f0xx Posted August 28, 2013 Report Share Posted August 28, 2013 I am curious on the subject and what each of you think. Let us discuss and compare our sources of information. At this point it is pretty certain such have been used. My question is - who do you think used them? The Syrian government, or the rebels? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inscribed Posted August 28, 2013 Report Share Posted August 28, 2013 US needs to stay out of it, but Obama will bomb them anyways while arming al-Qaeda, all the while Democrats plug their ears and chant "But Bush!". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeleeCrazy Posted August 28, 2013 Report Share Posted August 28, 2013 Let the French handle this one, they seem like they want to anyway. I hate how al I hear is Bush started an illegal war crap, when it was Congress that decided to go into Afghanistan and Iraq not BUSH. I believe we are laughed at as a nation and our president appears Impotent and weak to the world Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I've Killed for Less Posted August 28, 2013 Report Share Posted August 28, 2013 My thoughts exactly..... IKFL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeleeCrazy Posted August 28, 2013 Report Share Posted August 28, 2013 Nice video and he does bring up some valid points, But let us hope he is completely wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
egreir Posted August 28, 2013 Report Share Posted August 28, 2013 The CIA used the chems to create the justification to get rid of Al-Assad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pali Posted August 29, 2013 Report Share Posted August 29, 2013 US needs to stay out of it No argument with that. As for who used the weapons... *shrugs* How the hell should I, or anyone else on this forum, know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f0xx Posted August 29, 2013 Author Report Share Posted August 29, 2013 As for who used the weapons... *shrugs* How the hell should I' date=' or anyone else on this forum, know?[/quote'] My original question was, "Who do you think used tthem?" As with most things in life, I've found out that when you don't know the answer to something, usually the most logical one is the right one. If we look at the facts at hand, hell the video that IKFL posted, summarizes them pretty well. 3 days ago I used to think that Bashar al-Assad needs to be removed and the US needs to intervene. That was of course my impulsive self. Yesterday though, I did some research and read quite a bit on the subject in attempt to inform myself, and there seems to be quite some controversy about this chemical attack that supposedly came from the Syrian government. Somehow, it makes no sense for Assad to be the initiator of this attack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.Twendrist Posted August 29, 2013 Report Share Posted August 29, 2013 What I think is suspect is that they have been talking about chemical weapons being a red line since this **** started. There have been plenty of civil waresq conflicts that didn't come to that. It's like it was predicted from the get go. As far as who used them, I don't see how the rebels could have gotten access to chemical weapons, let alone a delivery system to use them. The U.S. is talking about arming the rebels which is a horrible plan. We saw how well that worked when we gave the Afghani's guns to fight the Soviets. If America does anything, it should be via a no fly zone. Our planes are good enough that we can just level the playing field with Assad for the rebels. If I was gonna support anyone, it'd be the rebels just because Assad clearly has little connection to his people anymore. I mean, after all, you're talking about a guy who sent in bombers to destroy his own people, he clearly has no legitimacy to rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f0xx Posted August 29, 2013 Author Report Share Posted August 29, 2013 What I think is suspect is that they have been talking about chemical weapons being a red line since this **** started. There have been plenty of civil waresq conflicts that didn't come to that. It's like it was predicted from the get go. As far as who used them' date=' I don't see how the rebels could have gotten access to chemical weapons, let alone a delivery system to use them.[/b'] The U.S. is talking about arming the rebels which is a horrible plan. We saw how well that worked when we gave the Afghani's guns to fight the Soviets. If America does anything, it should be via a no fly zone. Our planes are good enough that we can just level the playing field with Assad for the rebels. If I was gonna support anyone, it'd be the rebels just because Assad clearly has little connection to his people anymore. I mean, after all, you're talking about a guy who sent in bombers to destroy his own people, he clearly has no legitimacy to rule. I think you have your answer there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.Twendrist Posted August 29, 2013 Report Share Posted August 29, 2013 You mean the U.S. gave them chemical weapons? I mean, in a totally screwed up way it makes sense to garner support for an invasion, assuming there are powerful groups who want it. Like in V for Vendetta in a way? Though, if that is the case, then you also have to assume the world is totally screwed and will soon be torn asunder by the fall out. If it was the rebels who used the chemical weapons, I would think it would be from the Russians trying to keep Assad in power. That way they could point at the rebels and say "Well look what these guys are doing, they're the bad ones!" Russia/China have been firmly on Assad's side, because if Syria falls to this type of revolution, it will only be a matter of time before that kind of movement blows up in the larger oppresive regimes like Russia/China. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pali Posted August 29, 2013 Report Share Posted August 29, 2013 My original question was' date=' "Who do [b']you think used tthem?" As with most things in life, I've found out that when you don't know the answer to something, usually the most logical one is the right one. A logical argument without verifiable premises can be used to justify any absurdity, regardless of how valid it is. Without actual evidence to support the argument, all you have is guesses that encourage people to make bad conclusions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f0xx Posted August 29, 2013 Author Report Share Posted August 29, 2013 A logical argument without verifiable premises can be used to justify any absurdity' date=' regardless of how valid it is. Without actual evidence to support the argument, all you have is guesses that encourage people to make bad conclusions.[/quote'] Oww, why so serious man? Considering this is a gaming forum and not a UN meeting, and we are gamers, and not the presidents of the US/Russia/China, I see nothing bad in some theory crafting. So, calm down broski. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imoutgoodbye Posted August 29, 2013 Report Share Posted August 29, 2013 There will come a day when all will fall apart. The meta narratives that are social constructions will fail, logic shall be dispersed as the organization of the human mind as an attempt to dissuade others that there is more beyond the binary of order and disorder. The hegemonic disposition of the U.S. government pushes science, yet another meta narrative, often creating at least as many problems as it solves. Watch your televisions and be distracted by Miley Cyrus twerking, but please disavow the feminist rage that constitutes the deconstruction of Robin Thicke's lyrics while Miley twerked upon him. It all matters not. Distractions. Fall to the abyss with me and know that none are above suspicion, all is suspect. My Brothers and Sisters of Aabahran, I ask not for your souls, for they do not exist. I ask for your minds, your ability to think, your existence, for if you think, you are. If you do not, you are sheeple. Play in the sand box of society and pretend contentment, but join the revolution. A mere handful of corporations in the U.S. feed you your news. Drone programs approved by Obama kill innocent children every day, yet he cries for a school shooting. Double standards. Politicians know nothing but money. They are not the 99%. They will never be. Stand with me and know that what happened in Syria does not matter. Those people that died? That is their government, their local issue. We are separated by miles of H2O. It is their responsibility to overthrow their government if that is what is needed. But wait...what if it was the "rebels"? Aren't they Al Qaeda linked? The same Al Qaeda the U.S. used to supply with weapons? Is it happening again? Are they gone from freedom fighter to terrorist returned to freedom fighter? I don't know. Brothers and Sisters, you'll have to ask yourself. Either way, the U.S. has no business there. We have our own corrupt government to deal with. *kisses Foxx* Just for old times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pali Posted August 29, 2013 Report Share Posted August 29, 2013 Oww' date=' why so serious man?[/quote'] A few posts ago, you insinuated that the US armed the rebels with chemical weapons. That is a serious claim, one that many might find offensive or incendiary regardless of the medium. War crimes are not something I consider to be a joking issue - regardless of who did what, thousands of people are dead and many more sick or injured. Hence, so serious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f0xx Posted August 29, 2013 Author Report Share Posted August 29, 2013 A few posts ago' date=' you insinuated that the US armed the rebels with chemical weapons. That is a serious claim, one that many might find offensive or incendiary regardless of the medium. War crimes are not something I consider to be a joking issue - regardless of who did what, thousands of people are dead and many more sick or injured. Hence, so serious.[/quote'] Ofcourse I'm gonna assume that. Your government has been arming the rebels for quite some time now, what stops it from giving them chemical weapon too? And why would Assad use such weapons, when he hasn't in the past 2 years, when he was actually losing the war. Now that he is winning, he suddenly decides to try them eh? Especially with the UN inspectors who just happened to arrive and so conveniently close too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pali Posted August 29, 2013 Report Share Posted August 29, 2013 *sigh* I have no interest in arguing guesswork with guesswork - I am not willing to make war crimes accusations without actual evidence to support those claims. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeleeCrazy Posted August 29, 2013 Report Share Posted August 29, 2013 does seem a little suspect, And I'm an US citizen. I may also come off as cavalier when discussing such topics, It's serious no doubt but the reality is that this conflict doesn't affect the majority of any of us in any direct way, other than our governments involvement or lack there of. The fact of the matter is that when dealing with these parts of the world over the course of time many mistakes have been made all around, after so many mistakes, incompetence no longer seems to be a viable scapegoat and a reasonable person would at least consider that something more sinister could be afoot. Speaking for my self this is not an accusation or an assumption but merely a discussion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celerity Posted August 30, 2013 Report Share Posted August 30, 2013 This pretty much sums up my feelings: http://www.dailypaul.com/297370/never-before-in-history-has-mainstream-media-failed-to-convince-americans-to-support-usa-in-war-cry US Finally Admits What Ron Paul Said: "Nobody Knows Who Set Off The Gas" ""The danger of escalation with Russia is very high," Ron Paul warns in this brief Fox News interview. After casting doubts on the government's 'knowledge' and reasoning in the region, Paul gets straight to the point. Simply put, he notes, despite the ongoing headlines of 'proof' and 'dreadful videos', Paul states "We're not positive who set off the gas," and indeed - who is set to benefit most from any Assad-regime-smackdown? Al-Qaeda. "Assad is not an idiot," Paul adds, "it's unlikely he would do this on purpose... look how many lies were told to us about Saddam Hussein prior to that build-up." A lot of uncomfortable truths in this brief clip for an administration that has crossed its own red line (as we noted here) on actions against Syria now... "I think it's a false flag..." Paul adds, there is a big risk that "we are getting sucked in" and the American people are against this war."" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f0xx Posted August 31, 2013 Author Report Share Posted August 31, 2013 Some more interesting news: THE SAUDIS TRY TO BRIBE AND THREATEN PUTIN OVER SYRIA. Leaked transcripts of a closed-door meeting between Russia's Vladimir Putin and Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan shed an extraordinary light on the hard-nosed Realpolitik of the two sides. Prince Bandar, head of Saudi intelligence, allegedly confronted the Kremlin with a mix of inducements and threats in a bid to break the deadlock over Syria. . . . As-Safir said Prince Bandar pledged to safeguard Russia's naval base in Syria if the Assad regime is toppled, but he also hinted at Chechen terrorist attacks on Russia's Winter Olympics in Sochi if there is no accord. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inscribed Posted August 31, 2013 Report Share Posted August 31, 2013 Waiting until the middle of the first Saturday of college football, Obama announces he's officially launching military action against Syria. Al-Qaeda are now officially our allies. Democrats need to either admit they made a huge mistake voting this guy into office, or admit their party is built on hypocrisy, and that the only problem they ever had with Bush was that he didn't have a D attached to his name. http://www.politico.com/story/2013/08/obama-to-speak-on-syria-96122.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mali Posted August 31, 2013 Report Share Posted August 31, 2013 Welcome to the cold war, part II. Proxy wars fought between the U.S. And Russia, with the middle-east as collateral. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f0xx Posted August 31, 2013 Author Report Share Posted August 31, 2013 One of our national TV channels just announced that Obama is putting the attack for a vote in the senate? And your senate is off for like 10 days? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pali Posted August 31, 2013 Report Share Posted August 31, 2013 There is a problem with this video: it lists four sources. It has only one, because each of those four sources uses the same original source, this mintpressnews.com article. This of course does not mean that it is incorrect, but it does raise questions in my mind as to how much actual investigation of claims was done. The interesting thing about that original article is that the accounts it gives actually do match the accounts that Assad's people have given. I recommend reading it. The video description also has more donation/purchase options than a campaign email, which does nothing to help improve my view of those making it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celerity Posted August 31, 2013 Report Share Posted August 31, 2013 One of our national TV channels just announced that Obama is putting the attack for a vote in the senate? And your senate is off for like 10 days? They'll debate it and vote starting Sept. 9th here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.