Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(MSNBC)   OH you better believe that's a strongly worded letter   (worldnews.msnbc.msn.com) divider line 112
    More: Obvious, chemical weapons, Syrian Ali Bakran, Bashar al-Assad, Bashar, United Nations Security Council, Zawiya, Assad, NBC News  
•       •       •

16941 clicks; posted to Main » on 13 Jul 2012 at 10:40 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



112 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-07-13 08:01:16 PM  
Let me guess. They are moving WMDs and chemical weapons to Syria Iraq some evil place and we have to stop them before their reply comes in the form of a mushroom cloud?

I'm gonna pass on this one.
 
2012-07-13 08:16:42 PM  
This is easy. Pull out Powell's address, make a few changes and you're good to go.
 
2012-07-13 08:25:47 PM  
Today the UN. Is a powerless organization. Yesterday they were 5 minutes from confiscating your guns.
 
2012-07-13 08:48:16 PM  

BSABSVR: Today the UN. Is a powerless organization. Yesterday they were 5 minutes from confiscating your guns.


The UN was just the bogeyman du jour.
 
2012-07-13 09:40:16 PM  
You know, there are some that would believe these chemicals once belonged to Saddam
 
2012-07-13 10:42:34 PM  
Are the headlines wearing blackface now? Is that a new meme?
 
2012-07-13 10:44:27 PM  
Nadie_AZ: Let me guess. They are moving WMDs and chemical weapons to Syria Iraq some evil place and we have to stop them before their reply comes in the form of a mushroom cloud?

I'm gonna pass on this one.


The fact that Syria maintains an offensive military NBC program is not really a secret. We've known for decades they did.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/syria/facility.htm

On the other hand, the fact remains that US and NATO doctrine regarding the use of NBC weapons on allied forces, UN peacekeping forces, or on a civilian population, would provoke overwhelming retribution. Probibly, as you mentioned before, something that generates a mushroom cloud.

They gas you with Sarin, you introduce them to the five 300KT MIRVs ontop of a Minuteman III missile. That's the American way.
 
2012-07-13 10:44:44 PM  

EnviroDude: You know, there are some that would believe these chemicals once belonged to Saddam


You know, there are some that would believe the sun revolves around the earth.
 
2012-07-13 10:45:32 PM  

EnviroDude: You know, there are some that would believe these chemicals once belonged to Saddam


But do they have oil?
 
2012-07-13 10:46:56 PM  

BronyMedic: Nadie_AZ: Let me guess. They are moving WMDs and chemical weapons to Syria Iraq some evil place and we have to stop them before their reply comes in the form of a mushroom cloud?

I'm gonna pass on this one.

The fact that Syria maintains an offensive military NBC program is not really a secret. We've known for decades they did.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/syria/facility.htm

On the other hand, the fact remains that US and NATO doctrine regarding the use of NBC weapons on allied forces, UN peacekeping forces, or on a civilian population, would provoke overwhelming retribution. Probibly, as you mentioned before, something that generates a mushroom cloud.

They gas you with Sarin, you introduce them to the five 300KT MIRVs ontop of a Minuteman III missile. That's the American way.


It's because the US doctrine allows for WMD use in response to the use of WMDs, and the US only has one kind anymore: Nukes.
 
2012-07-13 10:46:57 PM  

EnviroDude: You know, there are some that would believe these chemicals once belonged to Saddam


Well, we 'would' know that. Reagan's name is on the invoice where we sold em to Saddam.

On topic, BO is heading for an easy re-election. But, if he puts us into a conflict with Syria, it'd better damned well be a mirror of the Libyan operation.

1) Unanimous support from the region/Arab League

2) Technical support/Air support of the local rebel forces.

3) No American soldiers on Syrian soil.

I seriously doubt we'll make any move at Syria, but if we do, it'd better damned well be like Libya and not like Iraq/Afghanistan.
 
2012-07-13 10:48:03 PM  
I'm fine with those people bombing themselves -- it's when they stick their fancy shoes, expensive toiletries and designer underwear on a plane that I'm suddenly not accepting of their regional orientation.
 
2012-07-13 10:48:21 PM  

sycraft: BronyMedic: Nadie_AZ: Let me guess. They are moving WMDs and chemical weapons to Syria Iraq some evil place and we have to stop them before their reply comes in the form of a mushroom cloud?

I'm gonna pass on this one.

The fact that Syria maintains an offensive military NBC program is not really a secret. We've known for decades they did.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/syria/facility.htm

On the other hand, the fact remains that US and NATO doctrine regarding the use of NBC weapons on allied forces, UN peacekeping forces, or on a civilian population, would provoke overwhelming retribution. Probibly, as you mentioned before, something that generates a mushroom cloud.

They gas you with Sarin, you introduce them to the five 300KT MIRVs ontop of a Minuteman III missile. That's the American way.

It's because the US doctrine allows for WMD use in response to the use of WMDs, and the US only has one kind anymore: Nukes.


'Officially', we have no chemical arsenal. Unofficially, it's a whole other story.
 
2012-07-13 10:49:51 PM  
غير أن طائرة بدون طيار؟
 
2012-07-13 10:49:53 PM  
Ladies and Gentlemen, step right up and get your tickets for the ultimate event, WORLD WAR III!

You're gonna pay for the entire seat, but will only need the edge!
 
2012-07-13 10:49:58 PM  

BronyMedic: The fact that Syria maintains an offensive military NBC program is not really a secret. We've known for decades they did.


The latter seasons of MASH were kinda preachy, but I wouldn't call it offensive.
 
2012-07-13 10:50:17 PM  
sycraft: It's because the US doctrine allows for WMD use in response to the use of WMDs, and the US only has one kind anymore: Nukes.

Well, we do still have stockpiles of Binary Nerve Gas and Mustard agents at Chemical Munitions Depos, but most of it's been destroyed and/or slated for destruction, and the only delivery mechanism we possess would be air strikes - the shells are for artillery and fire control systems that the US no longer has in it's TOE.

But, on that topic, I have no problem with maintaining the capability of dropping the fist of an angry god on someone insane enough to use WMDs.
 
2012-07-13 10:51:09 PM  

Infernalist: sycraft: BronyMedic: Nadie_AZ: Let me guess. They are moving WMDs and chemical weapons to Syria Iraq some evil place and we have to stop them before their reply comes in the form of a mushroom cloud?

I'm gonna pass on this one.

The fact that Syria maintains an offensive military NBC program is not really a secret. We've known for decades they did.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/syria/facility.htm

On the other hand, the fact remains that US and NATO doctrine regarding the use of NBC weapons on allied forces, UN peacekeping forces, or on a civilian population, would provoke overwhelming retribution. Probibly, as you mentioned before, something that generates a mushroom cloud.

They gas you with Sarin, you introduce them to the five 300KT MIRVs ontop of a Minuteman III missile. That's the American way.

It's because the US doctrine allows for WMD use in response to the use of WMDs, and the US only has one kind anymore: Nukes.

'Officially', we have no chemical arsenal. Unofficially, it's a whole other story.


We also don't have any biological weapons either....honestly I am sure we destroyed those stockpiles and burned the research.
 
2012-07-13 10:51:52 PM  
Not this shiat again.
 
2012-07-13 10:52:48 PM  
My enlistment ends in 11 months... please don't start another farking stupid war over oil and "evidence".
 
2012-07-13 10:52:57 PM  
upload.wikimedia.org
 
2012-07-13 10:53:08 PM  
there their theyre: We also don't have any biological weapons either....honestly I am sure we destroyed those stockpiles and burned the research.

The United States maintains a "defensive" bioweapons program at USAMRIID in Fort Detrick, Maryland. The UK does the same thing at Porton Down Military Complex. The US also maintains one of three known samples of Smallpox virus there, which would be a bioweapons wet dream.

Fun fact: The Russians maintain the other 1/3. And it's not like the Russians have ever sold anything nefarious.
 
2012-07-13 10:55:13 PM  
Well, it's a sticky subject.

Let's say Assad goes 'full retard' and gasses his own people and the rebel forces...

Do we drop a tactical nuke on him? Do we have the 'right' to do so?

How would Russia/China react to seeing that? I sincerely doubt that they'd respond with a cool head.

Better yet, Assad contacts the Chinese/Russians first and has them play interference...The Russians and Chinese preemptively let NATO know that any attack on Syria will be seen as an attack on their interests...

In all actuality, if Assad does use those weapons, we'll help cover up that fact simply to avoid having to retaliate as we've said that we would...Because no President is going to want to be the first President since Truman to drop nukes on a foreign country.
 
2012-07-13 10:55:17 PM  
Responding with a nuke would never happen. Way too many casualties among the civilian population.
 
2012-07-13 10:57:45 PM  
It's probably like any other display showroom.
You move the old models out to make room for the new ones.
 
2012-07-13 10:57:51 PM  
Actually had a run in with a Syrian patrol boat last year. They decided to see how close they could get to us and decided that we should play "chicken". Kind of hairy for about an hour as they refused to answer the radio and kept getting closer, but CO had enough of their shiat and turned around and charged them. They finally blinked and left the area, but in all the dealings I've had with Iranian gun boats and other hostile pirates, these idiots actually worried me. They know ther're screwed right now, and I think they figure if they're going down, they're going to take a shiatload of people with them. Thank God I retired, because that's going to be a mess to deal with a hell of a lot worse than Lybia was. Shot at them too, but that was one big joke dealing with their "armed forces".
 
2012-07-13 11:00:42 PM  

BronyMedic: the use of NBC weapons on allied forces, UN peacekeping forces, or on a civilian population, would provoke overwhelming retribution


♫ ♪ One of these things is not like the other... ♫ ♪
 
2012-07-13 11:01:05 PM  
syriously syrious, syria?
 
2012-07-13 11:02:18 PM  

BronyMedic: there their theyre: We also don't have any biological weapons either....honestly I am sure we destroyed those stockpiles and burned the research.

The United States maintains a "defensive" bioweapons program at USAMRIID in Fort Detrick, Maryland. The UK does the same thing at Porton Down Military Complex. The US also maintains one of three known samples of Smallpox virus there, which would be a bioweapons wet dream.

Fun fact: The Russians maintain the other 1/3. And it's not like the Russians have ever sold anything nefarious.


using smallpox in wartime, It's been done:

www.history.org

rangersoftheohiocompany.org



/Sir Jeffrey Amherst (he became the Comander-in-chief of the Forces after the death of General Wolfe in Quebec City) shown here in Joseph Blackburn's 1758 painting, suggested Bouquet infect the Indians with smallpox.

//He was also the first British Governor General in the territories that eventually became Canada. Numerous places and streets are named for him, both in Canada and the United States. Amherst is also infamous for catalyzing the first historical incidents of biological warfare, as he endorsed and commanded giving blankets infected with smallpox to American Indians.
 
2012-07-13 11:03:21 PM  
Hillary may have and undo button she could use.... or a reset button after the fact.



/Move it
//Rebels won't get it and use it on them
 
2012-07-13 11:03:56 PM  
The world stood by when Saddam Hussein gassed the Kurdish civilians in rebellion. The world would probably stand by again if Syria engaged in the practice against some of its civilians. Now there might be a token airstrike or two on their chemical capabilities, but certainly no ground troops. Getting involved in a civil war is very, very, messy especially if you may be forced to operate in a chemical environment. It further deters Turkey who, while maybe being more willing to use ground forces, isn't as well equipped or trained to get involved if there is danger of chemical attack.

Now, the question is whether the Syrian leadership would be stupid enough to use these weapons or whether it is merely the PR issue to try and scare people back in their homes. Chances are the leadership feels in a corner and has no way out of the situation they have gotten themselves in. There is still a possiblity they may be able to exile themselves to a non-extridition country in terms of a peace deal, but that disappears if they use gas. I think this is a media story only, but it is a remote possibility.
 
2012-07-13 11:04:28 PM  

RoxtarRyan: My enlistment ends in 11 months... please don't start another farking stupid war over oil and "evidence".


So, you're okay with sitting idly by while a regime uses chemical, bio, or nuclear weapons on its citizens?
 
2012-07-13 11:05:05 PM  

Infernalist: Do we drop a tactical nuke on him? Do we have the 'right' to do so?


Nukes are messy, and they don't clean up easily afterwards.

It may be old school... but it's just hard to beat a huge pile of thermobaric and conventional explosives.
 
2012-07-13 11:05:33 PM  

Nadie_AZ: Let me guess. They are moving WMDs and chemical weapons to Syria Iraq some evil place and we have to stop them before their reply comes in the form of a mushroom cloud?

I'm gonna pass on this one.


Syria has a long history of killing her civilians. I'm not sure I can be as cavalier.
 
2012-07-13 11:06:30 PM  
Mace and teargas. When it comes to using chemical weapons on civilians, accept no alternative!

/except plastic bullets, tasers, batons, beanbag bullets, microwaves, the sonic cannon and the taser shockwave
 
2012-07-13 11:08:36 PM  

Infernalist: Well, it's a sticky subject.

Let's say Assad goes 'full retard' and gasses his own people and the rebel forces...

Do we drop a tactical nuke on him? Do we have the 'right' to do so?

How would Russia/China react to seeing that? I sincerely doubt that they'd respond with a cool head.

Better yet, Assad contacts the Chinese/Russians first and has them play interference...The Russians and Chinese preemptively let NATO know that any attack on Syria will be seen as an attack on their interests...

In all actuality, if Assad does use those weapons, we'll help cover up that fact simply to avoid having to retaliate as we've said that we would...Because no President is going to want to be the first President since Truman to drop nukes on a foreign country.


you think nuking a civilian population is an effective means to retaliate for gassing the same?
 
2012-07-13 11:10:34 PM  
I say just let the Turks off the leash and sort this shiat out. No need for anyone else to get involved.
 
2012-07-13 11:11:07 PM  

ElLoco: Infernalist: Do we drop a tactical nuke on him? Do we have the 'right' to do so?

Nukes are messy, and they don't clean up easily afterwards.

It may be old school... but it's just hard to beat a huge pile of thermobaric and conventional explosives.


Oh, I agree, but it's also safe to say that conventional weapons can be equally destructive in the short term, in sufficient quantities.

I was merely referring to the fact that we have a long-standing proclamation that we will, without fail, respond to a WMD attack of any kind(Nuclear/Biological/Chemcial) with a nuclear retaliatory strike.

It's the basis for the MAD defense and if we fail to follow through, then every enemy we have across this world will know that they can attack with WMDs with relative impunity as long as they feel like that we can't respond due to Russian/Chinese retaliation.
 
2012-07-13 11:11:30 PM  
i47.tinypic.com

Everything is fine.
The regime wants to tidy up the storage area and they had to move the chemicals so they could use a Rug Doctor on the carpets.
 
2012-07-13 11:12:00 PM  

Kit Fister: So, you're okay with sitting idly by while a regime uses chemical, bio, or nuclear weapons on its citizens?


I wasn't necessarily ok with it, but I have sat 'idly by' and watched just that on TV. The World... on the other hand, also didn't do a farking thing one about it, either, except complain and talk about how wrong it was. Then the evening high ad revenue shows came on and regularly scheduled programming resumed.

/shrug
 
2012-07-13 11:12:45 PM  

fark'emfeed'emfish: Infernalist: Well, it's a sticky subject.

Let's say Assad goes 'full retard' and gasses his own people and the rebel forces...

Do we drop a tactical nuke on him? Do we have the 'right' to do so?

How would Russia/China react to seeing that? I sincerely doubt that they'd respond with a cool head.

Better yet, Assad contacts the Chinese/Russians first and has them play interference...The Russians and Chinese preemptively let NATO know that any attack on Syria will be seen as an attack on their interests...

In all actuality, if Assad does use those weapons, we'll help cover up that fact simply to avoid having to retaliate as we've said that we would...Because no President is going to want to be the first President since Truman to drop nukes on a foreign country.

you think nuking a civilian population is an effective means to retaliate for gassing the same?


Despite the image of huge mushroom clouds rising up over shattered cities, you might be surprised to learn that a good number of our nuclear weapons are not the city-killer types, but smaller tactical weapons designed to be used in the field against military forces.
 
2012-07-13 11:12:55 PM  
Let me review possibly related historical knowledge: Iraq/Kurds/Poison Gas... Gee, I can't imagine.
 
2012-07-13 11:13:55 PM  

BSABSVR: Today the UN. Is a powerless organization. Yesterday they were 5 minutes from confiscating your guns.


They're powerless to act against ruthless dictators, or at least are forced to spend a laughable amount of time, effort, and money to bring down even the most militarily incompetant one (Ghaddafi). On the other hand, they can tear down democracies and benevolent dictators with ease (Mubarak, Ben Ali, Ali Abdullah Saleh). Since those are the only targets their weapons are effective against, it should come as no surprise they'd rather build some twisted argument to try to prove that destroying Iraq and/or Israel would somehow restore peace to Syria rather than attack the Assad forces directly.
 
2012-07-13 11:14:58 PM  

fireclown: BronyMedic: The fact that Syria maintains an offensive military NBC program is not really a secret. We've known for decades they did.

The latter seasons of MASH were kinda preachy, but I wouldn't call it offensive.


MASH was on CBS.
 
2012-07-13 11:16:07 PM  

Shrugging Atlas: I say just let the Turks off the leash and sort this shiat out. No need for anyone else to get involved.


If chemical weapons are on the table, the Turks can't do it without massive casualties. They just aren't equipped and trained in large enough numbers to operate in any kind of chemical environment. It would be very challenging for the US to deploy forces with that threat. We were very concerned going into Iraq and were fortunate we didn't have to see if our training and equipment were sufficient. Turkey may be capable of conventional warfare, and even then I think there are going to be challenges there if they go solo, but if Sarin/VX are being used, I think it would result in massive losses as its not just your combat arms that have to operate there, but all your logistics as well.
 
2012-07-13 11:19:07 PM  

Infernalist: EnviroDude: You know, there are some that would believe these chemicals once belonged to Saddam

Well, we 'would' know that. Reagan's name is on the invoice where we sold em to Saddam.


[citation needed for your bullshiat claim]

In 1991, Iraq's weapons were Soviet, French, German, and Chinese, about in that order. We sold them very little; no chemical weapons at all. We were mocked by the British in the late '80s for stopping a shipment of pipe from going to Iraq because we said it was for a "supergun." After the 1991 war, it was shown that we were right.

We gave them some aerial intelligence dring the Iran-Iraq war. We gave the Iranians a variety of missiles to replace those expended against Iraq. We didn't like either side and figured it was better they kept each other busy.

One thing we could have done better with was acknowledging earlier when we knew Iraq was actively using gas warfare against Iran. We should have been clear about it the moment we knew. But we did absolutely nothing to assist their unconventional weapons programs, and the number of normal weapons we sold them was a tiny percentage of their arsenal.
 
2012-07-13 11:19:49 PM  

Mantour: BronyMedic: there their theyre: We also don't have any biological weapons either....honestly I am sure we destroyed those stockpiles and burned the research.

The United States maintains a "defensive" bioweapons program at USAMRIID in Fort Detrick, Maryland. The UK does the same thing at Porton Down Military Complex. The US also maintains one of three known samples of Smallpox virus there, which would be a bioweapons wet dream.

Fun fact: The Russians maintain the other 1/3. And it's not like the Russians have ever sold anything nefarious.

using smallpox in wartime, It's been done:

[www.history.org image 400x497]

[rangersoftheohiocompany.org image 689x682]



/Sir Jeffrey Amherst (he became the Comander-in-chief of the Forces after the death of General Wolfe in Quebec City) shown here in Joseph Blackburn's 1758 painting, suggested Bouquet infect the Indians with smallpox.

//He was also the first British Governor General in the territories that eventually became Canada. Numerous places and streets are named for him, both in Canada and the United States. Amherst is also infamous for catalyzing the first historical incidents of biological warfare, as he endorsed and commanded giving blankets infected with smallpox to American Indians.


Tecumseh Johnson is right.

As a Seneca, I would have to say that we, as Americans, need to say to the world, "Hey. Knock it off. We've already proven that you way doesn't work. Unless you got a farmer's market on the way home, with a few to choose from, and depending upon what's on the wife's mind for dinner, a couple of different ethnicities to choose from, then what's the point? You guys on your ethnic cleansing binge and for what? A potato salad recipe? I mean, we Americans are hard core, and all, and will break all bans you folks have on what's halal or kosher or clean, but what it boils down to is we, as Americans, have bashed on the Blacks and Asians and Irish and Injuns for centuries, and what have we learned? We' ve learned that if you don't like fried chicken and watermelon, there is something wrong with you; if you don't like rice and anything with it, you are going to perish; and the best NY style pizza can be bought at an Injun Rezervation Casino, for craps sake. Ethnic cleansing is like telling the Irish, we kicked your asses back in the day, and die, and for the point of it, we'll never have a Reuben Sammich again, or a baked potato. Or beer. Nay. America, Nay, the world. If you haven't had a different Baklava you may argue against, then what is the point? If you cannot argue Chicago v.s NY style, or BBQ styles, of soda v.s, POP, then you lose. You lose all vestiges of culture that will make us want to embrace you. You will be banished from our farmer's markets for life. And no one will want to purchase you soured recipes involving ground lamb, dough, and garlic, because we've had it all, from Kim Chee to jerked whale blubber. We're like the biblical upper room, but with the gastronome' of the top tier of the Tony Jaa Protector scene. We don't care what we cram in our gullets. That's why we need variety. We need ethnicity to live, to function, to love, and to laugh and argue and feel like we are all connected. If you, the army of Syria, continue this path of bloodshed, you will be forever forsaken of any credible post of culinary doctrine ever, in the free world again, and may Allah have mercy on your souls. "

~Signed, Her Hips.
 
2012-07-13 11:20:33 PM  

BronyMedic: US and NATO doctrine regarding the use of NBC weapons on allied forces, UN peacekeping forces, or on a civilian population, would provoke overwhelming retribution. Probibly, as you mentioned before, something that generates a mushroom cloud.


You are both right and wrong. The civilians have to be ours or our allies civilians in their own country for that to happen. Of course that's specific to chemical weapons (which these are). Biological weapons have a tendency to travel in the people that are infected but not yet detected. That's kind of a grey area, as in if they are intentionally infected in one country but escape seeking refuge into one of our allies countries and it goes on to infect people in that country would it be an attack on that country or not. Nobody knows because it hasn't happened and if it does it will probably be dependent on the agent and the overall situation (mainly can you prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they actually did it). A nuke, of course, is a nuke and any use of one or more against a country, it's allies or its military is just asking to be killed by them or their allies. Something like Hiroshima and Nagasaki will never happen again, that was a very unique situation in too many ways to break down here on Fark.
 
2012-07-13 11:22:54 PM  
can we just turn Israel loose and look the other way?

/lazy foreign policy
 
2012-07-13 11:22:55 PM  
This sounds familiar. When did I hear this before?
 
2012-07-13 11:23:11 PM  

Mantour: BronyMedic: there their theyre: We also don't have any biological weapons either....honestly I am sure we destroyed those stockpiles and burned the research.

The United States maintains a "defensive" bioweapons program at USAMRIID in Fort Detrick, Maryland. The UK does the same thing at Porton Down Military Complex. The US also maintains one of three known samples of Smallpox virus there, which would be a bioweapons wet dream.

Fun fact: The Russians maintain the other 1/3. And it's not like the Russians have ever sold anything nefarious.

using smallpox in wartime, It's been done:

[www.history.org image 400x497]

[rangersoftheohiocompany.org image 689x682]



/Sir Jeffrey Amherst (he became the Comander-in-chief of the Forces after the death of General Wolfe in Quebec City) shown here in Joseph Blackburn's 1758 painting, suggested Bouquet infect the Indians with smallpox.

//He was also the first British Governor General in the territories that eventually became Canada. Numerous places and streets are named for him, both in Canada and the United States. Amherst is also infamous for catalyzing the first historical incidents of biological warfare, as he endorsed and commanded giving blankets infected with smallpox to American Indians.


That's actually pretty seriously in doubt. The letter says "give them blankets from the smallpox hospital." Nothing in the letter suggests that they were to be USED blankets. But it has become legendary by now, and it's useless to expect people to care about what the original document said. Especially when it's a PC "white man evil villain" situation. Zinn said it, must be right! Matt Damon!
 
2012-07-13 11:26:42 PM  

Infernalist: fark'emfeed'emfish: Infernalist: Well, it's a sticky subject.

Let's say Assad goes 'full retard' and gasses his own people and the rebel forces...

Do we drop a tactical nuke on him? Do we have the 'right' to do so?

How would Russia/China react to seeing that? I sincerely doubt that they'd respond with a cool head.

Better yet, Assad contacts the Chinese/Russians first and has them play interference...The Russians and Chinese preemptively let NATO know that any attack on Syria will be seen as an attack on their interests...

In all actuality, if Assad does use those weapons, we'll help cover up that fact simply to avoid having to retaliate as we've said that we would...Because no President is going to want to be the first President since Truman to drop nukes on a foreign country.

you think nuking a civilian population is an effective means to retaliate for gassing the same?

Despite the image of huge mushroom clouds rising up over shattered cities, you might be surprised to learn that a good number of our nuclear weapons are not the city-killer types, but smaller tactical weapons designed to be used in the field against military forces.


so they say, have you tested 'em?
/PR
 
2012-07-13 11:28:52 PM  

EnviroDude: You know, there are some that would believe these chemicals once belonged to Saddam


They probably did. But we'll never know because you know...we let the Iraqi's hang the son-of-a-biatch.
 
2012-07-13 11:30:46 PM  

BronyMedic: And it's not like the Russians have ever sold anything nefarious.


For example?
 
2012-07-13 11:30:53 PM  

JohnAnnArbor: Mantour: BronyMedic: there their theyre: We also don't have any biological weapons either....honestly I am sure we destroyed those stockpiles and burned the research.

The United States maintains a "defensive" bioweapons program at USAMRIID in Fort Detrick, Maryland. The UK does the same thing at Porton Down Military Complex. The US also maintains one of three known samples of Smallpox virus there, which would be a bioweapons wet dream.

Fun fact: The Russians maintain the other 1/3. And it's not like the Russians have ever sold anything nefarious.

using smallpox in wartime, It's been done:

[www.history.org image 400x497]

[rangersoftheohiocompany.org image 689x682]



/Sir Jeffrey Amherst (he became the Comander-in-chief of the Forces after the death of General Wolfe in Quebec City) shown here in Joseph Blackburn's 1758 painting, suggested Bouquet infect the Indians with smallpox.

//He was also the first British Governor General in the territories that eventually became Canada. Numerous places and streets are named for him, both in Canada and the United States. Amherst is also infamous for catalyzing the first historical incidents of biological warfare, as he endorsed and commanded giving blankets infected with smallpox to American Indians.

That's actually pretty seriously in doubt. The letter says "give them blankets from the smallpox hospital." Nothing in the letter suggests that they were to be USED blankets. But it has become legendary by now, and it's useless to expect people to care about what the original document said. Especially when it's a PC "white man evil villain" situation. Zinn said it, must be right! Matt Damon!


Bad memory. Amherst had that sterling idea, but the doubt comes as to whether it was actually carried out (it's always presented as fact that it was). The writing I was thinking of was from a subordinate discussing what was supposed to be a "keeping the peace" type meeting with the Indians. See the indented text, the direct quote.

/Amherst still had that idea, so he's a bad guy no matter how you slice it.
 
2012-07-13 11:31:53 PM  

fark'emfeed'emfish: Infernalist: fark'emfeed'emfish: Infernalist: Well, it's a sticky subject.

Let's say Assad goes 'full retard' and gasses his own people and the rebel forces...

Do we drop a tactical nuke on him? Do we have the 'right' to do so?

How would Russia/China react to seeing that? I sincerely doubt that they'd respond with a cool head.

Better yet, Assad contacts the Chinese/Russians first and has them play interference...The Russians and Chinese preemptively let NATO know that any attack on Syria will be seen as an attack on their interests...

In all actuality, if Assad does use those weapons, we'll help cover up that fact simply to avoid having to retaliate as we've said that we would...Because no President is going to want to be the first President since Truman to drop nukes on a foreign country.

you think nuking a civilian population is an effective means to retaliate for gassing the same?

Despite the image of huge mushroom clouds rising up over shattered cities, you might be surprised to learn that a good number of our nuclear weapons are not the city-killer types, but smaller tactical weapons designed to be used in the field against military forces.

so they say, have you tested 'em?
/PR


Did 'I' test 'em? No, of course not.

Have they been tested? Of course they have, in all the usual ways, back when such weapons were designed and regularly tested.

Considering these are the experts who get paid obscene amounts of money to be right, I think I can trust them to know what they're talking about when they give estimates of blast radius and damage estimates.

Despite what people might think, nuclear weapons were/are a varied species of devices, with any number of potential targets from strategic weapons targeting strategic targets like cities. And tactical weapons designed to be used in the field against military targets.
 
2012-07-13 11:32:00 PM  

JohnAnnArbor: Mantour: BronyMedic: there their theyre: We also don't have any biological weapons either....honestly I am sure we destroyed those stockpiles and burned the research.

The United States maintains a "defensive" bioweapons program at USAMRIID in Fort Detrick, Maryland. The UK does the same thing at Porton Down Military Complex. The US also maintains one of three known samples of Smallpox virus there, which would be a bioweapons wet dream.

Fun fact: The Russians maintain the other 1/3. And it's not like the Russians have ever sold anything nefarious.

using smallpox in wartime, It's been done:

[www.history.org image 400x497]

[rangersoftheohiocompany.org image 689x682]



/Sir Jeffrey Amherst (he became the Comander-in-chief of the Forces after the death of General Wolfe in Quebec City) shown here in Joseph Blackburn's 1758 painting, suggested Bouquet infect the Indians with smallpox.

//He was also the first British Governor General in the territories that eventually became Canada. Numerous places and streets are named for him, both in Canada and the United States. Amherst is also infamous for catalyzing the first historical incidents of biological warfare, as he endorsed and commanded giving blankets infected with smallpox to American Indians.

That's actually pretty seriously in doubt. The letter says "give them blankets from the smallpox hospital." Nothing in the letter suggests that they were to be USED blankets. But it has become legendary by now, and it's useless to expect people to care about what the original document said. Especially when it's a PC "white man evil villain" situation. Zinn said it, must be right! Matt Damon!


In doubt?

Documents
 
2012-07-13 11:32:13 PM  

Daedalus27: The world stood by when Saddam Hussein gassed the Kurdish civilians in rebellion.


Hey, that's not true! Bush Sr was so upset that he almost interrupted his golf game!
 
2012-07-13 11:32:58 PM  
Wait, this is Fark. Am I allowed to correct a mistake, or should I defend it to the ends of the Internet, insisting my original thought was correct against all evidence?

Thoughts?
 
2012-07-13 11:34:38 PM  
It should be also noted that biological warfare has humble beginnings.

There are Middle-Age records of catapults being used to fling dead animal carcasses into besieged castles and wells in order to poison their water supplies.
 
2012-07-13 11:36:32 PM  

Infernalist: It should be also noted that biological warfare has humble beginnings.

There are Middle-Age records of catapults being used to fling dead animal carcasses into besieged castles and wells in order to poison their water supplies.


sf.looneylabs.com
 
2012-07-13 11:38:54 PM  

JohnAnnArbor: Infernalist: It should be also noted that biological warfare has humble beginnings.

There are Middle-Age records of catapults being used to fling dead animal carcasses into besieged castles and wells in order to poison their water supplies.

[sf.looneylabs.com image 216x302]


Oh, he looks so excited. I'm guessing he sees that he's going to land in the well.

/water park!
 
2012-07-13 11:40:54 PM  
The best way to respond to an evil regime using wmds on their civilians would be to kill some of the remaining civikiand with nukes and let what happens after kill the rest. That is obviously the best response.
 
2012-07-13 11:41:39 PM  
Civilians and.

/phone
 
2012-07-13 11:41:57 PM  

BronyMedic: http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/syria/facility.htm


Hey, the filter didn't break up your URL. Is this a new feature?
 
2012-07-13 11:41:58 PM  

JohnAnnArbor: Wait, this is Fark. Am I allowed to correct a mistake, or should I defend it to the ends of the Internet, insisting my original thought was correct against all evidence?

Thoughts?


Just go full on Derp and then get an alt... It's what all the cool kids do.
 
2012-07-13 11:43:19 PM  

Mantour: He was also the first British Governor General in the territories that eventually became Canada. Numerous places and streets are named for him, both in Canada and the United States. Amherst is also infamous for catalyzing the first historical incidents of biological warfare, as he endorsed and commanded giving blankets infected with smallpox to American Indians.


What is not clear is this: in 1758, was it understood that smallpox was transmissible via blanket?
Miasma theory of infectious disease was still mainstream in the 1800's. Louis Pasteur was not on the scene yet.
 
2012-07-13 11:45:11 PM  

Infernalist: fark'emfeed'emfish: Infernalist: fark'emfeed'emfish: Infernalist: Well, it's a sticky subject.

Let's say Assad goes 'full retard' and gasses his own people and the rebel forces...

Do we drop a tactical nuke on him? Do we have the 'right' to do so?

How would Russia/China react to seeing that? I sincerely doubt that they'd respond with a cool head.

Better yet, Assad contacts the Chinese/Russians first and has them play interference...The Russians and Chinese preemptively let NATO know that any attack on Syria will be seen as an attack on their interests...

In all actuality, if Assad does use those weapons, we'll help cover up that fact simply to avoid having to retaliate as we've said that we would...Because no President is going to want to be the first President since Truman to drop nukes on a foreign country.

you think nuking a civilian population is an effective means to retaliate for gassing the same?

Despite the image of huge mushroom clouds rising up over shattered cities, you might be surprised to learn that a good number of our nuclear weapons are not the city-killer types, but smaller tactical weapons designed to be used in the field against military forces.

so they say, have you tested 'em?
/PR

Did 'I' test 'em? No, of course not.

Have they been tested? Of course they have, in all the usual ways, back when such weapons were designed and regularly tested.

Considering these are the experts who get paid obscene amounts of money to be right, I think I can trust them to know what they're talking about when they give estimates of blast radius and damage estimates.

Despite what people might think, nuclear weapons were/are a varied species of devices, with any number of potential targets from strategic weapons targeting strategic targets like cities. And tactical weapons designed to be used in the field against military targets.


'till they've tested one in your backyard you should probably take the word of the military industrial complex with a grain of salt. they're not paid to increase anyone's standard of living.
 
2012-07-13 11:46:00 PM  

fusillade762: BronyMedic: http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/syria/facility.htm

Hey, the filter didn't break up your URL. Is this a new feature?


Longer urls will now fit into the wider allowed space. So yes and no. I'm sure at some point it will cut off. Go test it in the sandbox (thread #69) if you want to see just how long it will go.

But you should do links anyway just to be a nice guy.
 
2012-07-13 11:46:17 PM  

cloud_van_dame: Louis Pasteur was not on the scene yet.


He was working on a cure for Anthrax...........never mind that shiat, Here comes Mongo!
 
2012-07-13 11:49:50 PM  

BSABSVR: Today the UN. Is a powerless organization. Yesterday they were 5 minutes from confiscating your guns.


That's doublethink for you.
 
2012-07-13 11:53:56 PM  
I'm pretty sure that there was a casual basic cause and effect being noticed re: smallpox and its transmission via blankets and other things that came in close contact with the infected/uninfected but they didn't know how or why it did what it did, just that it did it. People weren't stupid back then, just uninformed about the mechanics of nature.
 
2012-07-13 11:59:32 PM  

cloud_van_dame: Mantour: He was also the first British Governor General in the territories that eventually became Canada. Numerous places and streets are named for him, both in Canada and the United States. Amherst is also infamous for catalyzing the first historical incidents of biological warfare, as he endorsed and commanded giving blankets infected with smallpox to American Indians.

What is not clear is this: in 1758, was it understood that smallpox was transmissible via blanket?
Miasma theory of infectious disease was still mainstream in the 1800's. Louis Pasteur was not on the scene yet.


Pasteur, pillar of microbiology, along with Koch became famous for his victory and complete refutation of the Aristotelian ''Spontaneous Generation'' theory with the use of the microscope and infecting healthy rats with TB using needles.

''Bad Air'' theory was indeed the mainstream but I imagine they believed that clothing of the dead were contaminated with ''Bad Air'' too. They knew bodies had to be buried and the clothing of the infected be burned and not reused,
 
2012-07-14 12:01:19 AM  

EnviroDude: You know, there are some that would believe these chemicals once belonged to Saddam


HERP DERP
 
2012-07-14 12:02:44 AM  

Mantour: ''Bad Air'' theory was indeed the mainstream but I imagine they believed that clothing of the dead were contaminated with ''Bad Air'' too. They knew bodies had to be buried and the clothing of the infected be burned and not reused,


That is what I wanted to know. Thanks.
 
2012-07-14 12:07:07 AM  

Infernalist: sycraft: BronyMedic: Nadie_AZ: Let me guess. They are moving WMDs and chemical weapons to Syria Iraq some evil place and we have to stop them before their reply comes in the form of a mushroom cloud?

I'm gonna pass on this one.

The fact that Syria maintains an offensive military NBC program is not really a secret. We've known for decades they did.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/syria/facility.htm

On the other hand, the fact remains that US and NATO doctrine regarding the use of NBC weapons on allied forces, UN peacekeping forces, or on a civilian population, would provoke overwhelming retribution. Probibly, as you mentioned before, something that generates a mushroom cloud.

They gas you with Sarin, you introduce them to the five 300KT MIRVs ontop of a Minuteman III missile. That's the American way.

It's because the US doctrine allows for WMD use in response to the use of WMDs, and the US only has one kind anymore: Nukes.

'Officially', we have no chemical arsenal. Unofficially, it's a whole other story.


In 1993, the United States signed the Chemical Weapons Treaty, which required the destruction of all chemical weapon agents, dispersal systems, chemical weapons production facilities by April 2012. The U.S. prohibition on the transport of chemical weapons has meant that destruction facilities had to be constructed at each of the U.S.'s nine storage facilities. The U.S. met the first three of the treaty's four deadlines, destroying 45% of its stockpile of chemical weapons by 2007. However, official expectations for the date of complete elimination of all chemical weapons was after the treaty deadline of 2012.
 
2012-07-14 12:08:33 AM  

Mantour: ''Bad Air'' theory was indeed the mainstream but I imagine they believed that clothing of the dead were contaminated with ''Bad Air'' too. They knew bodies had to be buried and the clothing of the infected be burned and not reused,


There was an Austrian doctor who committed suicide after his discovery that having the medical residents go from the morgue to the labor ward without washing their hands was the reason why deaths in childbirth were much higher in hospitals than home births with midwives. I think that was after 1758.

At least he got them to start washing their hands before he killed himself.
 
2012-07-14 12:10:20 AM  

cloud_van_dame: Mantour: ''Bad Air'' theory was indeed the mainstream but I imagine they believed that clothing of the dead were contaminated with ''Bad Air'' too. They knew bodies had to be buried and the clothing of the infected be burned and not reused,

That is what I wanted to know. Thanks.


They even had primitive long-nosed "gas masks" during plague times, with spices stuffed in the nose part in an attempt to ward off the "bad air."
 
2012-07-14 12:10:47 AM  

humanshrapnel: You know, there are some that would believe the sun revolves around the earth.


Especially if you point out that scientists are liberal and invoke Jesus.
 
2012-07-14 12:11:05 AM  

BronyMedic: there their theyre: We also don't have any biological weapons either....honestly I am sure we destroyed those stockpiles and burned the research.

The United States maintains a "defensive" bioweapons program at USAMRIID in Fort Detrick, Maryland. The UK does the same thing at Porton Down Military Complex. The US also maintains one of three known samples of Smallpox virus there, which would be a bioweapons wet dream.

Fun fact: The Russians maintain the other 1/3. And it's not like the Russians have ever sold anything nefarious.


Who owns the third one?
 
2012-07-14 12:12:35 AM  

Mazzic518: Who owns the third one?


Would not be surprised if it was France. Sanofi-Pasteur.
 
2012-07-14 12:13:21 AM  

cloud_van_dame: Mantour: ''Bad Air'' theory was indeed the mainstream but I imagine they believed that clothing of the dead were contaminated with ''Bad Air'' too. They knew bodies had to be buried and the clothing of the infected be burned and not reused,

There was an Austrian doctor who committed suicide after his discovery that having the medical residents go from the morgue to the labor ward without washing their hands was the reason why deaths in childbirth were much higher in hospitals than home births with midwives. I think that was after 1758.

At least he got them to start washing their hands before he killed himself.


Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis
 
2012-07-14 12:16:18 AM  

Mazzic518: Infernalist: sycraft: BronyMedic: Nadie_AZ: Let me guess. They are moving WMDs and chemical weapons to Syria Iraq some evil place and we have to stop them before their reply comes in the form of a mushroom cloud?

I'm gonna pass on this one.

The fact that Syria maintains an offensive military NBC program is not really a secret. We've known for decades they did.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/syria/facility.htm

On the other hand, the fact remains that US and NATO doctrine regarding the use of NBC weapons on allied forces, UN peacekeping forces, or on a civilian population, would provoke overwhelming retribution. Probibly, as you mentioned before, something that generates a mushroom cloud.

They gas you with Sarin, you introduce them to the five 300KT MIRVs ontop of a Minuteman III missile. That's the American way.

It's because the US doctrine allows for WMD use in response to the use of WMDs, and the US only has one kind anymore: Nukes.

'Officially', we have no chemical arsenal. Unofficially, it's a whole other story.

In 1993, the United States signed the Chemical Weapons Treaty, which required the destruction of all chemical weapon agents, dispersal systems, chemical weapons production facilities by April 2012. The U.S. prohibition on the transport of chemical weapons has meant that destruction facilities had to be constructed at each of the U.S.'s nine storage facilities. The U.S. met the first three of the treaty's four deadlines, destroying 45% of its stockpile of chemical weapons by 2007. However, official expectations for the date of complete elimination of all chemical weapons was after the treaty deadline of 2012.


Logistical issue. We don't have a trained chemical corps like in the old days. And the weapons themselves are all old, many leaking or otherwise unfit for actual use. Even if we wanted to, mounting a chemical attack would be very hard.
 
2012-07-14 12:17:48 AM  
Mazzic518: Who owns the third one?

The CDC in Atlanta.
 
2012-07-14 12:18:38 AM  
JohnAnnArbor: Logistical issue. We don't have a trained chemical corps like in the old days. And the weapons themselves are all old, many leaking or otherwise unfit for actual use. Even if we wanted to, mounting a chemical attack would be very hard.

The United States Army Chemical Corps would beg to differ on that.

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

(fark won't let me link things)
 
2012-07-14 12:20:50 AM  

Mazzic518:
In 1993, the United States signed the Chemical Weapons Treaty, which required the destruction of all chemical weapon agents, dispersal systems, chemical weapons production facilities by April 2012. The U.S. prohibition on the transport of chemical weapons has meant that destruction facilities had to be constructed at each of the U.S.'s nine storage facilities. The U.S. met the first three of the treaty's four deadlines, destroying 45% of its stockpile of chemical weapons by 2007. However, official expectations for the date of complete elimination of all chemical weapons was after the treaty deadline of 2012.


Now, why may we have missed the deadline, given the bolded text above. I'll give you a hint: NIMBY
Every time they have proposed building an on-site thermal destruction system, people come out of the woodwork to oppose it, with no real solution on how to get rid of what is sitting there. Nobody wants it transported elsewhere, nobody wants it destroyed on site, nobody wants it stored where it already sits in secured bunkers. WTF are we supposed to do with it?

/Rant off
//Kinda drunk right now
 
2012-07-14 12:23:54 AM  

BronyMedic: JohnAnnArbor: Logistical issue. We don't have a trained chemical corps like in the old days. And the weapons themselves are all old, many leaking or otherwise unfit for actual use. Even if we wanted to, mounting a chemical attack would be very hard.

The United States Army Chemical Corps would beg to differ on that.

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

(fark won't let me link things)


Our mutual acquiescence, JohnAnnnArbor is having a bad night.
 
2012-07-14 12:27:12 AM  

BronyMedic: JohnAnnArbor: Logistical issue. We don't have a trained chemical corps like in the old days. And the weapons themselves are all old, many leaking or otherwise unfit for actual use. Even if we wanted to, mounting a chemical attack would be very hard.

The United States Army Chemical Corps would beg to differ on that.

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

(fark won't let me link things)


Yeah, but they're defensive-only now. I should have added the word "offensive." I'd be interested to hear when was the last time they trained to actually execute a chemical attack.
 
2012-07-14 12:27:16 AM  

buzzcut73: Mazzic518:
In 1993, the United States signed the Chemical Weapons Treaty, which required the destruction of all chemical weapon agents, dispersal systems, chemical weapons production facilities by April 2012. The U.S. prohibition on the transport of chemical weapons has meant that destruction facilities had to be constructed at each of the U.S.'s nine storage facilities. The U.S. met the first three of the treaty's four deadlines, destroying 45% of its stockpile of chemical weapons by 2007. However, official expectations for the date of complete elimination of all chemical weapons was after the treaty deadline of 2012.

Now, why may we have missed the deadline, given the bolded text above. I'll give you a hint: NIMBY
Every time they have proposed building an on-site thermal destruction system, people come out of the woodwork to oppose it, with no real solution on how to get rid of what is sitting there. Nobody wants it transported elsewhere, nobody wants it destroyed on site, nobody wants it stored where it already sits in secured bunkers. WTF are we supposed to do with it?

/Rant off
//Kinda drunk right now


Send it all my way i'll "destroy" all of it....
 
2012-07-14 12:29:12 AM  

Mantour: using smallpox in wartime, It's been done:

[www.history.org image 400x497]
[rangersoftheohiocompany.org image 689x682]

//He was also the first British Governor General in the territories that eventually became Canada. Numerous places and streets are named for him, both in Canada and the United States. Amherst is also infamous for catalyzing the first historical incidents of biological warfare, as he endorsed and commanded giving blankets infected with smallpox to American Indians.


JohnAnnArbor: That's actually pretty seriously in doubt. The letter says "give them blankets from the smallpox hospital." Nothing in the letter suggests that they were to be USED blankets. But it has become legendary by now, and it's useless to expect people to care about what the original document said. Especially when it's a PC "white man evil villain" situation. Zinn said it, must be right! Matt Damon!


It's "pretty seriously in doubt" the same way the Theory of Evolution and the Holocaust are "pretty seriously in doubt."

To be fair, the "it" here is that Amherst TOLD Bouquet to infect Native Americans with smallpox. What one can honestly doubt is whether or not Bouquet went through with it.

But hey, historical revisionism and denial: it's not just for Nazi sympathizers anymore.
 
2012-07-14 12:31:08 AM  

buzzcut73: Mazzic518:
In 1993, the United States signed the Chemical Weapons Treaty, which required the destruction of all chemical weapon agents, dispersal systems, chemical weapons production facilities by April 2012. The U.S. prohibition on the transport of chemical weapons has meant that destruction facilities had to be constructed at each of the U.S.'s nine storage facilities. The U.S. met the first three of the treaty's four deadlines, destroying 45% of its stockpile of chemical weapons by 2007. However, official expectations for the date of complete elimination of all chemical weapons was after the treaty deadline of 2012.

Now, why may we have missed the deadline, given the bolded text above. I'll give you a hint: NIMBY
Every time they have proposed building an on-site thermal destruction system, people come out of the woodwork to oppose it, with no real solution on how to get rid of what is sitting there. Nobody wants it transported elsewhere, nobody wants it destroyed on site, nobody wants it stored where it already sits in secured bunkers. WTF are we supposed to do with it?

/Rant off
//Kinda drunk right now


For a while, we were destroying them in the middle of the Pacific, at Johnston Atoll. Not anymore, though.
 
2012-07-14 12:32:38 AM  

ciberido: Mantour: using smallpox in wartime, It's been done:

[www.history.org image 400x497]
[rangersoftheohiocompany.org image 689x682]

//He was also the first British Governor General in the territories that eventually became Canada. Numerous places and streets are named for him, both in Canada and the United States. Amherst is also infamous for catalyzing the first historical incidents of biological warfare, as he endorsed and commanded giving blankets infected with smallpox to American Indians.

JohnAnnArbor: That's actually pretty seriously in doubt. The letter says "give them blankets from the smallpox hospital." Nothing in the letter suggests that they were to be USED blankets. But it has become legendary by now, and it's useless to expect people to care about what the original document said. Especially when it's a PC "white man evil villain" situation. Zinn said it, must be right! Matt Damon!

It's "pretty seriously in doubt" the same way the Theory of Evolution and the Holocaust are "pretty seriously in doubt."

To be fair, the "it" here is that Amherst TOLD Bouquet to infect Native Americans with smallpox. What one can honestly doubt is whether or not Bouquet went through with it.

But hey, historical revisionism and denial: it's not just for Nazi sympathizers anymore.


Scroll down.....
 
2012-07-14 12:33:15 AM  

JohnAnnArbor: Infernalist: It should be also noted that biological warfare has humble beginnings.

There are Middle-Age records of catapults being used to fling dead animal carcasses into besieged castles and wells in order to poison their water supplies.

[sf.looneylabs.com image 216x302]


Fetchez la vache!
 
2012-07-14 12:46:53 AM  
not to worry, they can't use them because they can't read the Iraqi instructions.
 
2012-07-14 12:47:03 AM  

JohnAnnArbor: Scroll down.....


*shrug*

Such is the nature of real-time communication.
 
2012-07-14 01:07:07 AM  
Size 14 type...

... ITALIC
 
2012-07-14 01:33:03 AM  
upload.wikimedia.org

Oh hai guyz. What is up yo?
 
2012-07-14 01:39:35 AM  

RoxtarRyan: My enlistment ends in 11 months... please don't start another farking stupid war over oil and "evidence".


The eldest son of a friend of mine begins his (Army) in October. Oy.
 
2012-07-14 02:09:28 AM  
When it come to the US govt claiming a country has WMDs, I only have one thing to say about that...

Fool me once, shame on - shame on you. Fool me - you can't get fooled again.
 
2012-07-14 02:17:54 AM  
The Southern Dandy: When it come to the US govt claimingstating a known fact about Syria that is not subject to the same debate as it was in Iraq, a country has WMDs, I only have one thing to say about that...

Fool me once, shame on - shame on you. Fool me - you can't get fooled again.
 
2012-07-14 02:22:23 AM  
Isn't it amazing how they are doing tyhis just as the administration wants them to? For some reason I keep thinking "Remember the Maine."
 
2012-07-14 02:55:46 AM  
Asked whether there is concern that the weapons could fall into the hands of terrorists, the source said the United States still believes the chemical weapons are "secure" and under the control of the Assad regime.

I don't find this as reassuring as I'm apparently supposed to.
 
2012-07-14 02:59:18 AM  

The Southern Dandy: When it come to the US govt claiming a country has WMDs, I only have one thing to say about that...

Fool me once, shame on - shame on you. Fool me - you can't get fooled again.


This is a little different. Syria has a rather well documented chemical weapons program. This isn't a intel source named "curveball" giving information, they have well studied sites going back decades. It is Syria's deterrent to Israel's nuclear capability. Since Syria wasn't in a position to build its own bomb, they went with the cheaper, less effective weapon. No one doubts that Syria possesses a chemical capability of at least Sarin and potentially VX. That doesn't mean Syria overlooked nuclear capabilty, less we forget Israel's bombing of a North Korean reactor inside Syria in 2007, it is just much easier to produce and hide production of chemical weapons as much of the technology is duel use. Who is to say if your making pesticides or nerve gas without actually sampling the tank.
 
2012-07-14 03:34:07 AM  
1. Use nerve gas on a population of innocent people
2. Blame the rebels as launcing the attack
3. Call in allies (Russia) to help 'apprehend' the war crime committing rebels
4. ???
5. PROFIT!
 
2012-07-14 03:39:59 AM  

EnviroDude: You know, there are some that would believe these chemicals once belonged to Saddam


Yeah, just read the comment section of the article, it's full of them.
 
2012-07-14 03:45:14 AM  

Infernalist: EnviroDude: You know, there are some that would believe these chemicals once belonged to Saddam

Well, we 'would' know that. Reagan's name is on the invoice where we sold em to Saddam.

On topic, BO is heading for an easy re-election. But, if he puts us into a conflict with Syria, it'd better damned well be a mirror of the Libyan operation.

1) Unanimous support from the region/Arab League

2) Technical support/Air support of the local rebel forces.

3) No American soldiers on Syrian soil.

I seriously doubt we'll make any move at Syria, but if we do, it'd better damned well be like Libya and not like Iraq/Afghanistan.


I don't think we will either....and it's not close to Thanksgiving yet...but I think I smell Turkey.
 
2012-07-14 04:33:11 AM  
Daedalus27: This is a little different. Syria has a rather well documented chemical weapons program. This isn't a intel source named "curveball" giving information, they have well studied sites going back decades. It is Syria's deterrent to Israel's nuclear capability. Since Syria wasn't in a position to build its own bomb, they went with the cheaper, less effective weapon. No one doubts that Syria possesses a chemical capability of at least Sarin and potentially VX. That doesn't mean Syria overlooked nuclear capabilty, less we forget Israel's bombing of a North Korean reactor inside Syria in 2007, it is just much easier to produce and hide production of chemical weapons as much of the technology is duel use. Who is to say if your making pesticides or nerve gas without actually sampling the tank.

This. We also know, as a documented matter of fact, that the Syrians have SCUD-Cs tipped with Mustard Gas warheads. They killed 15 of their own people in 2007 servicing such a warhead when it detonated in their base, Janes Defense Magazine reported.

OhioUGrad: I don't think we will either....and it's not close to Thanksgiving yet...but I think I smell Turkey.

Turkey is a NATO member and American ally. You'd better hope and prey that some General in Syria doesn't go off his rocket and decide to lob a canister of Sarin or Tabun gas into their border. That WOULD start a nuclear exchange.
 
2012-07-14 05:43:13 AM  

BronyMedic: Daedalus27: This is a little different. Syria has a rather well documented chemical weapons program. This isn't a intel source named "curveball" giving information, they have well studied sites going back decades. It is Syria's deterrent to Israel's nuclear capability. Since Syria wasn't in a position to build its own bomb, they went with the cheaper, less effective weapon. No one doubts that Syria possesses a chemical capability of at least Sarin and potentially VX. That doesn't mean Syria overlooked nuclear capabilty, less we forget Israel's bombing of a North Korean reactor inside Syria in 2007, it is just much easier to produce and hide production of chemical weapons as much of the technology is duel use. Who is to say if your making pesticides or nerve gas without actually sampling the tank.

This. We also know, as a documented matter of fact, that the Syrians have SCUD-Cs tipped with Mustard Gas warheads. They killed 15 of their own people in 2007 servicing such a warhead when it detonated in their base, Janes Defense Magazine reported.

OhioUGrad: I don't think we will either....and it's not close to Thanksgiving yet...but I think I smell Turkey.

Turkey is a NATO member and American ally. You'd better hope and prey that some General in Syria doesn't go off his rocket and decide to lob a canister of Sarin or Tabun gas into their border. That WOULD start a nuclear exchange.


Which was my point....if anyone did anything, it would be Turkey, not the US. I think it's a matter of when, not if, sadly.
 
2012-07-14 05:48:54 AM  
OhioUGrad: BronyMedic: Daedalus27: This is a little different. Syria has a rather well documented chemical weapons program. This isn't a intel source named "curveball" giving information, they have well studied sites going back decades. It is Syria's deterrent to Israel's nuclear capability. Since Syria wasn't in a position to build its own bomb, they went with the cheaper, less effective weapon. No one doubts that Syria possesses a chemical capability of at least Sarin and potentially VX. That doesn't mean Syria overlooked nuclear capabilty, less we forget Israel's bombing of a North Korean reactor inside Syria in 2007, it is just much easier to produce and hide production of chemical weapons as much of the technology is duel use. Who is to say if your making pesticides or nerve gas without actually sampling the tank.

This. We also know, as a documented matter of fact, that the Syrians have SCUD-Cs tipped with Mustard Gas warheads. They killed 15 of their own people in 2007 servicing such a warhead when it detonated in their base, Janes Defense Magazine reported.

OhioUGrad: I don't think we will either....and it's not close to Thanksgiving yet...but I think I smell Turkey.

Turkey is a NATO member and American ally. You'd better hope and prey that some General in Syria doesn't go off his rocket and decide to lob a canister of Sarin or Tabun gas into their border. That WOULD start a nuclear exchange.

Which was my point....if anyone did anything, it would be Turkey, not the US. I think it's a matter of when, not if, sadly.


You know, I don't think Syria's that stupid. As much as it scares me to envison a "what-if" scenario, I like to think that the people in charge there now are sane enough to realize that they can get away with what ever atrocities they want at the moment, just as long as they don't harm a hair on a foreign head. The West, at the moment, can't do anything in Syria without seeming like imperialistic and aggressive. Anything we do, outside of Arab League and the neighboring countries interveneing militarily, would be seen by the community at large in that area as further colonial intentions, and the process of setting up a puppet Government.
 
2012-07-14 09:00:43 AM  

Dougie AXP: Ladies and Gentlemen, step right up and get your tickets for the ultimate event, WORLD WAR III!


While I have no doubt that China and Russia want to protect their interests in Syria, I doubt those interests are worth a major (or even minor) war. I think they'll wash their hands of Syria when (if?) the shooting starts.
 
2012-07-14 10:14:14 AM  
I can't believe anyone actually thinks the US would drop a nuke in response to anything short of an NBC attack on American soil by a sovereign nation. A few bombing runs by B-52s with conventional munitions approaches the power of a tactical nuke, anyway. Why bother with a nuke against a country the size of Washington state? Are the people who keep thinking the US or NATO would use a nuke the same people who masturbate to the phrase "glass parking lot"?
 
2012-07-14 12:31:01 PM  

JohnAnnArbor: We don't have a trained chemical corps like in the old days.


Speaking as a guy that was a soldier in the chemical corps for 8 years, you're wrong. The training is in Ft. Leonard Wood Missouri and you go through a CDTF with airlocks, VX nerve gas, all kinds of cool stuff. Blood is drawn before going in and after coming out, they give you clothes to change into and before you get out you take them all off and run naked through a shower. It's quite awkward when the instructors take their clothes off and tell you to do the same.

We don't do offensive stuff, which is a good thing. We did generate fog at my unit, basically making smokescreens from the humvees, and you could potentially put chemical weapons in that but it would be stupid. Once the wind changes you're screwed and you'll probably only kill civilians that way since soldiers still carry gas masks.

/Bullets and money are way more effective than gas.
 
Displayed 112 of 112 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report