 of the only factions that want a country like ours, they're the ones who have been asking for our help. An yeah your right they do have some air defenses, but they're from the 70's if a F-22 Raptor cant knock out a 1980's era piece of equipment we've got a problem. An I think the general idea is not to attack the chemical weapon storage sights, because like you said it's too hard to pin them down on a map especially since we've waited as long as we've had an the reports are that a good portion of them have been dispersed at brigade level. Not to mention you'd have to drop something like napalm or WP or thermite something that would burn fast an hot enough to eradicate the chemical agents with out actually turning a storage sight into 1 big bomb that backfires an kills thousands. So the next question is well what do we bomb then?? You go after their ability to use those weapons, wipe Assad's airfields off the map, an pound any artillery positions that aren't dug into a civilian area, which they probably aren't since the rebels don't have air power. Some have said on tv the goal isn't to tip the balance on the battlefield but that's just dumb doing something to limit what Assad can do tips the scales, even though the goal is to stop or limit his ability to launch chemical attacks will at the same time limit his ability to run normal airstrikes an to shell the rebels as well as civilians it's a 2 for 1 type deal. I've seen the video's on the new's an the videos on youtube that the news doesn't show, an to those who think those are made up videos I'm sorry your wrong my mom is a nurse of 20 plus years an when I showed her the videos she called it right out that the foaming of the mouth the crazy jerking of the bodies etc are all signs of attacks on the the body's nerve system, plus can you imagine trying to get that many kids to lay still an play dead for that long I don't think so. An what makes me think that this is Assad doing the gassing an not the rebels is, who is showing the aftermath?? You don't see Assad's people releasing video an pictures of dead SAA troops that have been hit w/ gas, even some of his own people are starting to think he is responsible. Assad's propaganda machine goes 24/7 they actually send texts to rebel commanders daily. The 1 text was "Look out Aleppo he we come". Something has to be done it is immoral to stand by an let these people be butchered. We did it in Kosovo in the 90's, we just did it in Libya I don't know why it cant be done again. Like I said in a earlier post I'm not calling for boots on the ground because that would just get nasty an out of hand. In all likely hood Syria is on a long long road, regardless of who wins, whether it be the extremists or the more western friendly groups. But I think if we don't try to help the consequences will eventually come back to haunt us an then a lot of the same people who were against helping out now will be the same ones saying "why didn't we do something back then". I'd rather reduce the chance of terrorists being able to profit from Syria an cause the deaths of Americans down the road. Oh an Russia has said it's not willing to go to war of Syria so I doubt there would be too much blow back from them, the most they're willing to do is vote NO at the UN.

The most successful force on the rebel side in Syria at the moment is the Al-Nusra Front, they have confirmed their allegiance to al-Zawahiri. In a situation like this, the strongest will emerge to lead, and Al'Qaeda has a lot of resources that they can put behind a group that wants to run a country.

In regards to Syrian air defence systems, they have the Pantsir-S1 (Sa-22), the 9K33 Osa (Sa-8), Kubs (Sa-6) and the old faithful Buk M1. Those are the mobile SAMs, there is also the S-300 and the possibility of some Tunguskas in the mix too.
Most of this stuff is 1980s kit, yes, but still potent. After all, a farmer with a AAA shot down a F-117 Nighthawk during Kosovo, so you really cannot guarantee the invincibility of American forces, and do you really think the American people, who are already only 45% in support of military action, will remain in support of military action if American lives are lost?

No disagreement from me in the truth behind those reports, although the real question of who used them is not fully clear, whilst it is slightly more likely that Assad used them, it's also quite possible that he didn't even order the use of them but it was someone else, possibly his brother. In a situation which is as chaotic as this it's very hard to get accurate information and facts.

In regards to intervening because of chemical weapons, one must look back at the Iran/Iraq war, where Iraq used chemical weapons with American blessing, and some 50,000 people died. The US didn't intervene or launch strikes on Iraq because they wanted Iran to lose. Even when Saddam gassed the Kurds, the US and the western world just shrugged its shoulders and said "C'est la guerre". The only reason we are so keen to act right now is that Assad is a Russian ally and we don't like him.

Also, one should never underestimate the Russians, you use the Kosovo example a lot, but we came very close to fighting the Russians in Kosovo at Pristina airport, so I really would not rule anything out.

[Alex]

Is it not amazing how the united states of America and its usual partners in war crimes are always so quick to rush to war, while Russia is the voice of diplomacy. Also American citizen are now persecuted by their own government for exposing evil and Russia gives them sanctuary.
The UN should be reformed and its headquarters moved to Moscow.

[August]

The UN should be reformed and its headquarters moved to Moscow.


That would be fine by me.

[kraznyi_oktjabr]

Is it not amazing how the united states of America and its usual partners in war crimes are always so quick to rush to war, while Russia is the voice of diplomacy. Also American citizen are now persecuted by their own government for exposing evil and Russia gives them sanctuary.:roll:
The UN should be reformed and its headquarters moved to Moscow.I propose South Pole. Would fit better with that organization's relevance (atleast when superpower interest are involved).

[eddie]

Well, the PR Campaign of BS goes to new levels!:haha:

http://news.msn.com/world/syria-terrorists-will-strike-europe-with-chemical-weapons

[Jimbuna]

Reminds me of this guy :)

http://memecrunch.com/image/513faae3afa96f4c7b00007d.jpg (http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=PICjw0N9nBhBJM&tbnid=RUUgqBmxZNsZhM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fmemecrunch.com%2Fgenerator%2Ftemp late%2F278212%2Fcomical-ali%2F&ei=9RweUueZC-e00wWP54GQCw&bvm=bv.51156542,d.ZGU&psig=AFQjCNG_sL24BM6YtdNp6EFStRKFUZAH3w&ust=1377791583859486)

[eddie]

:haha:

[Ducimus]

That would be fine by me.

Ditto.

[Skybird]

The UN should be reformed and its headquarters moved to Moscow.
Moscow? Dschidda sounds more appropriate to me.

[Ducimus]

UN Official, Syrian Rebels Used Sarin Nerve Gas, Not Assad’s Army (http://www.livetradingnews.com/un-official-syrian-rebels-used-sarin-nerve-gas-assads-army-6636.htm)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKXjjhrvbf4

[Ducimus]

Joy........
NATO Statement on Syria 08/28/13 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_BSl_9j7mc)

[Skybird]

UN Official, Syrian Rebels Used Sarin Nerve Gas, Not Assad’s Army (http://www.livetradingnews.com/un-official-syrian-rebels-used-sarin-nerve-gas-assads-army-6636.htm)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKXjjhrvbf4

I do not comment on that remark about a Un official having said that, the voice gives no source and so it just is a claim. But I pretty much agree with the voice's comments after that reference, and with almost all of it. The claim of this day that it was Assad's brother, also still stands unproven, is just a claim.

Evidence, Mr. Obama - evidence.

[eddie]

Even though I am totally against this strike, there is something I don't understand. When it comes to military decisions, why do we always broadcast way ahead of time, exactly what we are planning to do?

Could you imagine if this would have been the way things were done during WWII? Newsflash- Allies plan invasion of Europe in Normandy on June 6, 1944!! The German High Command would have loved that bit of news!

So I don't get why we advertise we are going to hit Syria for 2 or 3 days with cruise missiles!

[Catfish]

Wasn't a war almost the best what could happen, to divert from internal problems.

http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2013/08/26/open-secret-about-googles-surveillance-case-no-longer-secret/

:dead:

[Mittelwaechter]

These statements of DelPonte were made in may 2013, when she was a member of the first UN team to investigate the use of chemical weapons in Syria.

It was the first try to get the US into the conflict, but she frustrated the aggressors plans.

Don't be confused.

The running UN investigations shall only prove the use of CWs, but shall not find/name the culprit again.

[Jimbuna]

Oh but we did...the details got mixed up that's all :O:

[Oberon]

So I don't get why we advertise we are going to hit Syria for 2 or 3 days with cruise missiles!

I guess they reckon that there's nothing Assad can do to stop them.

[Ducimus]

In the spirit of gallows humor, anyone want to start taking bets on when our government does something incredibly stupid with a cruise missile? Pulling a date out of my ass, i'll guess sometime tomorrow, but definitely before the labor day weekend. Beer, BBQ, and stupidity on TV all in one go.

[Catfish]

Several sources now which claim gas has been used by the rebels. No evidence though.

As much evidence as for Assad having used it.


So there is still no evidence at all.

[Mittelwaechter]

Maybe just two days before someone does something stupid with a steam cooker at Victoria Station or Grand Central?

[Ducimus]

^
:haha:

Big brother is now watching this thread.

[soopaman2]

One of the New York papers had something about the Us ready to strike, when looking for corroborating evidence, as it was a Rupert Murdoch owned rag mag, I found that it was the UN ready to jump in.


I hate our media, especially when some paper owned by an Australian, does its best to undermine us at every turn.

And people are worried about Bradley Manning and Snowden.

By the way, the same phone hacking liar owns Fox News.

Just once I want straight news, and not having to cross reference to get the whole story.

[Catfish]

Maybe just two days before someone does something stupid with a steam cooker at Victoria Station or Grand Central?

Nevermind those undependable terrorists. For those actions you have the Gladio stay-behind armies.

Now they'll watch.

[Oberon]

In the spirit of gallows humor, anyone want to start taking bets on when our government does something incredibly stupid with a cruise missile? Pulling a date out of my ass, i'll guess sometime tomorrow, but definitely before the labor day weekend. Beer, BBQ, and stupidity on TV all in one go.

Hmmm, well Dave is having his chat with Parliament tomorrow so I don't think they'll go tomorrow, probably what Dave and Barry have been chatting about on the hotline. I doubt Dave will put it to a vote in parliament because too many would vote against.
My money is on Friday, Monday at the latest.

[Dowly]

Just once I want straight news, and not having to cross reference to get the whole story.

There are 200 some countries in the world, most with online news services. No need to
read just American media if you dont trust them.

UN's asking for everyone to wait for the results of the investigation.
US, UK and France, especially the US are the ones talking how sure they are
it was Assad and that action needs to be taken. :03:

[soopaman2]

Dave and Barry have a half a testicle between them.

My motive behind my opposition of any action, by my county at least, is my war wearyness.

I lost in the last wars, for zero gain to the common people.

We did not liberate Iraq Or Afghanistan, they hate us even more now. We are occupiers, barely tolerated.(by gunpoint)

What makes any of the warhawks think this is any different, unless you got alot of oil stock...