Chemical Weapon used in Syria, Western military response likely

[Shawnski]

Originally Posted by Kavy

Your post made me angry, as I don't like a lot of what you said.

Then I looked at your avatar, and completely forgot why I was angry.

LOL, point, set and match!

[DuffMan]

Originally Posted by Shawnski

I love mainstream media lapdancers. Does anyone think for themselves anymore? Do they do any further investigations beyond the headlines?

Do you actually trust a few newsgroups (or worse, politicians) so much that you would put your backing into them without question?

Did we not learn anything from Iraq?

Do you not follow certain professional investigative reporters that are more likely to be trusted than the networks themselves? Michael Hastings for example... oh wait, he was blown to bits. (debate THAT one elsewhere if you like).

We could play the same game here on CP. Flood the headlines (threads) with titles of "Plan the Parade!", "Best Rookie Group", "Smartest Hockey Minds Running Show" etc and suppress any thread that wasn't conforming to those themes, but that would NOT fly here. Why? Many here have a passion to actually understand all the facts on the Flames, but when it comes to world events, US Politics, economics, monetary policy and other aspects, your desire to delve deeper into each issue is quite often limited to just what the mainstream media is pumping out to you. "Control the media, control the minds".

Stay our of Syria. The US, UK, Canada, EU, NATO, etc, whatever.... stay the hell out. It is a mistake X 10 vis-a-vis Iraq, if not more.

Maybe you don't know who Joe Biden is, he's the VP of US. What he says has implications, hence the reason I quoted him. He's not some Joe in line at OJ, or a friend of my cousins dog groomers nephews Dad.

I'm pretty sure he is listening to the UN inspectors.

[Shawnski]

Originally Posted by DuffMan

Maybe you don't know who Joe Biden is, he's the VP of US. What he says has implications, hence the reason I quoted him. He's not some Joe in line at OJ, or a friend of my cousins dog groomers nephews Dad.

I'm pretty sure he is listening to the UN inspectors.

I know fully well who that pathetic puppet is Duffman.

Did you also listen and buy into Colin Powell's BS?

[DuffMan]

Originally Posted by Shawnski

I know fully well who that pathetic puppet is Duffman.

Did you also listen and buy into Colin Powell's BS?

Did I give an opinion on what JB said?

[Shawnski]

Originally Posted by DuffMan

Did I give an opinion on what JB said?

Then why the hell are you quoting him? Perpetuating myths? Or propoganda?

Perhaps you might focus on posting useful information then.

[DuffMan]

Are you drunk, bad at reading, or poor comprehension skills?

Originally Posted by Shawnski

Then why the hell are you quoting him? Perpetuating myths? Or propoganda?

Perhaps you might focus on posting useful information then.

Originally Posted by DuffMan

Maybe you don't know who Joe Biden is, he's the VP of US. What he says has implications, hence the reason I quoted him. He's not some Joe in line at OJ, or a friend of my cousins dog groomers nephews Dad.

I'm pretty sure he is listening to the UN inspectors.

[jar_e]

Originally Posted by Shawnski

Then why the hell are you quoting him? Perpetuating myths? Or propoganda?

Perhaps you might focus on posting useful information then.

Do you have anything to the contrary to say chemical weapons weren't used? And that the videos were fraudulent? Or is it just your opinion?

Legitimately interested.

[Shawnski]

Originally Posted by DuffMan

Are you drunk, bad at reading, or poor comprehension skills?

So based on that, you ARE endorsing him, therefore your opinion is known.

Or are you hereby denoucing him? What is it?

[Shawnski]

Originally Posted by jar_e

Do you have anything to the contrary to say chemical weapons weren't used? And that the videos were fraudulent? Or is it just your opinion?

Legitimately interested.

Something happened, it does appear. What, however, is up to conjecture. Rebels captured a chlorine plant earlier. Could chlorine gas have caused this? I don't know.

Someone posted that something to the effect that middle eastern leaders don't think as logically as us. I call BS. Why Assad would launch such an attack where and when he did (vis-a-vis the UN team being right there) makes no sense.

World politics is a HUGE game of chess. Once you realize that, you understand that yes... there are pawns.

[DuffMan]

Originally Posted by Shawnski

So based on that, you ARE endorsing him, therefore your opinion is known.

Or are you hereby denoucing him? What is it?

Wow, I wished I was open minded and objective as you.

[Knut]

I think what Biden says is important information. Where is all your important information Shawnski?

[jar_e]

Originally Posted by Shawnski

Something happened, it does appear. What, however, is up to conjecture. Rebels captured a chlorine plant earlier. Could chlorine gas have caused this? I don't know.

Someone posted that something to the effect that middle eastern leaders don't think as logically as us. I call BS. Why Assad would launch such an attack where and when he did (vis-a-vis the UN team being right there) makes no sense.

World politics is a HUGE game of chess. Once you realize that, you understand that yes... there are pawns.

Well, I appreciate the fact that you at least recognize that something horrible and inhumane is happening (as some still believe the videos are manufactured). Obviously a debate could come from what side is causing it, but its still happening.

Its a huge game of chess, sure, but surely international aid and force is sometimes legitimately needed when such atrocities are being committed, regardless of who's committing them.

[Plett25]

I don't know where Shawnski is getting his information from. I don't know who the "certain professional investigative reporters that are more likely to be trusted than the networks themselves" are. So if you could post a couple of links, that'd be appreciated.

But I'm certain that Obama won't put American boots on the ground. He's avoided a war with Iran (over the objections of the Republicans) he "led from behind" in Libya and that military intervention was short in duration and few in numbers. He got the US out of A-stan and Iraq, sure there's a huge mess left behind, but I can't imagine an exit scenario/timeframe where there isn't a huge mess left behind.

I don't know who the good guys are and who the bad guys are in Syria. Assad is probably a bad guy, but is the other side any better? I haven't a clue. The only thing for certain is that lots of people are dead and many more are in refugee camps. Those people are probably a lot like me and my family... they're probably the only "good guys" in this ####storm

So there are reports that chemical weapons have been used, reports that they have not been used, reports that Assad used them and reports that the rebels used them.

A scenario where rebels use chemical weapons to frame Assad strikes me as something out of a Bond movie... just not realistic. But on the other hand, guys like Assad are probably motivated by self preservation. Using chemical weapons is a pretty stupid move if you're trying to stay alive.

I wonder if the real problem is that we've gotten to the point where chemical weapons have been (or could be) used, but nobody (not the US, USSR, or Assad himself) really knows who has used them or is in control of them. What the hell does anybody do if that's the situation? I wonder if the real purpose of the pending US strike is a warning or a shot across the bow.

Obama's throwing a brushback pitch and if the chemical weapons don't get locked down, he's all warmed up and will start throwing beanballs. (Sorry for the baseball reference on a hockey board)

A hundred thousand casualties and a couple million refugees in a never-ending civil war is horrible, but it is Syria's problem, not ours. If the Syrian military's stockpile of chemical weapons disappear into the fog of war, that becomes our problem.

[Shawnski]

Almost to the day 60 years ago in 1953 the democratically elected Shah of Iran was overthrown with CIA involvement as indicated by recently declassified documents this week. It was long known as Operation Ajax but many doubted it could possibly be US Government authourized.

Well, it was. And look what THAT has led to in the long run.

If one wants me to point to one article to link "facts", well, good luck. It isn't that simple. In fact, if I did I would be doing you a diservice by ONLY doing so.

Each one of you needs to explore this issue, as far as you can and thus make your determination. But please, allow yourself the intellectual privilege of garnering knowledge from more than JUST the mainstream knowledge "bankers".

Well, it was. And look what THAT has led to in the long run.

If one wants me to point to one article to link "facts", well, good luck. It isn't that simple. In fact, if I did I would be doing you a diservice by ONLY doing so.

Each one of you needs to explore this issue, as far as you can and thus make your determination. But please, allow yourself the intelectual privalege of garering knowledge from more than JUST the mainsteam knowledge "bankers".

[DuffMan]

Originally Posted by Shawnski

Almost to the day 60 years ago in 1953 the democratically elected Shah of Iran was overthrown with CIA involvement as indicated by recently declassified documents this week. It was long known as Operation Ajax but many doubted it could possibly be US Government authourized.

Well, it was. And look what THAT has led to in the long run.

If one wants me to point to one article to link "facts", well, good luck. It isn't that simple. In fact, if I did I would be doing you a diservice by ONLY doing so.

Each one of you needs to explore this issue, as far as you can and thus make your determination. But please, allow yourself the intellectual privilege of garnering knowledge from more than JUST the mainstream knowledge "bankers".

Well, it was. And look what THAT has led to in the long run.

If one wants me to point to one article to link "facts", well, good luck. It isn't that simple. In fact, if I did I would be doing you a diservice by ONLY doing so.

Each one of you needs to explore this issue, as far as you can and thus make your determination. But please, allow yourself the intelectual privalege of garering knowledge from more than JUST the mainsteam knowledge "bankers".

your post is chalk full of the deju vu.

[Shawnski]

Originally Posted by DuffMan

your post is chalk full of the deju vu.

No shyte Einstein. So what are you NOT learning from history?

How about you come home to see a military convoy and find out your friend and neighbour was blown to bits in Afghanistan the FIRST day he was on patron. And for what....

[Plett25]

Originally Posted by Shawnski

Almost to the day 60 years ago in 1953 the democratically elected Shah of Iran was overthrown with CIA involvement as indicated by recently declassified documents this week. It was long known as Operation Ajax but many doubted it could possibly be US Government authourized.

I can break up everyone I know into 2 types of people... those who have heard of the Shah of Iran and those who haven't a clue what "Shah of Iran" means. Everyone who has heard of the Shah of Iran already thought that the CIA/US government overthrew the Shah.

None of them changed or made up their minds just because some documents were declassified.

Originally Posted by Shawnski

If one wants me to point to one article to link "facts", well, good luck. It isn't that simple. In fact, if I did I would be doing you a diservice by ONLY doing so.

Just point us in the right direction.

[Plett25]

Originally Posted by Shawnski

No shyte Einstein. So what are you NOT learning from history?

How about you come home to see a military convoy and find out your friend and neighbour was blown to bits in Afghanistan the FIRST day he was on patron. And for what....

Ummm...

You cut and pasted your post into your post

[Shawnski]

Plett, it is clear that the main networks have a pattern of (mis)information disbursement. Call it, oh, I don't know... propaganda. You DO know what that means, right?

And Obama will be led into whatever the financial/war machine backers tell him to do.

[Plett25]

Originally Posted by Shawnski

And Obama will be led into whatever the financial/war machine backers tell him to do.

How do you reconcile this statement with the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq and A-stan, the scale of the US intervention in Libya and his refusal to go to war with Iran?

Originally Posted by Shawnski

Plett, it is clear that the main networks have a pattern of (mis)information disbursement. Call it, oh, I don't know... propaganda. You DO know what that means, right?

You're kind of an ass.