Syria conflict: 'Chemical attacks kill hundreds'

eddie · 09-03-13, 05:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mapuc

Most likely scenario:

Some fraction i Syria that support Assad makes some attacks against some area in Israel. The same goes for those fractions in Lebanon

Markus

I agree Markus, I hope not but no one controls all the different factions in Syria or Lebanon.

Wolferz · 09-03-13, 05:48 PM

Ipso Facto

Have a pudding pop.

u crank · 09-03-13, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eddie

I agree Markus, I hope not but no one controls all the different factions in Syria or Lebanon.

Some of these factions are considered 'terrorist organizations'. Hezbollah and The Al-Nusra Front, who have strong ties to Al-Qaeda, for example. Funny thing is they are on opposite sides.

Oh....that's a shame.

Wolferz · 09-03-13, 06:09 PM

It appears that Obama wants to strike people who are only accused of using chemical weapons.

Quote:

from a recent MSN article on the subject:
Before his scheduled departure(for the G-20 summit) Tuesday night, Obama urged lawmakers meeting with him at the White House to support his plan to punish Syria for allegedly using chemical weapons to attack its own people.

And they gave this chump a Nobel Peace prize?!?!
I think it should be rescinded.

Platapus · 09-03-13, 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolferz

It appears that Obama wants to strike people who are only accused of using chemical weapons.

Good thing we have all these smart weapons that will only kill people accused of using chemical weapons. An accusation is good enough for targeting purposes evidently.

Tchocky · 09-03-13, 06:16 PM

French and US have released declassified intelligence detailing the accusation.

I'm not saying they're correct - but the picture of blind unsupported accusations isn't correct either.

Skybird · 09-03-13, 06:34 PM

The likelihood always was in favor of the chemicals being used by Assad's side, the question was about evidence to prove it (just assuming it is a bit thin for going to a time-limited war), and the question was how it came to it, since, the attack obviously made no sense and was counterproductive for Assad, which gave argument for assuming it could have been the rebels as well - which is another reason why the regime's responsibility must not be assumed, but proven.

However, we can have no interest in helping the rebels' side. If there would be no AQ, djihadists, Iranians and Hezbollah, one maybe would debate the option (and even then I am likely refusing to participate in any strike). But considering the nature and internal battles of the factions forming the rebels' "alliance", as well the as West-hostile stance of the Syrian population, evidence for this or that is unimportant, since it does not change the matter of main concern.

Send the bill for any strike now to the Saudis.

eddie · 09-03-13, 07:02 PM

So much for the great air defense system in Syria! What was Syria (or Iran)trying to send to Hezbollah? That's the only reason Israel will strike inside Syria.

"The blasts rocked a large military area in the suburbs of Syria's capital, prompting terrified residents nearby to run for cover.
"Everything kept exploding over and over again," said Anna Deeb, whose family lives just over a mile away. "We could hear gunshots, we could hear people screaming. ... We didn't know what to do, and there was a problem with us breathing because the smoke was too much."

http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/05/world/...ynamicSearchAd

09-03-13, 05:48 PM	#2
Wolferz Navy Seal Join Date: May 2007 Location: On a mighty quest for the Stick of Truth Posts: 5,963 Downloads: 52 Uploads: 0	Ipso Facto Have a pudding pop. __________________ Tomorrow never comes

09-03-13, 06:16 PM	#6
Tchocky Navy Seal Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 5,874 Downloads: 6 Uploads: 0	French and US have released declassified intelligence detailing the accusation. I'm not saying they're correct - but the picture of blind unsupported accusations isn't correct either. __________________ [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

09-03-13, 06:34 PM	#7
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,694 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	The likelihood always was in favor of the chemicals being used by Assad's side, the question was about evidence to prove it (just assuming it is a bit thin for going to a time-limited war), and the question was how it came to it, since, the attack obviously made no sense and was counterproductive for Assad, which gave argument for assuming it could have been the rebels as well - which is another reason why the regime's responsibility must not be assumed, but proven. However, we can have no interest in helping the rebels' side. If there would be no AQ, djihadists, Iranians and Hezbollah, one maybe would debate the option (and even then I am likely refusing to participate in any strike). But considering the nature and internal battles of the factions forming the rebels' "alliance", as well the as West-hostile stance of the Syrian population, evidence for this or that is unimportant, since it does not change the matter of main concern. Send the bill for any strike now to the Saudis. __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.

09-03-13, 07:02 PM	#8
eddie Ocean Warrior Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Minnesota Posts: 3,023 Downloads: 99 Uploads: 0	So much for the great air defense system in Syria! What was Syria (or Iran)trying to send to Hezbollah? That's the only reason Israel will strike inside Syria. "The blasts rocked a large military area in the suburbs of Syria's capital, prompting terrified residents nearby to run for cover. "Everything kept exploding over and over again," said Anna Deeb, whose family lives just over a mile away. "We could hear gunshots, we could hear people screaming. ... We didn't know what to do, and there was a problem with us breathing because the smoke was too much." http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/05/world/...ynamicSearchAd