RE: Chemical weapons used in Syria

RE: Chemical weapons used in Syria (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Yachtie -> RE: Chemical weapons used in Syria (8/22/2013 1:38:34 PM)
fr American, Israeli And Jordanian Troops And CIA Agents Have Entered Syria, Le Figaro Reports

mnottertail -> RE: Chemical weapons used in Syria (8/22/2013 1:44:01 PM)
Out of ZeroHedge, so worthless, and contradicts itself. We will yet wait upon events. And stupid with the war unsanctiontioned by congress asswipe.

Politesub53 -> RE: Chemical weapons used in Syria (8/22/2013 1:46:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri Support the people of Syria and the other side will accuse you of supporting AQ/terrorists. Support Assad, and the other side will accuse you of supporting a tyrannical despot. Unquestionably. So we do what everyone thinks is probably the right thing and get rid of Assad. Then what? We're left with another country full of factions who are happy to have us remove their obstacle so they can try taking over and continue hating us. Here's an idea...do nothing, say nothing, avoid the issue, and let the rest of the world figure it out on their own for once. France seems all fired up to jump in. Let them handle it. I find myself utterly unconcerned if the Syrians burn themselves to the ground or figure out how to get rid of Assad. No matter what we do it will yield the US no appreciation from anyone. Except, if it all goes to pot, and israel is threatened, the US would then be obliged to act. I think the only solution is UN intervention, including the Russians. Personally I cant see it happening.

Politesub53 -> RE: Chemical weapons used in Syria (8/22/2013 1:49:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri Don't forget that one of the reasons we went into Iraq was over the ties to AQ. Can't really make that claim against Assad, can we? FFS there were no ties to AQ, until after the invasion. The Sunnis invited them in when Britain and the US put the Shia in control. Your own intelligence services have even admitted there were no ties to AQ, so why do people insist on repeating this bullshit.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Chemical weapons used in Syria (8/22/2013 1:53:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri Don't forget that one of the reasons we went into Iraq was over the ties to AQ. Can't really make that claim against Assad, can we? FFS there were no ties to AQ, until after the invasion. The Sunnis invited them in when Britain and the US put the Shia in control. Your own intelligence services have even admitted there were no ties to AQ, so why do people insist on repeating this bullshit. Polite. DS has a very subtle <sarcasm font> Most of us see it. Apparently, you don't

Politesub53 -> RE: Chemical weapons used in Syria (8/22/2013 2:03:25 PM)
Hillwill.......... There are still many on here who think the AQ bullshit is true.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Chemical weapons used in Syria (8/22/2013 2:20:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 Hillwill.......... There are still many on here who think the AQ bullshit is true. Only a few of the particularly stupid ones.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Chemical weapons used in Syria (8/22/2013 2:21:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri Don't forget that one of the reasons we went into Iraq was over the ties to AQ. Can't really make that claim against Assad, can we? FFS there were no ties to AQ, until after the invasion. The Sunnis invited them in when Britain and the US put the Shia in control. Your own intelligence services have even admitted there were no ties to AQ, so why do people insist on repeating this bullshit. Read more, Polite. Please. Post#8: Ron responded with quote: Oh, no we didn't, they had no ties, that was one of the seven or eight tries at finding a reason that didnt pan out, that was after 9/11, yellow cake, nuke weapons it was at least 4th or 5th on the list of created justifications. Post#9: I responded to Ron with: quote: No, we did use it as a reason. I didn't say we found it to be true, just that it was used as justification. Hussein hadn't gassed his peeps for how many years before we went in? 10-20 years? It was cited as a reason justifying why we were going in. At no point in this discussion have I written that AQ and Iraq had ties. I only said that that was one of the reasons justifying the invasion. WMD's was another reason, remember? Turns out there weren't any WMD's, but that doesn't mean they weren't one of the reasons we went in, now, does it?

RottenJohnny -> RE: Chemical weapons used in Syria (8/22/2013 3:27:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 Except, if it all goes to pot, and israel is threatened, the US would then be obliged to act. At least then there would be more justification for us to get involved.

Politesub53 -> RE: Chemical weapons used in Syria (8/22/2013 4:22:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 Except, if it all goes to pot, and israel is threatened, the US would then be obliged to act. At least then there would be more justification for us to get involved. Why ?....... Bush and Blair decide the West had a duty to protect civilians from WMDs, so why is it morally right to protect Israelis and not Syrians ? The problem is by using that as a pretence, future leaders have no wriggle room. Its either be seen to act over the us of WMD`s in all cases, or to pick and choose if to take sides.

Politesub53 -> RE: Chemical weapons used in Syria (8/22/2013 4:24:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri Don't forget that one of the reasons we went into Iraq was over the ties to AQ. Can't really make that claim against Assad, can we? FFS there were no ties to AQ, until after the invasion. The Sunnis invited them in when Britain and the US put the Shia in control. Your own intelligence services have even admitted there were no ties to AQ, so why do people insist on repeating this bullshit. Read more, Polite. Please. Post#8: Ron responded with quote: Oh, no we didn't, they had no ties, that was one of the seven or eight tries at finding a reason that didnt pan out, that was after 9/11, yellow cake, nuke weapons it was at least 4th or 5th on the list of created justifications. Post#9: I responded to Ron with: quote: No, we did use it as a reason. I didn't say we found it to be true, just that it was used as justification. Hussein hadn't gassed his peeps for how many years before we went in? 10-20 years? It was cited as a reason justifying why we were going in. At no point in this discussion have I written that AQ and Iraq had ties. I only said that that was one of the reasons justifying the invasion. WMD's was another reason, remember? Turns out there weren't any WMD's, but that doesn't mean they weren't one of the reasons we went in, now, does it? My bad, I replied to post #6 and not the following posts.

popeye1250 -> RE: Chemical weapons used in Syria (8/22/2013 5:06:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri Support the people of Syria and the other side will accuse you of supporting AQ/terrorists. Support Assad, and the other side will accuse you of supporting a tyrannical despot. Unquestionably. So we do what everyone thinks is probably the right thing and get rid of Assad. Then what? We're left with another country full of factions who are happy to have us remove their obstacle so they can try taking over and continue hating us. Here's an idea...do nothing, say nothing, avoid the issue, and let the rest of the world figure it out on their own for once. France seems all fired up to jump in. Let them handle it. I find myself utterly unconcerned if the Syrians burn themselves to the ground or figure out how to get rid of Assad. No matter what we do it will yield the US no appreciation from anyone. Couldn't have said it better myself.

tweakabelle -> RE: Chemical weapons used in Syria (8/23/2013 2:53:53 AM)
quote: I think the only solution is UN intervention, including the Russians. Personally I cant see it happening. Sadly you are correct in your assessment. First it has to get past the Security Council, which would mean tortuous negotiations with Russia and China, both of whom would be likely to veto, in the probable absence of an invitation from Assad to intervene. Then it would take months to assemble a force and deploy it. NATO is most unlikely to act without UN approval and most Third World countries are reluctant to approve international interventions particularly Western interventions in sovereign States. Israeli intervention is a possibility. Perversely enough that might be the only thing that might unite all the Syrian factions. And it would create another problem too - Israel has a long history of not leaving countries it has invaded. So no grounds for optimism. Syrians will continue to die, caught up in the machinations of others and Syria will remain the battlefield for the major powers and regional forces to fight out their squabbles. Every one is already involved and there's not a single force for good among the lot of them.

ashjor911 -> RE: Chemical weapons used in Syria (8/23/2013 3:40:32 AM)
uh .. yeah i am still here BTW ... still breathing ....

TheHeretic -> RE: Chemical weapons used in Syria (8/23/2013 6:58:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ashjor911 i am still here BTW ... still breathing .... I doubt I'm alone in being very glad to know that, Ash. Good thoughts to you and yours.

ashjor911 -> RE: Chemical weapons used in Syria (8/23/2013 7:18:55 AM)
there is another hit going to be tomorrow .. on the Yarmouk refugee camp in Damascus .. & there was a serious threats that its going to be chemical ... funny thing is that area is less than 1 mile away from me.. one mistake or wind & its going to be over for me

Hillwilliam -> RE: Chemical weapons used in Syria (8/23/2013 7:19:00 AM)
We're thinking about you ash. How is it on the ground there?

DesideriScuri -> RE: Chemical weapons used in Syria (8/23/2013 7:23:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ashjor911 there is another hit going to be tomorrow .. on the Yarmouk refugee camp in Damascus .. & there was a serious threats that its going to be chemical ... funny thing is that area is less than 1 mile away from me.. one mistake or wind & its going to be over for me Best wishes for safety through this mess.

ashjor911 -> RE: Chemical weapons used in Syria (8/23/2013 7:26:04 AM)
check points every 1 mile .. people get kidnaped from the streets & the kidnapers demand a huge ransom .. the water is almost gone & so is the power .. there is not a single day I don't see an injured person .. or more not a single day where I don't hear a cannon fire at nowhere .. or everywhere .. gun fire every damn day & every damn night .. seems that the guns don't sleep .. every thing is now x3 of its original price .. or more

RottenJohnny -> RE: Chemical weapons used in Syria (8/23/2013 9:05:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 quote: ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 Except, if it all goes to pot, and israel is threatened, the US would then be obliged to act. At least then there would be more justification for us to get involved. Why ?....... Bush and Blair decide the West had a duty to protect civilians from WMDs, so why is it morally right to protect Israelis and not Syrians ? The problem is by using that as a pretence, future leaders have no wriggle room. Its either be seen to act over the us of WMD`s in all cases, or to pick and choose if to take sides. Personally, I think agreements like those make better politics than they do acceptable actionable law. Morally, you're right. There is no difference. But I'm not basing my response on what's morally correct. I'm basing it on what is legally correct, my estimation of the possible political fallout, and my personal opinion that the US should be backing down its Middle East presence. I realize this is without question, a horrible and tragic affair but getting involved in a Syrian civil-war because of a moral issue is one thing. Getting involved in Syria because it's spilling over into a country we have legal defense treaties with is another. If something like that happens it might change my mind. But unless it does, I have no interest in having the US involved.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875