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.

(NBC News)   Oh no the Syrian military didn't   (worldnews.nbcnews.com) divider line 783
    More: News, Syrians, officials told, NBC News, chemical weapons, Syrian Air Force, arms control agreements, U.S. officials, artillery shells  
•       •       •

32827 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Dec 2012 at 8:12 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread
 
2012-12-05 07:53:38 PM
About to cross the U.S.'s red line. What's one more war....
 
2012-12-05 08:07:10 PM

The Muthaship: About to cross the U.S.'s red line. What's one more war....


According to news I'm listening to, they have 60 days before it goes bad.

/could be an interesting/scary 60 days
 
2012-12-05 08:08:06 PM

The Muthaship: About to cross the U.S.'s red line. What's one more war....


Fair point, but the use of chemical or biological weapons should be a red line for the entire world, not just America. No one even thinks of using these kinds of weapons for anything other than genocide, and humanity has a duty to itself to stop such insanity from coming to bear.
 
2012-12-05 08:08:34 PM
Repeating myself since this might go green:

U.S. officials stressed that as of now, the sarin bombs hadn't been loaded onto planes and that Assad hadn't issued a final order to use them. But if he does, one of the officials said, "there's little the outside world can do to stop it."

No Fly Zone
 
2012-12-05 08:10:15 PM

GAT_00: Repeating myself since this might go green:

U.S. officials stressed that as of now, the sarin bombs hadn't been loaded onto planes and that Assad hadn't issued a final order to use them. But if he does, one of the officials said, "there's little the outside world can do to stop it."

No Fly Zone


Pair that with a visits from Seal Team 6, some Green Berets, and some of fine folks from MI6, and we got ourselves an international ass kicking of a despot.
 
2012-12-05 08:14:30 PM
This should be some party--who will show up? Turkey? Hezbollah? Israel? The US? Iran?

/gonna need some more snacks
 
2012-12-05 08:15:19 PM
There's plenty the world could do, it's just the lack of will. What happened when Saddam Hussein gassed the Kurds? Not a damn thing...
 
2012-12-05 08:15:26 PM

Grand_Moff_Joseph: GAT_00: Repeating myself since this might go green:

U.S. officials stressed that as of now, the sarin bombs hadn't been loaded onto planes and that Assad hadn't issued a final order to use them. But if he does, one of the officials said, "there's little the outside world can do to stop it."

No Fly Zone

Pair that with a visits from Seal Team 6, some Green Berets, and some of fine folks from MI6, and we got ourselves an international ass kicking of a despot.


If he's doing this, he's already close to an ass kicking. This is a sign of desperation. The people should free themselves, we just make sure they can.
 
2012-12-05 08:16:10 PM
Meanwhile the Russians keep doing business.
 
2012-12-05 08:16:12 PM
yellowcake 2.0?
 
2012-12-05 08:16:14 PM
Admiral Painter in 5... 4... 3... 2...
 
2012-12-05 08:16:17 PM
GODDAMMIT!
 
2012-12-05 08:16:34 PM

Repeat after me Fark.

NOT.. OUR ....FARKING.... PROBLEM!
 
2012-12-05 08:16:53 PM
So another war in the middle east for us then, right?
 
2012-12-05 08:17:05 PM
Aw shiat.
 
2012-12-05 08:17:34 PM
The Turks will do it which will make the Ruskies very nervous.
 
2012-12-05 08:17:48 PM
We found the WMD's! Woo hoo!
 
2012-12-05 08:18:29 PM

cman: So another war in the middle east for us then, right?


You'd rather watch genocide in HD on the nightly news?
 
2012-12-05 08:18:29 PM
mmmmmm hmmmmmmm
 
2012-12-05 08:18:35 PM
At this point, it's as if Assad wants UN intervention...
 
2012-12-05 08:18:42 PM

Allen. The end.: There's plenty the world could do, it's just the lack of will. What happened when Saddam Hussein gassed the Kurds? Not a damn thing...


Obama =! Reagan

/plus Saddam was an ally for that week
 
2012-12-05 08:18:53 PM
His head is shaped like a cylinder. Wat up with that?
 
2012-12-05 08:19:04 PM
Weren't people bragging about missiles that can land in some guy's coffee cup from a thousand miles away? Why don't we just use those?
 
2012-12-05 08:19:17 PM

The Muthaship: About to cross the U.S.'s red line. What's one more war....


i wonder if they're hoping iran will join in. romney may get his war anyway...
 
2012-12-05 08:19:18 PM

GAT_00: Repeating myself since this might go green:

U.S. officials stressed that as of now, the sarin bombs hadn't been loaded onto planes and that Assad hadn't issued a final order to use them. But if he does, one of the officials said, "there's little the outside world can do to stop it."

No Fly Zone


That could be a lot of fun if the F-22s are actually up and running okay for now. I'm curious to see what they would be like when let off the leash, because an air superiority fighter that you can't see coming is something that should be pants wettingly scary for a military that has to go up against them.

Of course, that is assuming that the F-22 can manage to not asphyxiate its pilot in the process. Last I head it was actually squeezing them to unconsciousness with the G-suits somehow.
 
2012-12-05 08:19:22 PM
This is starting to get Syrias.
 
2012-12-05 08:19:27 PM
Finally an excuse to start world war three.
 
2012-12-05 08:19:29 PM

mr lawson: Repeat after me Fark.

NOT.. OUR ....FARKING.... PROBLEM!


Yes, it is. This has the potential to engulf the entire Middle East including several of our allies who may or may not end up on the same side. This isn't the same situation as Iraq.
 
2012-12-05 08:19:45 PM
Meh, Fartbama needs another war to justify his tax cuts for the socialist deadbeat middle class.
 
2012-12-05 08:19:48 PM
upload.wikimedia.org
 
2012-12-05 08:19:57 PM

mr lawson: Repeat after me Fark.

NOT.. OUR ....FARKING.... PROBLEM!


bingo. i don't care who owns that crappy section of desert as long as i didnt have to pay for it. i realize thats callous and cruel to say, but why should more of my friends die on the other side of the globe to try and sort things out in favor of a group who are no more fond of us than assad.
 
2012-12-05 08:20:01 PM
denver.mylittlefacewhen.com
 
2012-12-05 08:20:17 PM
But, but where's the intelligence that says he has weapons of mass destruction. President Community Organizer channeling George Bush...come in President Bush....
 
2012-12-05 08:21:06 PM

PirateKing: Weren't people bragging about missiles that can land in some guy's coffee cup from a thousand miles away? Why don't we just use those?


Because we don't want to break, spell, and disperse the coffee cup and it's contents?
 
2012-12-05 08:21:10 PM
How many Arab countries do we need to bomb until we get one for free?
 
2012-12-05 08:22:02 PM
I have a feeling Turkey is going to take issue with this.
 
2012-12-05 08:22:06 PM
Remember when Nancy Pelosi put on a cute headscarf and did freelance diplomacy (in violation of the law, but who cares about that) in Syria while Bush was in office? "The road to peace goes through Damascus," or some such nonsense? Accomplishing exactly nothing?

Good times.

/The little dork eye doctor was always a murderer, geniuses.
 
2012-12-05 08:22:26 PM
The military has loaded the precursor chemicals for sarin, a deadly nerve gas, into aerial bombs that could be dropped onto the Syrian people from dozens of fighter-bombers, the officials said.

Initial symptoms following exposure to sarin are a runny nose, tightness in the chest and constriction of the pupils. Soon after, the victim has difficulty breathing and experiences nausea and drooling. As the victim continues to lose control of bodily functions, the victim vomits, defecates and urinates. This phase is followed by twitching and jerking. Ultimately, the victim becomes comatose and suffocates in a series of convulsive spasms.

ya..you guys bring this to the table, and it's all over biatches. You're going to get raped. Don't even think about it.
 
2012-12-05 08:22:29 PM

Mentat: We found the WMD's! Woo hoo!


Only nine years too late.
 
2012-12-05 08:22:29 PM

WTF Indeed: How many Arab countries do we need to bomb until we get one for free?


We've gotten a couple so far. We just keep giving them back since we see what they're like once we're there.
 
2012-12-05 08:22:45 PM
So, if Syria gets pushed onto the train tracks, do we only take pictures?
 
2012-12-05 08:23:00 PM

Mentat: Yes, it is. This has the potential to engulf the entire Middle East including several of our allies who may or may not end up on the same side. This isn't the same situation as Iraq.


Nope...Let's try letting them killing off each other for a while. The whole Middle East seem to want war. Fine. Let'em have it.

NOT OUR PROBLEM
 
2012-12-05 08:23:02 PM
Motherfu(kers.

Shall I point out that while I agree with the weapons bans, another 'thing' we agreed on, internationally speaking, was no torture?

I still think we should help.
Because we can.
 
2012-12-05 08:23:07 PM

vartian: cman: So another war in the middle east for us then, right?

You'd rather watch genocide in HD on the nightly news?


No, I would turn the TV off.

Look what happened with Bush and Iraq. Mushroom Cloud Smoking Gun, remember that? This doesnt concern us
 
2012-12-05 08:23:08 PM
I haven't kept up on the outrage, but is the GOP angry that Obama is doing too much or not enough?
 
2012-12-05 08:23:23 PM

JohnAnnArbor: Nancy Pelosi put on a cute headscarf and did freelance diplomacy (in violation of the law, but who cares about that) in Syria while Bush was in office


No, because that never happened.
 
2012-12-05 08:23:58 PM

cman: Look what happened with Bush and Iraq. Mushroom Cloud Smoking Gun, remember that? This doesnt concern us


Wait, how is this in any way similar to Iraq?
 
2012-12-05 08:24:11 PM

WTF Indeed: How many Arab countries do we need to bomb until we get one for free?


None, we should let Israel take care of things over there.
 
2012-12-05 08:24:14 PM

Grand_Moff_Joseph: Pair that with a visits from Seal Team 6, some Green Berets, and some of fine folks from MI6, and we got ourselves an international ass kicking of a despot.


Hopefully we've already have had international discussions (and plans) to deal with this.

/bets the Presidents phone is pretty busy right now
 
2012-12-05 08:24:17 PM

Mentat: We found the WMD's! Woo hoo!


We were only about 1500 miles off.
 
2012-12-05 08:24:35 PM

SilentStrider: Mentat: We found the WMD's! Woo hoo!

Only nine years too late.


Well, the left made sure to mock anyone who pointed out all the trucks crossing from Iraq into Syria just before the 2003 war. "MORE LIES! HALLIBURTON!"

Um, yeah. That was helpful.
 
2012-12-05 08:24:49 PM

JohnAnnArbor: Remember when Nancy Pelosi put on a cute headscarf and did freelance diplomacy (in violation of the law, but who cares about that) in Syria while Bush was in office? "The road to peace goes through Damascus," or some such nonsense? Accomplishing exactly nothing?

Good times.

/The little dork eye doctor was always a murderer, geniuses.


Well, thank you for that utterly meaningless bit of historical trivia.
 
2012-12-05 08:24:52 PM

cman: Look what happened with Bush and Iraq. Mushroom Cloud Smoking Gun, remember that? This doesnt concern us


What in the f*ck does this even mean?
 
2012-12-05 08:24:54 PM
If true, then this is a nightmare - but I want to see a source cited other than "U.S. officials." I can't find any mention of this on the BBC, other British sites, Al Jazeera English, or other Middle Eastern news sites. The only other mention outside of the US media was from the Jerusalem Post. I'd think that if weapons had been loaded then the world media would be all over this.
 
2012-12-05 08:25:08 PM
Chemical weapons don't kill people. People kill people.
 
2012-12-05 08:25:48 PM

GAT_00: Repeating myself since this might go green:

U.S. officials stressed that as of now, the sarin bombs hadn't been loaded onto planes and that Assad hadn't issued a final order to use them. But if he does, one of the officials said, "there's little the outside world can do to stop it."

No Fly Zone


Nope, destroy the aircraft on the ground, NOW!
 
2012-12-05 08:25:50 PM

mr lawson: Mentat: Yes, it is. This has the potential to engulf the entire Middle East including several of our allies who may or may not end up on the same side. This isn't the same situation as Iraq.

Nope...Let's try letting them killing off each other for a while. The whole Middle East seem to want war. Fine. Let'em have it.

NOT OUR PROBLEM


I think we've tried that a few dozen times already. Doesn't seem to help.
 
2012-12-05 08:25:58 PM

Bit'O'Gristle: The military has loaded the precursor chemicals for sarin, a deadly nerve gas, into aerial bombs that could be dropped onto the Syrian people from dozens of fighter-bombers, the officials said.

Initial symptoms following exposure to sarin are a runny nose, tightness in the chest and constriction of the pupils. Soon after, the victim has difficulty breathing and experiences nausea and drooling. As the victim continues to lose control of bodily functions, the victim vomits, defecates and urinates. This phase is followed by twitching and jerking. Ultimately, the victim becomes comatose and suffocates in a series of convulsive spasms.

ya..you guys bring this to the table, and it's all over biatches. You're going to get raped. Don't even think about it.


Not me. I didn't have the fish.
 
2012-12-05 08:26:04 PM

cameroncrazy1984: Wait, how is this in any way similar to Iraq?


The fact, like Iraq, Syria is NOT OUR PROBLEM.

/oil be damned!
 
2012-12-05 08:26:05 PM

JohnAnnArbor: Remember when Nancy Pelosi put on a cute headscarf and did freelance diplomacy (in violation of the law, but who cares about that) in Syria while Bush was in office? "The road to peace goes through Damascus," or some such nonsense? Accomplishing exactly nothing?

Good times.

/The little dork eye doctor was always a murderer, geniuses.


Nancy Pelosi is a dousche no matter who's in charge.
 
2012-12-05 08:26:13 PM

cameroncrazy1984: JohnAnnArbor: Nancy Pelosi put on a cute headscarf and did freelance diplomacy (in violation of the law, but who cares about that) in Syria while Bush was in office

No, because that never happened.


ORLY?

/ya rly.
 
2012-12-05 08:26:43 PM
TFA: The nerve agents were locked and loaded inside the bombs. 

OK, I had to look this up. I know what "load" means, but WTF is "lock"??

Apparently the term is made up. Well, it's not a range command and "lock and load" doesn't seem to refer to anything in particular... even loading, apparently.
 
2012-12-05 08:26:51 PM

cameroncrazy1984: cman: Look what happened with Bush and Iraq. Mushroom Cloud Smoking Gun, remember that? This doesnt concern us

Wait, how is this in any way similar to Iraq?


Because, remember, Saddam Hussein had WMD's and was committing genocide against his own people, right? We were played for fools then; lets not get played for fools now.
 
2012-12-05 08:27:14 PM
That chinless rentboy really doesn't get it, does he?

Pay attention, Republicans. This is what happens when you are actually allowed to "make your own reality."
 
2012-12-05 08:27:24 PM
 
2012-12-05 08:27:31 PM

Mentat: We found the WMD's! Woo hoo!


wouldn't be surprised if these were Saddam's chemicals they transported over the boarder after the US announced we were moving into Iraq.


They better get a hurry on it... the Mayans' date is approaching fast!

 
2012-12-05 08:27:33 PM
they'll get over it.
 
2012-12-05 08:27:44 PM

Mentat: I think we've tried that a few dozen times already. Doesn't seem to help.


Maybe not, but it doesn't cost us a trillion dollars and thousands of US lives for the same results.
 
2012-12-05 08:27:53 PM
May Allah have mercy on their lime green glowing souls if they do.
 
2012-12-05 08:27:55 PM

Allen. The end.: There's plenty the world could do, it's just the lack of will. What happened when Saddam Hussein gassed the Kurds? Not a damn thing...


And WTF happened to the Whey?!
 
2012-12-05 08:28:04 PM
No-fly zone might help, since the rebels don't have planes and there's not a lot of airspace to cover (compared to past zones in Iraq).

The number of Russian SAMs the Syrians have would need to be taken into account.

Hypothetically.
 
2012-12-05 08:28:04 PM
jaypgreene.files.wordpress.com

/Hot
 
2012-12-05 08:28:08 PM

Grand_Moff_Joseph: GAT_00: Repeating myself since this might go green:

U.S. officials stressed that as of now, the sarin bombs hadn't been loaded onto planes and that Assad hadn't issued a final order to use them. But if he does, one of the officials said, "there's little the outside world can do to stop it."

No Fly Zone

Pair that with a visits from Seal Team 6, some Green Berets, and some of fine folks from MI6, and we got ourselves an international ass kicking of a despot.


A "Rock the Casbah," if you will.
 
2012-12-05 08:28:14 PM

cman: cameroncrazy1984: cman: Look what happened with Bush and Iraq. Mushroom Cloud Smoking Gun, remember that? This doesnt concern us

Wait, how is this in any way similar to Iraq?

Because, remember, Saddam Hussein had WMD's and was committing genocide against his own people, right? We were played for fools then; lets not get played for fools now.


The real question is, can you live with yourself knowing that your country could have done something to stop it and didn't? Will you just shrug off the millions this country's "leader" would kill to remain in power?
 
2012-12-05 08:28:15 PM

cman: cameroncrazy1984: cman: Look what happened with Bush and Iraq. Mushroom Cloud Smoking Gun, remember that? This doesnt concern us

Wait, how is this in any way similar to Iraq?

Because, remember, Saddam Hussein had WMD's and was committing genocide against his own people, right? We were played for fools then; lets not get played for fools now.


To be fair, he was killing his own people with the WMDs we gave him in the 1980's. So that was more a test to see how well our weapons held up over time.
 
2012-12-05 08:28:20 PM

bulldg4life: I haven't kept up on the outrage, but is the GOP angry that Obama is doing too much or not enough?


Since he hasn't done anything, it's probably "not enough".
 
2012-12-05 08:28:32 PM

mr lawson: Mentat: Yes, it is. This has the potential to engulf the entire Middle East including several of our allies who may or may not end up on the same side. This isn't the same situation as Iraq.

Nope...Let's try letting them killing off each other for a while. The whole Middle East seem to want war. Fine. Let'em have it.

NOT OUR PROBLEM


Just keep that idea firmly in mind when the inevitable pictures of hundreds to thousands of dead women/children in the streets, dead where the stood when the gas hit, start pouring in after he does use them. Screaming not our problem will make it all go away....
 
2012-12-05 08:28:33 PM

mr lawson: cameroncrazy1984: Wait, how is this in any way similar to Iraq?

The fact, like Iraq, Syria is NOT OUR PROBLEM.

/oil be damned!


Yeah, we really shouldn't give a fark about a ruler using chemical warfare against his citizens.
 
2012-12-05 08:28:33 PM
Maybe the Mayans were right.
 
2012-12-05 08:28:50 PM

vartian: cman: So another war in the middle east for us then, right?

You'd rather watch genocide in HD on the nightly news?


BF to GF: "Ugh! Your breath tastes like cigarettes!"
GF: "You'd rather it tasted like pussy?"
BF: "Well, yeah, actually."
 
2012-12-05 08:29:12 PM

mr lawson: Mentat: I think we've tried that a few dozen times already. Doesn't seem to help.

Maybe not, but it doesn't cost us a trillion dollars and thousands of US lives for the same results.


It didn't cost us a trillion dollars or any American lives to deal with Libya.
 
2012-12-05 08:29:44 PM
Where's your Allah now?
 
2012-12-05 08:29:51 PM
Assad has nothing to lose at this point - he's going down and he's taking as many people as he can with him.

We need some ninjas to sneak in and take hims out quickly. We have ninjas, right?

/Or we could try the $25 million bounty again
 
2012-12-05 08:31:06 PM

mr lawson: cameroncrazy1984: Wait, how is this in any way similar to Iraq?

The fact, like Iraq, Syria is NOT OUR PROBLEM.

/oil be damned!


What oil? Syria produces almost as much oil as Central Java and just a little more than Thailand.
 
2012-12-05 08:31:15 PM

JohnAnnArbor: cameroncrazy1984: JohnAnnArbor: Nancy Pelosi put on a cute headscarf and did freelance diplomacy (in violation of the law, but who cares about that) in Syria while Bush was in office

No, because that never happened.

ORLY?

/ya rly.


No, what I mean is it wasn't "in violation of the law"
 
2012-12-05 08:31:21 PM

JohnAnnArbor: The little dork eye doctor was always a murderer, geniuses.


Rand Paul?
 
2012-12-05 08:31:28 PM
I think we'd be able to inhibit the use of chemical weapons but not entirely prevent it, mainly with air power. The good thing to that plan is that we wouldn't have to risk any troops on the ground, as the ground troops might not be properly equipped to handle a sarin chemical weapon. The rate-limiting factor would be the rate at which we'd be able to gather intelligence on the whereabouts of the chemical weapons.
 
2012-12-05 08:31:41 PM

ShadowLAnCeR: cman: cameroncrazy1984: cman: Look what happened with Bush and Iraq. Mushroom Cloud Smoking Gun, remember that? This doesnt concern us

Wait, how is this in any way similar to Iraq?

Because, remember, Saddam Hussein had WMD's and was committing genocide against his own people, right? We were played for fools then; lets not get played for fools now.

The real question is, can you live with yourself knowing that your country could have done something to stop it and didn't? Will you just shrug off the millions this country's "leader" would kill to remain in power?


Syria is not the United States. Syria is a sovereign nation who is filled with people known as Syrians.

Sure, it would horrify me, but unless Syria commits some sort of military attack upon us, we should not get involved. This is Syria's problem. Syria has to work this out with themselves.
 
2012-12-05 08:31:49 PM
I swear Assad and his family act like this is a farking game. biatch was worrying about getting the newest Harry Potter books, and, I don't know- her favorite jelly or some such mundane shiat.
While hubby was having a busy day at work trying to commit genocide on the people he's supposed to be leading.

They are real people, not numbers, ffs. No re-spawning.
 
2012-12-05 08:31:57 PM
Syria is very close to our NATO bases in Turkey not to forget the carriers in the Med. Unless this a complete fabrication, ala "Saddam has chemical weapons", then Syria dare not use them. The Syrian bombers would likely never make it off the ground given our overwhelming air superiority. If they did get aloft then they'd be toast in the air within minutes.

Likely more hyperbole and posturing. Assad, a very bad man, will fall one way or another.

Russia has a major naval base in Syria and they, as a practical matter, need to have their interests appeased and protected.
 
2012-12-05 08:32:11 PM

bulldg4life: I haven't kept up on the outrage, but is the GOP angry that Obama is doing too much or not enough?


If Libya was any guide, they will be angry that he isn't doing anything until he does something, at which point they will object that he had no right to do so. 

But as someone else pointed out, I want some confirmation from a non-US source (and Israel doesn't count) that this is really happening.
 
2012-12-05 08:32:27 PM

The Muthaship: About to cross the U.S.'s red line. What's one more war....


we are going to be soooo totally mad at them if they do that. We might have to send another strongly worded letter. Maybe even a bad yelp review.
 
2012-12-05 08:32:31 PM

cameroncrazy1984: JohnAnnArbor: Nancy Pelosi put on a cute headscarf and did freelance diplomacy (in violation of the law, but who cares about that) in Syria while Bush was in office

No, because that never happened.


ginacobb.typepad.com

Link (New Window) 

"We came in friendship, hope, and determined that the road to Damascus is a road to peace," Pelosi told reporters after her talks with Assad.
 
2012-12-05 08:32:47 PM

ShadowLAnCeR: cman: cameroncrazy1984: cman: Look what happened with Bush and Iraq. Mushroom Cloud Smoking Gun, remember that? This doesnt concern us

Wait, how is this in any way similar to Iraq?

Because, remember, Saddam Hussein had WMD's and was committing genocide against his own people, right? We were played for fools then; lets not get played for fools now.

The real question is, can you live with yourself knowing that your country could have done something to stop it and didn't? Will you just shrug off the millions this country's "leader" would kill to remain in power?


The same damn thing has happened in Africa for a long time. Maybe not with chemical weapons, but genocide nonetheless. Not that I like it, but if we are going in to stop the genocide for moral reasons, there are plenty of areas we need to go to, and should have gone into besides Syria in order for that to work

/uganda, congo, etc aren't just places for fark to make dark jokes about
//fart of darkness
 
2012-12-05 08:33:05 PM
Not our problem
Nuke these pigs.
Wat do?
 
2012-12-05 08:33:08 PM

vegasj: Mentat: We found the WMD's! Woo hoo!

wouldn't be surprised if these were Saddam's chemicals they transported over the boarder after the US announced we were moving into Iraq.


They better get a hurry on it... the Mayans' date is approaching fast!


Oh yeah, you know, Saddam's best friend Syria. Derpityderp
 
2012-12-05 08:33:12 PM

ShadowLAnCeR: cman: cameroncrazy1984: cman: Look what happened with Bush and Iraq. Mushroom Cloud Smoking Gun, remember that? This doesnt concern us

Wait, how is this in any way similar to Iraq?

Because, remember, Saddam Hussein had WMD's and was committing genocide against his own people, right? We were played for fools then; lets not get played for fools now.

The real question is, can you live with yourself knowing that your country could have done something to stop it and didn't? Will you just shrug off the millions this country's "leader" would kill to remain in power?


People can do it by claiming war in a globalized world is not their problem.
The cleanup is a different matter, but there's years left to spin the fallout from that.
 
2012-12-05 08:33:14 PM

cman: Syria is not the United States. Syria is a sovereign nation who is filled with people known as Syrians.

Sure, it would horrify me, but unless Syria commits some sort of military attack upon us, we should not get involved. This is Syria's problem. Syria has to work this out with themselves


This may shock you, but Syria does not exist in a self-contained little bubble.
 
2012-12-05 08:33:22 PM

ShadowLAnCeR: cman: cameroncrazy1984: cman: Look what happened with Bush and Iraq. Mushroom Cloud Smoking Gun, remember that? This doesnt concern us

Wait, how is this in any way similar to Iraq?

Because, remember, Saddam Hussein had WMD's and was committing genocide against his own people, right? We were played for fools then; lets not get played for fools now.

The real question is, can you live with yourself knowing that your country could have done something to stop it and didn't? Will you just shrug off the millions this country's "leader" would kill to remain in power?


We've seemed to do a pretty good of turning a blind eye to most of Africa, what's one more country that's just going to end up under Sharia Law anyway?
 
2012-12-05 08:33:32 PM

GAT_00: Yeah, we really shouldn't give a fark about a ruler using chemical warfare against his citizens.


You know, if I had the slightest bit of hope that our intervention would create peace over there i would be all in.
All Hope is gone.
They want War (some for the right reasons even)
They don't need nor want us.
Not our problem.
We have our own
 
2012-12-05 08:33:46 PM

Mentat: We found the WMD's! Woo hoo!


They probably have cyrillic instructions.
 
2012-12-05 08:33:56 PM
Reports are the the USS Eisenhower is sitting of the coast of Syria, ready to strike.
 
2012-12-05 08:34:02 PM
http://theaviationist.com/2012/12/05/mig23-attack/#.UL_00Xj74Vb

Video from Syria shows Assad has started dropping thermobaric bombs.

If he wants to get more brutal, there's nowhere left to go for him but chemical weapons.
 
2012-12-05 08:34:31 PM

cman: Syria is not the United States. Syria is a sovereign nation who is filled with people known as Syrians.

Sure, it would horrify me, but unless Syria commits some sort of military attack upon us, we should not get involved. This is Syria's problem. Syria has to work this out with themselves.


Chemical weapons is everybody's business. Wake up and smell the global affairs.
 
2012-12-05 08:34:33 PM

mr lawson: Repeat after me Fark.

NOT.. OUR ....FARKING.... PROBLEM!


Oh it just might be if the entire region goes batshiat over the use of WMDs.

Syria borders a NATO ally in Turkey and Israel as well. You think either of them are going to tolerate an errant rocket or bomb with a chemical weapon warhead?
 
2012-12-05 08:34:44 PM

russlar: yellowcake 2.0?


Wrong administration.
 
2012-12-05 08:34:55 PM

WTF Indeed: cman: cameroncrazy1984: cman: Look what happened with Bush and Iraq. Mushroom Cloud Smoking Gun, remember that? This doesnt concern us

Wait, how is this in any way similar to Iraq?

Because, remember, Saddam Hussein had WMD's and was committing genocide against his own people, right? We were played for fools then; lets not get played for fools now.

To be fair, he was killing his own people with the WMDs we gave him in the 1980's. So that was more a test to see how well our weapons held up over time.


His weapons were Soviet, French, German, and Chinese, in about that order. We have him jack shiat; we often were openly mocked, even by Britain, for trying to stop shipments of "innocuous" stuff (oil pipes that were turned into artillery pieces, for example). I know it's a lefty talking point that we armed Saddam, but just saying it doesn't make it true.
 
2012-12-05 08:35:01 PM
Obama makes his yellow cake speech in 3.....2.....1
 
2012-12-05 08:35:06 PM
I've said it before eleventy times. I'll say it again. Let them kill themselves. They seem to LOVE this shiat.
 
2012-12-05 08:35:33 PM

thamike: What oil? Syria produces almost as much oil as Central Java and just a little more than Thailand.


That was more of a statement in reply toward the entire M.E. erupting into war...not regarding just Syria.
/should have worded that better.
 
2012-12-05 08:35:40 PM

DblDad: If true, then this is a nightmare - but I want to see a source cited other than "U.S. officials." I can't find any mention of this on the BBC, other British sites, Al Jazeera English, or other Middle Eastern news sites. The only other mention outside of the US media was from the Jerusalem Post. I'd think that if weapons had been loaded then the world media would be all over this.


Check out the side bar "Live Blog Syria"
Link

It's on Al Jazeera.
 
2012-12-05 08:35:45 PM

mr lawson: Not our problem.


And if you are willing to stand by and saying that chemical warfare against civilians is simply a "problem" and even worse isn't our problem, then quite frankly I don't want to have anything to do with you. You're almost as bad as the people who would actually use these weapons.
 
2012-12-05 08:36:08 PM

Linkster: GAT_00: Repeating myself since this might go green:

U.S. officials stressed that as of now, the sarin bombs hadn't been loaded onto planes and that Assad hadn't issued a final order to use them. But if he does, one of the officials said, "there's little the outside world can do to stop it."

No Fly Zone

Nope, destroy the aircraft on the ground, NOW!


Yup.
 
2012-12-05 08:36:17 PM

GAT_00: Repeating myself since this might go green:

U.S. officials stressed that as of now, the sarin bombs hadn't been loaded onto planes and that Assad hadn't issued a final order to use them. But if he does, one of the officials said, "there's little the outside world can do to stop it."

No Fly Zone


fark that, drop them on the tarmac. Now.

/sucks to be the people near those airports
 
2012-12-05 08:36:37 PM
Why am suddenly reminded of something I heard and ignored back when I was a kid, something in the Bible about Revelations and that "middle eastern" neck of the woods and all which might involve a "big bear"....
 
2012-12-05 08:36:57 PM

BravadoGT: This should be some party--who will show up? Turkey? Hezbollah? Israel? The US? Iran?

/gonna need some more snacks


I know, right?
 
2012-12-05 08:37:02 PM

cameroncrazy1984: JohnAnnArbor: cameroncrazy1984: JohnAnnArbor: Nancy Pelosi put on a cute headscarf and did freelance diplomacy (in violation of the law, but who cares about that) in Syria while Bush was in office

No, because that never happened.

ORLY?

/ya rly.

No, what I mean is it wasn't "in violation of the law"


Well, you're still a dumbass.
 
2012-12-05 08:37:08 PM
What's that? The Caribbean is nice this time of year?
cdn.theatlantic.com
 
2012-12-05 08:37:12 PM

The Muthaship: About to cross the U.S.'s red line. What's one more war....


That depends. Are we doing it Bush style or Obama style?

Because we could fund 2 or 3 Obama-in-Libyas per year by simply digging the spare change out of the Pentagon's couch (not, of course, to suggest that it's purely a monetary issue), and not even have a single casket or wheelchair to deal with afterwards.

cman: cameroncrazy1984: cman: Look what happened with Bush and Iraq. Mushroom Cloud Smoking Gun, remember that? This doesnt concern us

Wait, how is this in any way similar to Iraq?

Because, remember, Saddam Hussein had WMD's and was committing genocide against his own people, right? We were played for fools then; lets not get played for fools now.


To be fair, the White House isn't currently being run a cabal of sociopaths fronted by a charming man with Alzheimer's.
 
2012-12-05 08:37:17 PM

cameroncrazy1984: cman: Syria is not the United States. Syria is a sovereign nation who is filled with people known as Syrians.

Sure, it would horrify me, but unless Syria commits some sort of military attack upon us, we should not get involved. This is Syria's problem. Syria has to work this out with themselves

This may shock you, but Syria does not exist in a self-contained little bubble.


I know that.

But as the saying goes "Those who fail to learn history are destined to repeat it" needs to be heeded. The last time we got involved in another nations civil war, Vietnam, 56000 US troops were killed and 2 million Vietnamese were killed as well. All of that was to prevent the Vietnamese from taking care of a Vietnamese problem, their right for self determination.

I dont like genocide, I dont; but sometimes we can make a problem much worse by getting involved in things that we shouldnt.
 
2012-12-05 08:37:48 PM
Someone mentioned that Russia has major interests in Syria. Would they be likely to defend the current government, or decide that the current government has become a liability and try to take them out quickly?
 
2012-12-05 08:38:14 PM

thamike: Oh yeah, you know, Saddam's best friend Syria. Derpityderp


now where did I say Saddam knew about them being transported?

derpityderp makes you sound... retarded.

 
2012-12-05 08:38:28 PM

JustinCase: BravadoGT: This should be some party--who will show up? Turkey? Hezbollah? Israel? The US? Iran?

/gonna need some more snacks

I know, right?


Who's next?
 
2012-12-05 08:39:13 PM
cdn.overclock.net
 
2012-12-05 08:39:13 PM

Grand_Moff_Joseph: The Muthaship: About to cross the U.S.'s red line. What's one more war....

Fair point, but the use of chemical or biological weapons should be a red line for the entire world, not just America. No one even thinks of using these kinds of weapons for anything other than genocide, and humanity has a duty to itself to stop such insanity from coming to bear.


What he said!
 
2012-12-05 08:39:19 PM

vartian: cman: So another war in the middle east for us then, right?

You'd rather watch genocide in HD on the nightly news?


What's another genocide for us to watch in HD?
 
2012-12-05 08:39:21 PM

bulldg4life: I haven't kept up on the outrage, but is the GOP angry that Obama is doing too much or not enough?


Both. Simultaneously.
 
2012-12-05 08:39:31 PM
And, oy, followup, my post is referring to Saddam's original genocidey adventures during the 80s, if the Reagan reference doesn't make that clear.
 
2012-12-05 08:39:38 PM
I just want to make something perfectly clear: my position is not based off of partisan politics. Iraq was idiotic and Bush really farked us over getting us in there. I am not taking a position against a war with Syria because Obama is in the white house.
 
2012-12-05 08:39:39 PM

cman: cameroncrazy1984: cman: Syria is not the United States. Syria is a sovereign nation who is filled with people known as Syrians.

Sure, it would horrify me, but unless Syria commits some sort of military attack upon us, we should not get involved. This is Syria's problem. Syria has to work this out with themselves

This may shock you, but Syria does not exist in a self-contained little bubble.

I know that.

But as the saying goes "Those who fail to learn history are destined to repeat it" needs to be heeded. The last time we got involved in another nations civil war, Vietnam, 56000 US troops were killed and 2 million Vietnamese were killed as well. All of that was to prevent the Vietnamese from taking care of a Vietnamese problem, their right for self determination.

I dont like genocide, I dont; but sometimes we can make a problem much worse by getting involved in things that we shouldnt.


Actually, the last one was Libya, and, with the exception of Benghazi, went along swimmingly.
 
2012-12-05 08:40:08 PM

AlwaysRightBoy: The Muthaship: About to cross the U.S.'s red line. What's one more war....

According to news I'm listening to, they have 60 days before it goes bad.

/could be an interesting/scary 60 days


It's not like US is a key player on the security council of some kind of union of countries that tries to keep peace in the world and prevent atrocities and war crimes.
 
2012-12-05 08:40:08 PM
But didn't he just assure us he wouldn't use chemical weapons even if he did have them? I can't believe he is not to be trusted.
Oh well, at least he's doing it in time for the December 2 apocalypse.
 
2012-12-05 08:40:23 PM

WTF Indeed: How many Arab countries do we need to bomb until we get one for free?



BWHHAHAAH!
 
2012-12-05 08:40:25 PM

JohnAnnArbor: cameroncrazy1984: JohnAnnArbor: cameroncrazy1984: JohnAnnArbor: Nancy Pelosi put on a cute headscarf and did freelance diplomacy (in violation of the law, but who cares about that) in Syria while Bush was in office

No, because that never happened.

ORLY?

/ya rly.

No, what I mean is it wasn't "in violation of the law"

Well, you're still a dumbass.


And it's still not a violation of the Logan act for a member of Congress to travel overseas and make a speech.
 
2012-12-05 08:40:34 PM

BarkingUnicorn: Linkster: GAT_00: Repeating myself since this might go green:

U.S. officials stressed that as of now, the sarin bombs hadn't been loaded onto planes and that Assad hadn't issued a final order to use them. But if he does, one of the officials said, "there's little the outside world can do to stop it."

No Fly Zone

Nope, destroy the aircraft on the ground, NOW!

Yup.


Load the drones and send them in. NOW!
 
2012-12-05 08:41:00 PM
Anyone know if little brother Maher al-Assad is still among the living? It's kind of important, since he was the head of the military and secret police, and he'd be the one actually ordering the bombing if he's still alive. Also, there were indications Assad was willing to step down in favor of Maher earlier this year...before the Damascus bombing in July.

If Assad's back is as against the wall as this nerve-gas threat seems to indicate, then maybe the US should be interested. The last thing we need is ANOTHER unsupported power vacuum in the Middle East. Not saying we should get involved, but maybe we want to see what Turkey and Jordan are going to do.
 
2012-12-05 08:41:01 PM

Krymson Tyde: But didn't he just assure us he wouldn't use chemical weapons even if he did have them? I can't believe he is not to be trusted.
Oh well, at least he's doing it in time for the December 2 apocalypse.


*21

December 21 apocalypse.
 
2012-12-05 08:41:11 PM
I think if this is validated we should destroy as many of their planes and artillery as possible now.
 
2012-12-05 08:41:16 PM
skull valley, 1968. never forget....

upload.wikimedia.org
 
2012-12-05 08:41:57 PM

Grand_Moff_Joseph: GAT_00: Repeating myself since this might go green:

U.S. officials stressed that as of now, the sarin bombs hadn't been loaded onto planes and that Assad hadn't issued a final order to use them. But if he does, one of the officials said, "there's little the outside world can do to stop it."

No Fly Zone

Pair that with a visits from Seal Team 6, some Green Berets, and some of fine folks from MI6, and we got ourselves an international ass kicking of a despot.


Where do we base the no-fly enforcement out of? It has to be close, or we can't respond fast enough. We could do western Iraq, but I doubt we have enough resources in place to enforce it. Lebanon probably won't let us stage there, and Turkey is far enough away from Damascus that even if they did give us permission, it may not work. For obvious reasons, staging out of Israel is a non-starter.

We have at least one carrier group, the George H.W. Bush in place, but while that's good for eventually shooting down planes, it's not as good for short-range missiles. It also needs local support just to keep running. There's also the USS Iwo Jima Amphibious Ready Group, which consists of 2,500 Marines. Good enough to offer support if invited, but not enough to invade the whole country. The Marines are good, but they aren't THAT good.

But all of this is a moot point, because if those guys decide that tomorrow is the day they launch planes and missiles with chemical weapons - no one has anything in place right now to stop them immediately. Shoot down the planes? Quite possibly - but some will get through unless they're all going for long range targets. If Syria launches a bombing run on a target 100 miles away from the airport, we wouldn't get there in time. Defend against short range missiles mounted on mobile platforms? Not so much.
 
2012-12-05 08:42:13 PM
I really wish I was a child again sometimes, so I didn't have to care about this shiat. I'm just glad my innocence and naïveté lasted till I was about 10 yrs old. Seriously, the human race is one farked up species...so much hate and killing. I just don't understand it.

Absolutely straight up, laugh if you want, but it is very depressing to me at times
 
2012-12-05 08:42:15 PM
The U.S. won't do shiat if they start using that crap other than wording strong letters of disapproval.
 
2012-12-05 08:42:54 PM

Shrugging Atlas: mr lawson: Repeat after me Fark.

NOT.. OUR ....FARKING.... PROBLEM!

Oh it just might be if the entire region goes batshiat over the use of WMDs.

Syria borders a NATO ally in Turkey and Israel as well. You think either of them are going to tolerate an errant rocket or bomb with a chemical weapon warhead?


Turkey's response so far is to request a NATO shield of Patriot missiles, which won't arrive until next year. Link
 
2012-12-05 08:42:56 PM

bim1154: The U.S. won't do shiat if they start using that crap other than wording strong letters of disapproval.


Libya would like a word with you.
 
2012-12-05 08:43:17 PM

WTFDYW: I've said it before eleventy times. I'll say it again. Let them kill themselves. They seem to LOVE this shiat.


Who is 'they?' You're saying you'd have a different answer if it was Christians being killed and not Muslims?
 
2012-12-05 08:43:21 PM

JohnAnnArbor: SilentStrider: Mentat: We found the WMD's! Woo hoo!

Only nine years too late.

Well, the left made sure to mock anyone who pointed out all the trucks crossing from Iraq into Syria just before the 2003 war. "MORE LIES! HALLIBURTON!"

Um, yeah. That was helpful.


Oh dear.
You're not a particularly rational person are you?
 
2012-12-05 08:43:41 PM

BravadoGT: This should be some party--who will show up? Turkey? Hezbollah? Israel? The US? Iran?

/gonna need some more snacks


I predict a combined force that which hasn't been seen...ever.

Nothing short of a force that'll prevent anyone from getting their hands on such a weapon outside of Syria for nefarious purposes and a major assault being issued not only by our allies, but the enemy of my enemy is my friend kind of shiat we haven't seen since a very long time.
 
2012-12-05 08:43:54 PM

GAT_00: And if you are willing to stand by and saying that chemical warfare against civilians is simply a "problem" and even worse isn't our problem, then quite frankly I don't want to have anything to do with you. You're almost as bad as the people who would actually use these weapons.


Who are you gonna bomb? Both side are bad. One just slightly less than the other.
That is the problem. There doesn't seem to be a side that wants equal right for all.
Make no mistake I would not shed a single tear if the current president died. But this is the person who won their "election". They voted for him.
 
2012-12-05 08:44:04 PM

bulldg4life: I haven't kept up on the outrage, but is the GOP angry that Obama is doing too much or not enough?


Yes.
 
2012-12-05 08:44:05 PM
If this is a real threat, then fine, chemical weapons can afflict America's allies over yonder, perhaps the American government will start another war. This time, though, they should take the stupid country for our own uses- think of all the oil reserves over there! It's just too bad that the USA decided to be the judge and meddler in world affairs without ever taking any territories to leverage power except the one it has way off on it's own safe and happy continent.
 
2012-12-05 08:44:13 PM

atomic-age: bulldg4life: I haven't kept up on the outrage, but is the GOP angry that Obama is doing too much or not enough?

Both. Simultaneously.


This is actually a rare case when a quantum mechanical problem can be solved exactly: Obama and the GOP are in a singlet state.

Therefore whenever you observe what Obama's doing, you know due to 100% anticorrelation that the GOP is frothing at the mouth about how wrong what Obama is doing is, regardless of what Obama is actually doing.

Scientists have made numerous precision tests of this theory over the last several years, and in every case the predicted correlation has held up better than measurement accuracy, and Quantum Derpchanics is a rapidly growing field.
 
2012-12-05 08:44:16 PM

ArkPanda: I think if this is validated we should destroy as many of their planes and artillery as possible now.


This.
 
2012-12-05 08:44:18 PM
If Assad uses chemical weapons it will be very difficult for China and Russia to continue vetoing any sort of international intervention and reconciliation. If there is not any sort of international peace-keeping than it's gonna be a very rough spot that the Alawites, the 10% of the population who have been running shiat for 60 years, find themselves in. This could just be a bluff but it's hard to see how Assad could think that this would help his chances of not ending up being hung in a market square. He might just be enough of a bastard to use a WMD on his own people (you hear that acronym a lot less on the news when there's no international contracts to be had)
 
2012-12-05 08:44:43 PM

GAT_00: WTFDYW: I've said it before eleventy times. I'll say it again. Let them kill themselves. They seem to LOVE this shiat.

Who is 'they?' You're saying you'd have a different answer if it was Christians being killed and not Muslims?


Well, isolationism was a pretty popular position during WWI AND WWII...
 
2012-12-05 08:45:03 PM

Lsherm: Where do we base the no-fly enforcement out of?


Hmm, I wonder what kind of ally we have in the area that we've given lots of weapons to? Oh right, Israel. And Turkey is in NATO and has been supporting the rebels for months. And we have a few bases in Saudi Arabia.

Nah, there's nowhere to base out of.
 
2012-12-05 08:45:36 PM

Oznog: TFA: The nerve agents were locked and loaded inside the bombs. 

OK, I had to look this up. I know what "load" means, but WTF is "lock"??

Apparently the term is made up. Well, it's not a range command and "lock and load" doesn't seem to refer to anything in particular... even loading, apparently.


LOCK refers to locking a magazine, LOAD refers to injecting a round into the breach, Try to keep the fark up!

Also, it is well documented that Saddam's WMD Were moved to Syria, along with a lot of other shiat.

What part of Treaties and Commitments to Turkey, Jordan, Israel, etc. NOT a US Problem? All you "Foriegn Policy" Geeks seem to forget shiat before you where born. Oil has nothing to do with it.

NATO is gonna play with their beard for a week when Israel and the US is ready and prepared to drop this shiat at the field and not let it get to 100K dead, have to Boots on the ground crap.
 
2012-12-05 08:45:57 PM

mr lawson: GAT_00: And if you are willing to stand by and saying that chemical warfare against civilians is simply a "problem" and even worse isn't our problem, then quite frankly I don't want to have anything to do with you. You're almost as bad as the people who would actually use these weapons.

Who are you gonna bomb? Both side are bad. One just slightly less than the other.
That is the problem. There doesn't seem to be a side that wants equal right for all.
Make no mistake I would not shed a single tear if the current president died. But this is the person who won their "election". They voted for him.


Ok, I am utterly done with you forever. This is the worst apologist shiat I've ever read.
 
2012-12-05 08:46:02 PM

JohnAnnArbor: His weapons were Soviet, French, German, and Chinese, in about that order. We have him jack shiat; we often were openly mocked, even by Britain, for trying to stop shipments of "innocuous" stuff (oil pipes that were turned into artillery pieces, for example). I know it's a lefty talking point that we armed Saddam, but just saying it doesn't make it true.


So you're saying we didn't sell him helicopters in the late 80's for Air-to ground operations in Iran that were then used against the Kurds?
 
2012-12-05 08:46:27 PM

MelGoesOnTour: Why am suddenly reminded of something I heard and ignored back when I was a kid, something in the Bible about Revelations and that "middle eastern" neck of the woods and all which might involve a "big bear"....


Is the bear hairy? Is the bear scary?
 
2012-12-05 08:46:46 PM
Don't GIS Halabja.
 
2012-12-05 08:47:39 PM
We need to do this gulf war 1 style, or Libya style. Completely crush their air power and offensive capability in 48 hrs and fly on home, let the resistance mop up.

We can't do a Bush 2 style anything. That guy was the farking anti-Midas, everything he touched turned to failure and mediocrity.
 
2012-12-05 08:47:40 PM

UseUrHeadFred: [jaypgreene.files.wordpress.com image 618x347]

/Hot


That took longer than I expected.
 
2012-12-05 08:47:43 PM

Mad_Radhu: GAT_00: Repeating myself since this might go green:

U.S. officials stressed that as of now, the sarin bombs hadn't been loaded onto planes and that Assad hadn't issued a final order to use them. But if he does, one of the officials said, "there's little the outside world can do to stop it."

No Fly Zone

That could be a lot of fun if the F-22s are actually up and running okay for now. I'm curious to see what they would be like when let off the leash, because an air superiority fighter that you can't see coming is something that should be pants wettingly scary for a military that has to go up against them.

Of course, that is assuming that the F-22 can manage to not asphyxiate its pilot in the process. Last I head it was actually squeezing them to unconsciousness with the G-suits somehow.


When I was in Israel, someone pointed out that mach1 from north to south is something like 1.2 seconds. -haven't looked at a map recently but I can't imagine what it is for Syria.

Then taking to mind that in modern aerial dogfights, aircraft are miles apart, the spacing just boggles my mind. Can they go far over the Mediterranean without triggering some type of incidents?
 
2012-12-05 08:48:04 PM
Funny how this story has been reported widely and with such veracity. From what I hear, Assad's jets are getting knocked out with AA missiles and his artillery is hell and gone from the fighting.

He must be planning to deliver the chemical weapons by truck.
 
2012-12-05 08:48:13 PM

bulldg4life: I haven't kept up on the outrage, but is the GOP angry that Obama is doing too much or not enough?


Yes!
 
2012-12-05 08:48:58 PM

denbroc: Dr.Zom: Assad has nothing to lose at this point - he's going down and he's taking as many people as he can with him.

We need some ninjas to sneak in and take hims out quickly. We have ninjas, right?



[images.popmatters.com image 500x250]

Ninjas.
Check.


The seals aren't ninjas. They'd probably beat the ninjas is certain contests, and fail miserably in others. Even with the technology, SEALs aren't inteligence gathering spies. Ninja, on the other hand, would probably not pass the SEAL physical test on the first try. Running and climbing is a lot different in full body armor with guns and ammo strapped on.
 
2012-12-05 08:49:08 PM

WTF Indeed: JohnAnnArbor: His weapons were Soviet, French, German, and Chinese, in about that order. We have him jack shiat; we often were openly mocked, even by Britain, for trying to stop shipments of "innocuous" stuff (oil pipes that were turned into artillery pieces, for example). I know it's a lefty talking point that we armed Saddam, but just saying it doesn't make it true.

So you're saying we didn't sell him helicopters in the late 80's for Air-to ground operations in Iran that were then used against the Kurds?


Um, they flew Soviet and French aircraft. Not American. Iran had American stuff, pre-revolution stuff plus reloads from arms for hostages (remember that?).
 
2012-12-05 08:49:10 PM

atomic-age: MelGoesOnTour: Why am suddenly reminded of something I heard and ignored back when I was a kid, something in the Bible about Revelations and that "middle eastern" neck of the woods and all which might involve a "big bear"....

Is the bear hairy? Is the bear scary?


YES

upload.wikimedia.org

nothing about this will end well. not for us, not for mr. weak chin assad, not for no one nowhere, no sirree.
 
2012-12-05 08:49:40 PM

pciszek: Someone mentioned that Russia has major interests in Syria. Would they be likely to defend the current government, or decide that the current government has become a liability and try to take them out quickly?


Russia has a major strategic naval base which they lease in Syria and have extensively developed. Being the practical folks that they are, the Russians are unlikely to give a rat's ass who's in charge as long as they are left alone.
 
2012-12-05 08:50:07 PM
God-is-a-Taco:
upload.wikimedia.org

...

ryanleak.com 

/A golf clap for you sir.
 
2012-12-05 08:50:11 PM

mr lawson: Mentat: I think we've tried that a few dozen times already. Doesn't seem to help.

Maybe not, but it doesn't cost us a trillion dollars and thousands of US lives for the same results.



WW II had no costs in US dollars and US lives? We sat out of it while Europe burned because it was "not our problem"?

Syria has been going at it for awhile now. The British should have intervened, but I suppose they sit on their hands because, well simply Blair and his association with the war drumming for Iraq.

The use of Chemical Weapons will lead to a greater escalation in Syria and the region around it. We can try and prevent that escalation or we can sit back say "not our problem" and be sucked into a much larger problem later on.

This is a truly worrisome problem. It can not be underestimated. This is why SS Clinton is warning Asssad of the implications of a decision to use these weapons. If he does use them, expect to see a very large retaliation, most likely by the US, possibly NATO, or maybe the British, if they ever find their balls again.

Ah look at this Britian is stepping up:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/9721126/Br i tain-has-directly-warned-Assad-of-immediate-response-if-Syria-uses-che mical-weapons.html

Good.
 
2012-12-05 08:50:25 PM

GAT_00: Ok, I am utterly done with you forever. This is the worst apologist shiat I've ever read.


Sigh..ok fine. Take out all planes, mobile rockets, hell..take out syrians entire millitary and the president.
Then what?
 
2012-12-05 08:50:34 PM

smells_like_meat: pciszek: Someone mentioned that Russia has major interests in Syria. Would they be likely to defend the current government, or decide that the current government has become a liability and try to take them out quickly?

Russia has a major strategic naval base which they lease in Syria and have extensively developed. Being the practical folks that they are, the Russians are unlikely to give a rat's ass who's in charge as long as they are left alone.


Nor do they care how many die. They're very--what's the word--"practical."
 
2012-12-05 08:51:17 PM

WTF Indeed: How many Arab countries do we need to bomb until we get one for free?


Bwaaaaahahaha
 
2012-12-05 08:51:22 PM

Gyrfalcon: Anyone know if little brother Maher al-Assad is still among the living? It's kind of important, since he was the head of the military and secret police, and he'd be the one actually ordering the bombing if he's still alive. Also, there were indications Assad was willing to step down in favor of Maher earlier this year...before the Damascus bombing in July.

If Assad's back is as against the wall as this nerve-gas threat seems to indicate, then maybe the US should be interested. The last thing we need is ANOTHER unsupported power vacuum in the Middle East. Not saying we should get involved, but maybe we want to see what Turkey and Jordan are going to do.


What I'm hoping for is that the Arab countries (Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, etc.) actually intervene. It's as much their problem as ours -- and they should be very concerned should Assad launch a chemical attack on anyone and any chemical weapon land anywhere within Israeli territory. I wouldn't put it past him to do that intentionally, and I don't think any of the other ME countries would want that to happen, either, under ANY circumstances.
 
2012-12-05 08:51:39 PM

GAT_00: Lsherm: Where do we base the no-fly enforcement out of?

Hmm, I wonder what kind of ally we have in the area that we've given lots of weapons to? Oh right, Israel. And Turkey is in NATO and has been supporting the rebels for months. And we have a few bases in Saudi Arabia.

Nah, there's nowhere to base out of.


Can you read?
 
2012-12-05 08:51:59 PM

Popcorn Johnny: Reports are the the USS Eisenhower is sitting of the coast of Syria, ready to strike.


TROLL OR MORON, I pick the Later!
 
2012-12-05 08:52:11 PM

MelGoesOnTour: Why am suddenly reminded of something I heard and ignored back when I was a kid, something in the Bible about Revelations and that "middle eastern" neck of the woods and all which might involve a "big bear"....


Because that book was written in the Mideast so it's unlikely that the authors would set the final battle to determine the fate of the world in Kansas.
 
2012-12-05 08:52:17 PM

JustinCase: When I was in Israel, someone pointed out that mach1 from north to south is something like 1.2 seconds. -haven't looked at a map recently but I can't imagine what it is for Syria.


1.2 seconds at Mach 1 is slightly over 4 football fields in length. Mach 1 is roughly a mile per five seconds.
 
2012-12-05 08:53:04 PM

SilentStrider: Mentat: We found the WMD's! Woo hoo!

Only nine years too late.


I'm still not sure why they didn't just plant some.
 
2012-12-05 08:53:14 PM

just_intonation: Gyrfalcon: Anyone know if little brother Maher al-Assad is still among the living? It's kind of important, since he was the head of the military and secret police, and he'd be the one actually ordering the bombing if he's still alive. Also, there were indications Assad was willing to step down in favor of Maher earlier this year...before the Damascus bombing in July.

If Assad's back is as against the wall as this nerve-gas threat seems to indicate, then maybe the US should be interested. The last thing we need is ANOTHER unsupported power vacuum in the Middle East. Not saying we should get involved, but maybe we want to see what Turkey and Jordan are going to do.

What I'm hoping for is that the Arab countries (Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, etc.) actually intervene. It's as much their problem as ours -- and they should be very concerned should Assad launch a chemical attack on anyone and any chemical weapon land anywhere within Israeli territory. I wouldn't put it past him to do that intentionally, and I don't think any of the other ME countries would want that to happen, either, under ANY circumstances.


Turkey isn't Arab, as I'm sure Turks and Arabs would both love to point out at some length.
 
2012-12-05 08:53:17 PM

JohnAnnArbor: Um, they flew Soviet and French aircraft. Not American. Iran had American stuff, pre-revolution stuff plus reloads from arms for hostages (remember that?).


Study it out.

Link
Link
Link
 
2012-12-05 08:53:21 PM
Any one else think Assad might send a few towards Israel? If he going to go for a hail Mary type move, attacking Israel with chemical weapons, declaring holy war, and calling for all Islamic people to join them could start a wider mid-east war. Of course sparking that greater middle eastern war would require Israel to respond to chemical weapon attacks by using nuclear weapons on Syria, but I don't think Assad cares.

He knows he's dead if he uses gas. Why not gas the Jews.

/if he survives he would be a hero to many Muslims
//and be welcome in exile in many Islamic nations
 
2012-12-05 08:53:30 PM

doglover: denbroc: Dr.Zom: Assad has nothing to lose at this point - he's going down and he's taking as many people as he can with him.

We need some ninjas to sneak in and take hims out quickly. We have ninjas, right?



[images.popmatters.com image 500x250]

Ninjas.
Check.

The seals aren't ninjas. They'd probably beat the ninjas is certain contests, and fail miserably in others. Even with the technology, SEALs aren't inteligence gathering spies. Ninja, on the other hand, would probably not pass the SEAL physical test on the first try. Running and climbing is a lot different in full body armor with guns and ammo strapped on.


So....House of Sinanju?
 
2012-12-05 08:54:02 PM

cman: cameroncrazy1984: cman: Syria is not the United States. Syria is a sovereign nation who is filled with people known as Syrians.

Sure, it would horrify me, but unless Syria commits some sort of military attack upon us, we should not get involved. This is Syria's problem. Syria has to work this out with themselves

This may shock you, but Syria does not exist in a self-contained little bubble.

I know that.

But as the saying goes "Those who fail to learn history are destined to repeat it" needs to be heeded. The last time we got involved in another nations civil war, Vietnam, 56000 US troops were killed and 2 million Vietnamese were killed as well. All of that was to prevent the Vietnamese from taking care of a Vietnamese problem, their right for self determination.

I dont like genocide, I dont; but sometimes we can make a problem much worse by getting involved in things that we shouldnt.


But those two civil wars weren't like this one. There were no chemical weapons (well, that we didn't introduce) in Vietnam, and there were none in Iraq. Then again, we were told there were.
 
2012-12-05 08:54:05 PM
Brown people...
 
2012-12-05 08:54:16 PM

mr lawson: GAT_00: Ok, I am utterly done with you forever. This is the worst apologist shiat I've ever read.

Sigh..ok fine. Take out all planes, mobile rockets, hell..take out syrians entire millitary and the president.
Then what?


You know, we kind of have a blueprint with Libya. You might have heard something about that.
 
2012-12-05 08:54:26 PM

Linkster: Oznog: TFA: The nerve agents were locked and loaded inside the bombs. 

OK, I had to look this up. I know what "load" means, but WTF is "lock"??

Apparently the term is made up. Well, it's not a range command and "lock and load" doesn't seem to refer to anything in particular... even loading, apparently.

LOCK refers to locking a magazine, LOAD refers to injecting a round into the breach, Try to keep the fark up!

 

Well the phrase is said to originate around the M1 Garand. If you put the clip in but didn't chamber a round, wouldn't you still call it "loaded"? I'd say putting a clip into it makes it pretty darn "loaded", terminology-wise. It's not like you really need to instruct people to put a clip in the weapon before going into combat... at least I hope not.
 
2012-12-05 08:54:40 PM

tlchwi02: mr lawson: Repeat after me Fark.

NOT.. OUR ....FARKING.... PROBLEM!

bingo. i don't care who owns that crappy section of desert as long as i didnt have to pay for it. i realize thats callous and cruel to say, but why should more of my friends die on the other side of the globe to try and sort things out in favor of a group who are no more fond of us than assad.


I've never quoted for truth before but I guess there is always a first time. Not our business, not our problem to solve. Let them sort it out for themselves. We need a Star Trek style prime directive. Unless another country attacks us directly, we need to keep our long noses and fat arses out of it.
 
2012-12-05 08:55:16 PM

mr lawson: Repeat after me Fark.

NOT.. OUR ....FARKING.... PROBLEM!


Except that it is our problem. We are a member of the world community. Atrocities cannot be ignored.
 
2012-12-05 08:56:47 PM

johnnyrocket: Except that it is our problem. We are a member of the world community. Atrocities cannot be ignored.


What about the ignore list?
 
2012-12-05 08:56:52 PM

erik-k: JustinCase: When I was in Israel, someone pointed out that mach1 from north to south is something like 1.2 seconds. -haven't looked at a map recently but I can't imagine what it is for Syria.

1.2 seconds at Mach 1 is slightly over 4 football fields in length. Mach 1 is roughly a mile per five seconds.


I was told there would be no math, cause your math SUCKS!
 
2012-12-05 08:57:10 PM
Let them use them BEFORE we act. I don't want to give the jib-jibs more "proof" that we are just going around indiscriminately killing Arabs for no reason; especially if I'm going to have to be one of the people who has to go do it.
 
2012-12-05 08:57:11 PM

Mentat: You know, we kind of have a blueprint with Libya. You might have heard something about that.


If I thought for a second it would work, I would be all in.
 
2012-12-05 08:57:22 PM
Sarin?
Better send Nick Cage in.

/Do you know how this shiat works?
//I'd take pleasure in guttin you, boy.
 
2012-12-05 08:57:56 PM
The problem with Syria is that government is seated in Damascus and the rebels are making trouble in the north and there's sandy desert in between.

Just another problem caused by map makers in the past that locked governments into stupid boundaries but no one wants to give up power that would be involved in redistricting the maps.

It's as if the region was gerrymandered to create the most strife.
 
2012-12-05 08:57:59 PM

Omahawg: atomic-age: MelGoesOnTour: Why am suddenly reminded of something I heard and ignored back when I was a kid, something in the Bible about Revelations and that "middle eastern" neck of the woods and all which might involve a "big bear"....

Is the bear hairy? Is the bear scary?

YES

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x299]

nothing about this will end well. not for us, not for mr. weak chin assad, not for no one nowhere, no sirree.


That hirsute gentleman looks friendly.
 
2012-12-05 08:58:16 PM

kinkkerbelle: I've never quoted for truth before but I guess there is always a first time. Not our business, not our problem to solve. Let them sort it out for themselves. We need a Star Trek style prime directive. Unless another country attacks us directly, we need to keep our long noses and fat arses out of it.


Like it or not, we are the world's superpower and sometimes that means you have to deal with stuff like this. I'm not a chickenhawk aching for war. I would just as soon stay out. But sometimes, we have to deal with shiat that no one else wants to touch. If chemical weapons start flying, all bets are off. We can't just ignore it and hope that it will all work itself out.
 
2012-12-05 08:58:30 PM

johnnyrocket: mr lawson: Repeat after me Fark.

NOT.. OUR ....FARKING.... PROBLEM!

Except that it is our problem. We are a member of the world community. Atrocities cannot be ignored.


unless they are in africa?
 
2012-12-05 08:59:00 PM

cman: cman: cameroncrazy1984: cman: Look what happened with Bush and Iraq. Mushroom Cloud Smoking Gun, remember that? This doesnt concern us

Wait, how is this in any way similar to Iraq?

Because, remember, Saddam Hussein had WMD's and was committing genocide against his own people, right? We were played for fools then; lets not get played for fools now.

media.tumblr.com

^^^ Never thought he would agree with cman ^^^


SUCKERS!

 
2012-12-05 08:59:02 PM

BigBooper: Any one else think Assad might send a few towards Israel? If he going to go for a hail Mary type move, attacking Israel with chemical weapons, declaring holy war, and calling for all Islamic people to join them could start a wider mid-east war. Of course sparking that greater middle eastern war would require Israel to respond to chemical weapon attacks by using nuclear weapons on Syria, but I don't think Assad cares.

He knows he's dead if he uses gas. Why not gas the Jews.

/if he survives he would be a hero to many Muslims
//and be welcome in exile in many Islamic nations


If Assad attacked Israel with Sarin, you can bet that there would be a STRONGLY worded letter of reprimand from the UN that would go into their PERMANENT file.

Maybe.
 
2012-12-05 08:59:30 PM
The BBC broadcast this on the evening news tonight... but they were just citing the same source I think.

The risk here is of course a conflict which spreads through the region. (Unless you are Syrian of course and have bigger fish to fry) The region is so unstable it's always a concern if something like dense. urban chem attacks occur. The Kurds were a different matter... mostly rural compared to a large Syrian city, and what about 5,000 people killed. A Sarin attack from truly militarized delivery system on a dense urban population would be potentially devastating to the entire region, not to mention to the Syrian civilian population.

The US would have virtually no choice but to intervene.
 
2012-12-05 08:59:50 PM

Bit'O'Gristle: The military has loaded the precursor chemicals for sarin, a deadly nerve gas, into aerial bombs that could be dropped onto the Syrian people from dozens of fighter-bombers, the officials said.

Initial symptoms following exposure to sarin are a runny nose, tightness in the chest and constriction of the pupils. Soon after, the victim has difficulty breathing and experiences nausea and drooling. As the victim continues to lose control of bodily functions, the victim vomits, defecates and urinates. This phase is followed by twitching and jerking. Ultimately, the victim becomes comatose and suffocates in a series of convulsive spasms.

ya..you guys bring this to the table, and it's all over biatches. You're going to get raped. Don't even think about it.


To be fair, I experienced the same symptoms watching 'Twilight'.
 
2012-12-05 08:59:51 PM

Mentat: f. We can't just ignore it


We did that once with chemical weapons, on top of various other genocide we've ignored, it never works out well for anyone in the long term.
 
2012-12-05 08:59:54 PM

bim1154: The U.S. won't do shiat if they start using that crap other than wording strong letters of disapproval.


It won't be in our hands.
We've got a NATO member next door and a half a dozen allies less than a stones throw from this mess. If Assad starts lobbing gas, everyone downwind is gonna get awfully angry and demand something be done. Even if it means WWIII.

Russia is going to have to wear her big girl britches and either put Syria in its place or disown the situation. They won't back the use of chemical weapons.
They need to leash this guy, ASAP.
 
2012-12-05 09:00:06 PM

WTF Indeed: JohnAnnArbor: Um, they flew Soviet and French aircraft. Not American. Iran had American stuff, pre-revolution stuff plus reloads from arms for hostages (remember that?).

Study it out.

Link
Link
Link


Interesting. (Really.) But, still proves out the point: the vast majority of their military hardware was Soviet and French. Looks like we shipped them three varieties of goofy light scout helicopters and one larger variety. The actual militarily-useful stuff was Soviet and French. (Ideally, we shouldn't have sent crap like that at all, of course.)
 
2012-12-05 09:00:25 PM

Oznog: TFA: The nerve agents were locked and loaded inside the bombs. 

OK, I had to look this up. I know what "load" means, but WTF is "lock"??

Apparently the term is made up. Well, it's not a range command and "lock and load" doesn't seem to refer to anything in particular... even loading, apparently.


"Lock and load" was GI slang for mimicking our Vietnamese allies saying "rock and roll."

/true story
//not really, just made it up
/// should be on snopes within a fortnight
 
2012-12-05 09:00:30 PM
Oh yes they did gurl, they are really trying it!
 
2012-12-05 09:00:59 PM

johnnyrocket:
Except that it is our problem. We are a member of the world community. Atrocities cannot be ignored.


"We" ignore them all the time. Where's your protest for the DNC or any other mass violence surely going on elsewhere in the world?
People about this one because someone on Facebook linked it to them and that chick you like hit "like" so you need to read up on it so you can totally break the ice the next time you see her.
 
2012-12-05 09:01:22 PM

DblDad: If true, then this is a nightmare - but I want to see a source cited other than "U.S. officials." I can't find any mention of this on the BBC, other British sites, Al Jazeera English, or other Middle Eastern news sites. The only other mention outside of the US media was from the Jerusalem Post. I'd think that if weapons had been loaded then the world media would be all over this.


Point.

I didn't look hard but the only BBC mention I found was from 12/3 mentioning a warning from America.
 
2012-12-05 09:01:25 PM

Omahawg: johnnyrocket: mr lawson: Repeat after me Fark.

NOT.. OUR ....FARKING.... PROBLEM!

Except that it is our problem. We are a member of the world community. Atrocities cannot be ignored.

unless they are in africa?



Our only interest is how this might affect Israel.


/Or is Israel the source of this "intelligence" - like it was in the case with Iraq?
 
2012-12-05 09:03:59 PM
I predict the outcome of chemical weapons from the Assad regime to go something like this:

All NATO countries become enraged, something something bombs, Syria is freed.
 
2012-12-05 09:03:59 PM

JohnAnnArbor: just_intonation: Gyrfalcon: Anyone know if little brother Maher al-Assad is still among the living? It's kind of important, since he was the head of the military and secret police, and he'd be the one actually ordering the bombing if he's still alive. Also, there were indications Assad was willing to step down in favor of Maher earlier this year...before the Damascus bombing in July.

If Assad's back is as against the wall as this nerve-gas threat seems to indicate, then maybe the US should be interested. The last thing we need is ANOTHER unsupported power vacuum in the Middle East. Not saying we should get involved, but maybe we want to see what Turkey and Jordan are going to do.

What I'm hoping for is that the Arab countries (Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, etc.) actually intervene. It's as much their problem as ours -- and they should be very concerned should Assad launch a chemical attack on anyone and any chemical weapon land anywhere within Israeli territory. I wouldn't put it past him to do that intentionally, and I don't think any of the other ME countries would want that to happen, either, under ANY circumstances.

Turkey isn't Arab, as I'm sure Turks and Arabs would both love to point out at some length.


True. I should have said 'Middle Eastern' throughout. But no one would deny that they have a common interest here.
 
2012-12-05 09:03:59 PM

mr lawson: Mentat: You know, we kind of have a blueprint with Libya. You might have heard something about that.

If I thought for a second it would work, I would be all in.


Um, it did work. That's the point.
 
2012-12-05 09:04:00 PM

Grand_Moff_Joseph: The Muthaship: About to cross the U.S.'s red line. What's one more war....

Fair point, but the use of chemical or biological weapons should be a red line for the entire world, not just America. No one even thinks of using these kinds of weapons for anything other than genocide, and humanity has a duty to itself to stop such insanity from coming to bear.


I try not to be a jingoistic idiot, but in my opinion telling the world that a nuclear strike on any site preparing chemical weapons for use is a virtual certainty would not be out of line
 
2012-12-05 09:04:01 PM

jaybeezey: what's one more country that's just going to end up under Sharia Law anyway?


That's "Arab Spring" to you, sonny Jim.

/twitter and Facebook will sort it all out in the end
 
2012-12-05 09:04:06 PM

Lsherm: GAT_00: Lsherm: Where do we base the no-fly enforcement out of?

Hmm, I wonder what kind of ally we have in the area that we've given lots of weapons to? Oh right, Israel. And Turkey is in NATO and has been supporting the rebels for months. And we have a few bases in Saudi Arabia.

Nah, there's nowhere to base out of.

Can you read?


Your reasons are fairly superficial. You just dismiss that we can't use those places. The Iraqi zones were run from Saudi Arabia and Turkey. While Saudi Arabia may be farther, what legitimate reason can you give that we patrolled Northern Iraq from Turkey but can't patrol Syria?
 
2012-12-05 09:04:15 PM

vartian: cman: So another war in the middle east for us then, right?

You'd rather watch genocide in HD on the nightly news?


But, we can't judge. Can't judge. We're "no better" and we've got people here that we need to take care of "here at home".
 
2012-12-05 09:04:29 PM

Oznog: Linkster: Oznog: TFA: The nerve agents were locked and loaded inside the bombs. 

OK, I had to look this up. I know what "load" means, but WTF is "lock"??

Apparently the term is made up. Well, it's not a range command and "lock and load" doesn't seem to refer to anything in particular... even loading, apparently.

LOCK refers to locking a magazine, LOAD refers to injecting a round into the breach, Try to keep the fark up! 

Well the phrase is said to originate around the M1 Garand. If you put the clip in but didn't chamber a round, wouldn't you still call it "loaded"? I'd say putting a clip into it makes it pretty darn "loaded", terminology-wise. It's not like you really need to instruct people to put a clip in the weapon before going into combat... at least I hope not.


My dad was drafted for WWII. He said they had a drill instructor who could not pronounce the letter 'L' and instead exhorted them to "Rock and road!"
 
2012-12-05 09:04:32 PM

wildcardjack: It's as if the region was gerrymandered to create the most strife.


That's basically exactly what the British did when they cast off their colonies in the region, and in Africa: "If we can't have it, let's just draw the lines on the map so the natives are guaranteed to be at each other's throats forever, then at least there won't be any competitors arising from the region."

In short, the British successfully tricked an appreciable fraction of earth's entire surface into a neverending flamewar with itself and escaped virtually unscathed by comparison, making the Royal Family probably the most enormously successful trolls of all time.
 
2012-12-05 09:04:37 PM
the war won't last long. They don't have much we want. Granted they produce/export oil but nothing (as far as I can tell) like Iran. They do import machinery and the like but all in all they don't seem to be a huge economic powerhouse in the region.
So again, not much there to take or get rid of so it should be quick Bomb the snot out of govt offices- ruin the airforce, dismantle any other armed services and the secret police and we're done. Oh and give Assad what'shisname bus fare to The Hague.

Link
 
2012-12-05 09:04:46 PM

Linkster: Popcorn Johnny: Reports are the the USS Eisenhower is sitting of the coast of Syria, ready to strike.

TROLL OR MORON, I pick the Later!


LOL what?
 
2012-12-05 09:05:15 PM

erik-k: JustinCase: When I was in Israel, someone pointed out that mach1 from north to south is something like 1.2 seconds. -haven't looked at a map recently but I can't imagine what it is for Syria.

1.2 seconds at Mach 1 is slightly over 4 football fields in length. Mach 1 is roughly a mile per five seconds.


Wow, I was WAY off.

Could you elaborate on where any potential aerial dogfights might take place without flying over a neighboring country?
 
2012-12-05 09:05:36 PM
I have a solution that should eliminate the middle east.
www.maniacworld.com
 
2012-12-05 09:06:27 PM

Mentat: Like it or not, we are the world's superpower and sometimes that means you have to deal with stuff like this. I'm not a chickenhawk aching for war. I would just as soon stay out. But sometimes, we have to deal with shiat that no one else wants to touch. If chemical weapons start flying, all bets are off. We can't just ignore it and hope that it will all work itself out.


Please believe me when i say I understand and appreciate that rational. I hate the idea of standing by while thousands are murdered.But there are no good side vs bad side. Just bad vs a little less bad.
 
2012-12-05 09:06:46 PM

david_gaithersburg: Obama makes his yellow cake speech in 3.....2.....1


He can't. No matter what the intellegence is he can't make that speech because it'll make him Bush. He has to wait until thousands are dead before he can make that speech. He knows it and Assad knows it. Assad also knows that Obama, in an attempt to not look like Bush, will take this before the UN, where Russia and China will foul up the works. All that will come out of that will be a light punative action.
 
2012-12-05 09:07:40 PM

mr lawson: But there are no good side vs bad side.


Stopping genocide if it starts happening makes you default good. It's all situational, no one is perfect and a lack of perfection is no excuse for sitting back.
 
2012-12-05 09:07:43 PM

JohnAnnArbor: Interesting. (Really.) But, still proves out the point: the vast majority of their military hardware was Soviet and French. Looks like we shipped them three varieties of goofy light scout helicopters and one larger variety. The actual militarily-useful stuff was Soviet and French. (Ideally, we shouldn't have sent crap like that at all, of course.)


You see, back in the 80's Iraq was at war with Iran. We sold them them following:

Link
 
2012-12-05 09:07:54 PM
Obama and Hilary have certainly made the world a safer place. By talking to these leaders, we will see that they desire peace as well. Our relationships with Russia, Isreal, Egypt and the UK are stronger than ever.
 
2012-12-05 09:07:58 PM

atomic-age: My dad was drafted for WWII. He said they had a drill instructor who could not pronounce the letter 'L' and instead exhorted them to "Rock and road!"


ROR
 
2012-12-05 09:08:18 PM
An amazingly accurate prediction put in game format. An oldie but a goodie. I remember "playing" this 10 years ago and laughing my head off and thinking "yep that sounds about right". They even got the order of Egypt and Syria correct.

GULF WAR 2.0
 
2012-12-05 09:09:06 PM

WTFDYW: I've said it before eleventy times. I'll say it again. Let them the guy with the chemical weapons kill themselves the unarmed civilian population. They seem to LOVE this shiat.

 
2012-12-05 09:09:58 PM

roughridersfan: cameroncrazy1984: JohnAnnArbor: Nancy Pelosi put on a cute headscarf and did freelance diplomacy (in violation of the law, but who cares about that) in Syria while Bush was in office

No, because that never happened.

[ginacobb.typepad.com image 350x498]

Link (New Window) 

"We came in friendship, hope, and determined that the road to Damascus is a road to peace," Pelosi told reporters after her talks with Assad.


PWND!
 
2012-12-05 09:10:33 PM
Anyone hear what the alleged SOURCE of this "intelligence" is?
 
2012-12-05 09:10:38 PM
So, that's where those pesky Iraq WMD's went.

www.sondrak.com
 
2012-12-05 09:10:48 PM

mr lawson: Please believe me when i say I understand and appreciate that rational. I hate the idea of standing by while thousands are murdered.But there are no good side vs bad side. Just bad vs a little less bad.


Then don't put it in terms of good vs bad. Put it in terms of enlightened self-interest. It is not in our nation's best interest for this civil war to escalate to the use of chemical weapons. There is too much danger of the war expanding beyond Syria's borders and dragging in our allies. It would be better for us to deal with it on our terms rather than to allow the situation to escalate beyond our control. We have a blueprint for dealing with this situation that doesn't involve boots on the ground or anyone greeting us as liberators. If it comes to it, we should act.
 
2012-12-05 09:11:01 PM

erik-k: In short, the British successfully tricked an appreciable fraction of earth's entire surface into a neverending flamewar with itself and escaped virtually unscathed by comparison, making the Royal Family probably the most enormously successful trolls of all time.


To say this is to assume that the Africans have no moral agency of their own -- i.e. that if Africans have only to be provoked in a certain way to automatically cause them to commit genocide against each other, through no fault of their own. If the map of the United States were to be rejiggered tomorrow by an outside power so that there were only 13 irregularly- shaped states instead of the current 57 (sic) would you Americans all suddenly go apesh*t and start killing each other? I mean Texans might, but everyone else? Colonialism gets the blame for all of Africa's and Middle East's problems, but ethnic strife has raged in these regions since time immemorial and the excuse is wearing a bit thin.
 
2012-12-05 09:11:08 PM
My stomach hurts. Damn, we've turned this world into a cesspool.
 
2012-12-05 09:11:29 PM

cman: cameroncrazy1984: cman: Look what happened with Bush and Iraq. Mushroom Cloud Smoking Gun, remember that? This doesnt concern us

Wait, how is this in any way similar to Iraq?

Because, remember, Saddam Hussein had WMD's and was committing genocide against his own people, right? We were played for fools then; lets not get played for fools now.


Big difference between invading and conquering a country and establishing a no-fly zone. A few air patrols from manned aircraft and drones could stop most chemical weapons use, since those weapons need to be delivered by aircraft or missile. This could be done like Libya; no American boots on the ground, no Americans hurt, and no WMDs launched.
 
2012-12-05 09:12:11 PM

pedobearapproved: Assad also knows that Obama,


Obama had no problem calling in Seal Team Six on bin Laden. If there's an air craft carrier out in the waters near Syria, then if any sort of nerve agent or other chemical agent starts being used, there's not going to be much waiting around.
 
2012-12-05 09:13:05 PM

WTF Indeed: To be fair, he was killing his own people with the WMDs we gave him in the 1980's. So that was more a test to see how well our weapons held up over time.


This old thing again.
Please show one relevant document that show 'we gave him WMD's', other than agricultural samples.
Actual weapons? Just one reliable document.

C'mon...I know you can do it.
 
2012-12-05 09:13:26 PM

PirateKing: Weren't people bragging about missiles that can land in some guy's coffee cup from a thousand miles away? Why don't we just use those?


need a bigger boom than those can deliver. just blowing up the site risks releasing the chemical agents. This calls for a strike by FAE (fuel air explosives) or a "Daisy cutter" 16,000 lb conventional bomb or a small nuke so you guarantee you cook off the bad shiat at the site in the ensuing inferno.

Ugly to be sure but so is nerve gas
 
2012-12-05 09:13:31 PM
Damascus, Syria is about 10 minutes airtime from the USS Eisenhower. Slightly longer, not much, from our bases in Iraq, Jordan and Turkey. The power of a carrier group is hard to imagine. If we wanted, his airfields would be cratered and useless in 11 minutes. Any planes in the air would be dark spots on the ground in 12. This is not "USA, USA, USA ITG posturing. Its the reality of our air power.

He can't win. He can't even kill his own people. Unless we let him.
 
2012-12-05 09:13:45 PM
they really didnt...
 
2012-12-05 09:14:29 PM

MorrisBird: My stomach hurts. Damn, we've turned this world into a cesspool.


Well, who's we?
 
2012-12-05 09:15:10 PM
Didnt his daddy gas one of his cities also?
 
2012-12-05 09:15:46 PM
I'm in the camp that we're obligated to help where we can, and if we don't, we're cowards. I also think everyone who would stand by is a coward, and has no real humanity about them. I understand why they say it, but I don't understand how their hearts can be so cold.
 
2012-12-05 09:16:24 PM

smells_like_meat: Damascus, Syria is about 10 minutes airtime from the USS Eisenhower. Slightly longer, not much, from our bases in Iraq, Jordan and Turkey. The power of a carrier group is hard to imagine. If we wanted, his airfields would be cratered and useless in 11 minutes. Any planes in the air would be dark spots on the ground in 12. This is not "USA, USA, USA ITG posturing. Its the reality of our air power.

He can't win. He can't even kill his own people. Unless we let him.


Doesn't mean we'll use it.
 
2012-12-05 09:16:35 PM

Mentat: Then don't put it in terms of good vs bad. Put it in terms of enlightened self-interest. It is not in our nation's best interest for this civil war to escalate to the use of chemical weapons. There is too much danger of the war expanding beyond Syria's borders and dragging in our allies. It would be better for us to deal with it on our terms rather than to allow the situation to escalate beyond our control. We have a blueprint for dealing with this situation that doesn't involve boots on the ground or anyone greeting us as liberators. If it comes to it, we should act.


If we can achieve those goals with a limited amount of involvement, the so be it. If, however, another land war spanning 10+ years is on the table forget it.
Deal?
 
2012-12-05 09:17:03 PM

WTF Indeed: JohnAnnArbor: Interesting. (Really.) But, still proves out the point: the vast majority of their military hardware was Soviet and French. Looks like we shipped them three varieties of goofy light scout helicopters and one larger variety. The actual militarily-useful stuff was Soviet and French. (Ideally, we shouldn't have sent crap like that at all, of course.)

You see, back in the 80's Iraq was at war with Iran. We sold them them following:

Link


..............which still proves only that we thought it was convenient for two nations we didn't like to shoot at each other for a while. Red on red is what it's called.

The central point stands: by far, the VAST majority of their stuff was Soviet and French. Saying "we armed Saddam" is about as accurate as "we armed Japan before WWII." We sold Japan a few P-35s, but they made the vast majority of their own stuff.
 
2012-12-05 09:17:31 PM

Marine1: MorrisBird: My stomach hurts. Damn, we've turned this world into a cesspool.

Well, who's we?


The human race. My dog merely wants steak.
 
2012-12-05 09:17:34 PM
There were a lot of lies leading up to our latest fling in Iraq.

You remember them, don't you?

But I'm sure we can safely believe all that we are told.

Now.
 
2012-12-05 09:17:56 PM

brandent: An amazingly accurate prediction put in game format. An oldie but a goodie. I remember "playing" this 10 years ago and laughing my head off and thinking "yep that sounds about right". They even got the order of Egypt and Syria correct.

GULF WAR 2.0


Baghdad Crater has been liberated!
 
2012-12-05 09:18:51 PM

EvilRacistNaziFascist: jaybeezey: what's one more country that's just going to end up under Sharia Law anyway?

That's "Arab Spring" to you, sonny Jim.

/twitter and Facebook will sort it all out in the end


We need a badge for this thread
 
2012-12-05 09:19:02 PM

mr lawson: Mentat: Then don't put it in terms of good vs bad. Put it in terms of enlightened self-interest. It is not in our nation's best interest for this civil war to escalate to the use of chemical weapons. There is too much danger of the war expanding beyond Syria's borders and dragging in our allies. It would be better for us to deal with it on our terms rather than to allow the situation to escalate beyond our control. We have a blueprint for dealing with this situation that doesn't involve boots on the ground or anyone greeting us as liberators. If it comes to it, we should act.

If we can achieve those goals with a limited amount of involvement, the so be it. If, however, another land war spanning 10+ years is on the table forget it.
Deal?


I agree with that.
 
2012-12-05 09:19:24 PM
Roosevelt had the same problem.

pedobearapproved: david_gaithersburg: Obama makes his yellow cake speech in 3.....2.....1

He can't. No matter what the intellegence is he can't make that speech because it'll make him Bush. He has to wait until thousands are dead before he can make that speech. He knows it and Assad knows it. Assad also knows that Obama, in an attempt to not look like Bush, will take this before the UN, where Russia and China will foul up the works. All that will come out of that will be a light punative action.



Obama does not need to make a Bush speech. He is not actively looking for the answer that always equals war. The Bush administration did not like diplomacy. They scuttled diplomatic efforts that had been underway for over a decade because of a righteous belief system. Prior to Iraq getting underway, Hussein had relented, but war was necessary in the eyes of the administration.

Obama has none of that. We are maintaining diplomatic relations, Britain is applying pressure and expect to see Russia doing so as well, with possibly Iran chiming in as well. Assad is about to become very isolated. Hopefully, he realizes his position and relents. The only ones against that would be other monarchies in the ME, they will become very nervous looking at their own ability to hold onto power.
 
2012-12-05 09:19:36 PM

YouPeopleAreCrazy: WTF Indeed: To be fair, he was killing his own people with the WMDs we gave him in the 1980's. So that was more a test to see how well our weapons held up over time.

This old thing again.
Please show one relevant document that show 'we gave him WMD's', other than agricultural samples.
Actual weapons? Just one reliable document.

C'mon...I know you can do it.


He found a few helicopters we sold Saddam (civil-grade, but still a surprise to me). No WMDs, not much else. But it doesn't take much to make extravagant claims if you have a philosophy that "US bad, must blame."
 
2012-12-05 09:19:37 PM

Brick-House: So, that's where those pesky Iraq WMD's went.

[www.sondrak.com image 434x297]


Are you sure that isn't the crowd at Burning Man leaving after the burn?
 
2012-12-05 09:19:40 PM
Muslims killing fellow Muslims in their own country.

I don't see the problem.
 
2012-12-05 09:19:49 PM

RealAmericanHero: I'm in the camp that we're obligated to help where we can, and if we don't, we're cowards. I also think everyone who would stand by is a coward, and has no real humanity about them. I understand why they say it, but I don't understand how their hearts can be so cold.



You assume that the information we have been given is accurate.

I assume that there are games afoot, and remain VERY skeptical.
 
2012-12-05 09:20:08 PM

JohnAnnArbor: The central point stands: by far, the VAST majority of their stuff was Soviet and French. Saying "we armed Saddam" is about as accurate as "we armed Japan before WWII." We sold Japan a few P-35s, but they made the vast majority of their own stuff.


Look buddy, we gave them arms, satellites, economic ad, and chemical weapons. We armed them. Just because you can't handle that fact doesn't mean I have change the inflection of the word "armed" to suit your need to feel better about whatever the f*ck you want to feel better about.
 
2012-12-05 09:20:23 PM

Amos Quito: There were a lot of lies leading up to our latest fling in Iraq.

You remember them, don't you?

But I'm sure we can safely believe all that we are told.

Now.


If Assad starts launching chemical weapons, then it's not a hypothetical anymore. That's the standard that President Obama set. We're not talking about invading a country based on imaginary WMD's.
 
2012-12-05 09:20:29 PM

Mentat: I agree with that.


Well congrats then. You converted me.
/Seriously tired of all of the bullshiat the M.E. produces.
 
2012-12-05 09:20:31 PM

johnnyrocket: Except that it is our problem. We are a member of the world community. Atrocities cannot be ignored.


Americans are rapidly running out of money to fix their own problems, and in any case atrocities are ignored every day whenever addressing them would be too dangerous or inconvenient (e.g. Darfur). Besides all of that, the US has a way of making things worse whenever it interferes militarily, with only occasional exceptions (such as the first Gulf War, arguably) -- even in WWII they ended up by helping Uncle Joe take over half of Europe.
 
2012-12-05 09:20:34 PM

GAT_00: Grand_Moff_Joseph: GAT_00: Repeating myself since this might go green:

U.S. officials stressed that as of now, the sarin bombs hadn't been loaded onto planes and that Assad hadn't issued a final order to use them. But if he does, one of the officials said, "there's little the outside world can do to stop it."

No Fly Zone

Pair that with a visits from Seal Team 6, some Green Berets, and some of fine folks from MI6, and we got ourselves an international ass kicking of a despot.

If he's doing this, he's already close to an ass kicking. This is a sign of desperation. The people should free themselves, we just make sure they can.


WOOO-HOOOOO, The Libbies are in charge now!! It's okay! The Obama controls the military now!! It's okay to invade countries now!! Let's go bomb the shiat out of Syria, and turn it into a pile of glass!!

Hypocritical libtards.

/against invading any country without provication.
 
2012-12-05 09:20:53 PM

JohnAnnArbor: cameroncrazy1984: JohnAnnArbor: cameroncrazy1984: JohnAnnArbor: Nancy Pelosi put on a cute headscarf and did freelance diplomacy (in violation of the law, but who cares about that) in Syria while Bush was in office

No, because that never happened.

ORLY?

/ya rly.

No, what I mean is it wasn't "in violation of the law"

Well, you're still a dumbass.


So a law that has never been used successfully in a single prosecution and is mainly pulled out as a threat of legal bludgeoning at politically opportune times... was pulled out at a politically opportune time and used as a threat of legal bludgeoning?

2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-12-05 09:21:37 PM
Oh, Motherfarker.
 
2012-12-05 09:22:10 PM

johncb76006: Muslims killing fellow Muslims in their own country.

I don't see the problem.


+ 1
 
2012-12-05 09:22:26 PM

Tumunga: GAT_00: Grand_Moff_Joseph: GAT_00: Repeating myself since this might go green:

U.S. officials stressed that as of now, the sarin bombs hadn't been loaded onto planes and that Assad hadn't issued a final order to use them. But if he does, one of the officials said, "there's little the outside world can do to stop it."

No Fly Zone

Pair that with a visits from Seal Team 6, some Green Berets, and some of fine folks from MI6, and we got ourselves an international ass kicking of a despot.

If he's doing this, he's already close to an ass kicking. This is a sign of desperation. The people should free themselves, we just make sure they can.

WOOO-HOOOOO, The Libbies are in charge now!! It's okay! The Obama controls the military now!! It's okay to invade countries now!! Let's go bomb the shiat out of Syria, and turn it into a pile of glass!!

Hypocritical libtards.

/against invading any country without provication.


It really is fascinating how some people miss the point so completely.
 
2012-12-05 09:22:26 PM
Honestly, I don't give a fark which side of the political spectrum you land on..... Using Sarin gas is farking HORRIFIC!!! The agony involved in the dying is farking horrible!
We aren't talking about soldiers who are (or should be) prepared to fight in a chemical environment. We are talking about civilians; men, women and children.
Any "leader" who resorts to this is a psychopath who needs to be taken out real quick fast and in a hurry!

/think of the children!
 
2012-12-05 09:22:31 PM

Linkster: Popcorn Johnny: Reports are the the USS Eisenhower is sitting of the coast of Syria, ready to strike.

TROLL OR MORON, I pick the Later!


Still waiting for an answer here, did you think that the USS Eisenhower had been decommissioned or that Syria was landlocked? It's okay to admit that you're wrong.
 
2012-12-05 09:22:52 PM

BigBurrito: Roosevelt had the same problem.pedobearapproved: david_gaithersburg: Obama makes his yellow cake speech in 3.....2.....1

He can't. No matter what the intellegence is he can't make that speech because it'll make him Bush. He has to wait until thousands are dead before he can make that speech. He knows it and Assad knows it. Assad also knows that Obama, in an attempt to not look like Bush, will take this before the UN, where Russia and China will foul up the works. All that will come out of that will be a light punative action.


Obama does not need to make a Bush speech. He is not actively looking for the answer that always equals war. The Bush administration did not like diplomacy. They scuttled diplomatic efforts that had been underway for over a decade because of a righteous belief system. Prior to Iraq getting underway, Hussein had relented, but war was necessary in the eyes of the administration.

Obama has none of that. We are maintaining diplomatic relations, Britain is applying pressure and expect to see Russia doing so as well, with possibly Iran chiming in as well. Assad is about to become very isolated. Hopefully, he realizes his position and relents. The only ones against that would be other monarchies in the ME, they will become very nervous looking at their own ability to hold onto power.



Obama believes in diplomacy. Just ask a Libyan!
 
2012-12-05 09:22:57 PM

Tumunga: WOOO-HOOOOO, The Libbies are in charge now!! It's okay! The Obama controls the military now!! It's okay to invade countries now!! Let's go bomb the shiat out of Syria, and turn it into a pile of glass!!

Hypocritical libtards.

/against invading any country without provication.


Sorry if we're a little more nuanced than "DUR SADDAM HUSSEIN DONE BLOWED UP THEM BUILDINGS WAR BABY AMERICA FARK YEAH WOOOO!"
 
2012-12-05 09:23:05 PM

johnnyrocket: Except that it is our problem. We are a member of the world community. Atrocities cannot be ignored.


I think it's some other member of the community's turn. We must have rolled doubles 10 times in a row
 
2012-12-05 09:23:11 PM

Magorn: need a bigger boom than those can deliver. just blowing up the site risks releasing the chemical agents. This calls for a strike by FAE (fuel air explosives) or a "Daisy cutter" 16,000 lb conventional bomb or a small nuke so you guarantee you cook off the bad shiat at the site in the ensuing inferno


Nerve gas has what's called "persistence". Its how long it lasts after being deployed. Usually less than an hour. This is so friendly troops can take over before the dead guys can be reinforced. Hard to imagine that we would care if the burning rubble of planes spewing nerve gas is killing the very same folks who launched the attack. Also, I think that, for the safety of the people doing the deployment of the gas, that it needs to be proactively mixed immediately prior to use. Perhaps due to its volatility. In that case, blowing up planes on the ground, or in the air, about to deploy, would be harmless.
 
2012-12-05 09:23:34 PM

MorrisBird: My stomach hurts. Damn, we've turned this world into a cesspool.


120,000 years late but yeah!

smells_like_meat: Damascus, Syria is about 10 minutes airtime from the USS Eisenhower. Slightly longer, not much, from our bases in Iraq, Jordan and Turkey. The power of a carrier group is hard to imagine. If we wanted, his airfields would be cratered and useless in 11 minutes. Any planes in the air would be dark spots on the ground in 12. This is not "USA, USA, USA ITG posturing. Its the reality of our air power.

He can't win. He can't even kill his own people. Unless we let him.


This! This is what needs to happen, yesterday!
 
2012-12-05 09:23:55 PM

WTF Indeed: JohnAnnArbor: The central point stands: by far, the VAST majority of their stuff was Soviet and French. Saying "we armed Saddam" is about as accurate as "we armed Japan before WWII." We sold Japan a few P-35s, but they made the vast majority of their own stuff.

Look buddy, we gave them arms, satellites, economic ad, and chemical weapons. We armed them. Just because you can't handle that fact doesn't mean I have change the inflection of the word "armed" to suit your need to feel better about whatever the f*ck you want to feel better about.


"Chemical weapons." I saw helicopters on your list (again, new fact, thanks). Helicopters are not chemical weapons. Just sayin'. Your righteous anger changes nothing and means nothing.

/Lots of talk in the '80s about various shady European companies that might have sold Iraq chemical "precursors." Not sure anything definitive came of it.
 
2012-12-05 09:24:10 PM

Gwendolyn: Doesn't mean we'll use it.


True. Depends.
 
2012-12-05 09:24:32 PM
I see that ASS-ad portrait is hanging in the appropriate gallery...
Link NSFW!
 
2012-12-05 09:25:13 PM

Holocaust Agnostic: Obama believes in diplomacy. Just ask a Libyan!


Obama didn't order military intervention in Libya until it became clear that Gaddafi was going to inflict mass casualties against civilians.
 
2012-12-05 09:25:37 PM
Oh no, I can hear the rattling from here.
 
2012-12-05 09:26:18 PM

Mentat: Holocaust Agnostic: Obama believes in diplomacy. Just ask a Libyan!

Obama didn't order military intervention in Libya until it became clear that Gaddafi was going to inflict mass casualties against civilians.


pull the other one.
 
2012-12-05 09:26:33 PM

Amos Quito: You assume that the information we have been given is accurate.

I assume that there are games afoot, and remain VERY skeptical.


I believe in the sanity of a Democrat White House a lot more than a Republican White House. Most Republican's are certifiably nuts, so I can't really put their failures on anyone else.
 
2012-12-05 09:26:56 PM

BigBooper: /if he survives he would be a hero to many Muslims
//and be welcome in exile in many Islamic nations



he would not survive Israel's retaliation

and if he did go into exile Israel's hunt would be more like Obama's hunt for Osama and less like Dubya's "hunt" for Osama
 
2012-12-05 09:27:00 PM

atomic-age: Oznog: Linkster: Oznog: TFA: The nerve agents were locked and loaded inside the bombs. 

OK, I had to look this up. I know what "load" means, but WTF is "lock"??

Apparently the term is made up. Well, it's not a range command and "lock and load" doesn't seem to refer to anything in particular... even loading, apparently.

LOCK refers to locking a magazine, LOAD refers to injecting a round into the breach, Try to keep the fark up! 

Well the phrase is said to originate around the M1 Garand. If you put the clip in but didn't chamber a round, wouldn't you still call it "loaded"? I'd say putting a clip into it makes it pretty darn "loaded", terminology-wise. It's not like you really need to instruct people to put a clip in the weapon before going into combat... at least I hope not.

My dad was drafted for WWII. He said they had a drill instructor who could not pronounce the letter 'L' and instead exhorted them to "Rock and road!"


LOCK the breach open AND LOAD the ammunition.

/freakin idiots
//dunno if I just fed the troll.
 
2012-12-05 09:27:10 PM

Mentat: Obama didn't order military intervention in Libya until it became clear that Gaddafi was going to inflict mass casualties against civilians


And what happened when the rebels inflicted mass casualties on the other set of civilians?
 
2012-12-05 09:27:30 PM

Mad_Radhu: GAT_00: Repeating myself since this might go green:

U.S. officials stressed that as of now, the sarin bombs hadn't been loaded onto planes and that Assad hadn't issued a final order to use them. But if he does, one of the officials said, "there's little the outside world can do to stop it."

No Fly Zone

That could be a lot of fun if the F-22s are actually up and running okay for now. I'm curious to see what they would be like when let off the leash, because an air superiority fighter that you can't see coming is something that should be pants wettingly scary for a military that has to go up against them.

Of course, that is assuming that the F-22 can manage to not asphyxiate its pilot in the process. Last I head it was actually squeezing them to unconsciousness with the G-suits somehow.


tfwiki.net

"Like it's my fault your fleshlings are so weak and squishy."
 
2012-12-05 09:28:31 PM
Ah, I get it. We're just going to keep changing back and forth from Eurasia to Eastasia. That way the war never stops!!
 
2012-12-05 09:29:00 PM

kendelrio: Honestly, I don't give a fark which side of the political spectrum you land on..... Using Sarin gas is farking HORRIFIC!!! The agony involved in the dying is farking horrible! We aren't talking about soldiers who are (or should be) prepared to fight in a chemical environment. We are talking about civilians; men, women and children.


I agree it's going to be bloody awful -- the situation already is bloody awful with only the conventional weapons being used so far. I don't think any of us can imagine what it must be like to see our family, friends and neighbours being destroyed with powerful weapons. It's crazy.

That being said -- it's not the "white man's burden" to save every country in the world. There's a noble sentiment behind what you say, but as usual the devil is in the details and for pragmatic reasons alone we should stay well the hell away from anything to do with the Middle East (and yes, this includes you too, Israel -- even if you're not quite so bad as the rest).
 
2012-12-05 09:29:16 PM

mr lawson: Mentat: Yes, it is. This has the potential to engulf the entire Middle East including several of our allies who may or may not end up on the same side. This isn't the same situation as Iraq.

Nope...Let's try letting them killing off each other for a while. The whole Middle East seem to want war. Fine. Let'em have it.

NOT OUR PROBLEM


Are you that narrow minded that you actually believe every man woman and child in the middle east wants war? Give me a farking break.
 
2012-12-05 09:29:23 PM

I_Hate_Iowa: JohnAnnArbor: cameroncrazy1984: JohnAnnArbor: cameroncrazy1984: JohnAnnArbor: Nancy Pelosi put on a cute headscarf and did freelance diplomacy (in violation of the law, but who cares about that) in Syria while Bush was in office

No, because that never happened.

ORLY?

/ya rly.

No, what I mean is it wasn't "in violation of the law"

Well, you're still a dumbass.

So a law that has never been used successfully in a single prosecution and is mainly pulled out as a threat of legal bludgeoning at politically opportune times... was pulled out at a politically opportune time and used as a threat of legal bludgeoning?

[2.bp.blogspot.com image 600x445]


You'd be cool with John Boehner going overseas, right now, and negotiating with various important world leaders even if Obama said it wasn't a good idea?

I'd object, and I voted for Romney. (Yes, I'm serious. There needs to be one voice on that kind of stuff. Internal debate on foreign policy is fine and dandy, but going overseas and messing with policy without Presidential approval or at cross-purposes to Presidential policy is way out of bounds. And Barack Obama is the President.)
 
2012-12-05 09:29:26 PM

MugzyBrown: Mentat: Obama didn't order military intervention in Libya until it became clear that Gaddafi was going to inflict mass casualties against civilians

And what happened when the rebels inflicted mass casualties on the other set of civilians?


or when gadaffi offered a ceasefire ~24 hours after the UN resolution authorizing the use of force to obtain a ceasefire?
 
2012-12-05 09:29:38 PM

Mentat: Amos Quito: There were a lot of lies leading up to our latest fling in Iraq.

You remember them, don't you?

But I'm sure we can safely believe all that we are told.

Now.

If Assad starts launching chemical weapons, then it's not a hypothetical anymore. That's the standard that President Obama set. We're not talking about invading a country based on imaginary WMD's.



Saddam's WMD's weren't "imaginary" - at least not in our minds, because we were stupid enough to believe the lies.

You really believe that they (or our perpetually paranoid regional "allies") haven't ruled out a "preemptive strike"?

Again I ask, what is the source of this "intelligence"?
 
2012-12-05 09:29:41 PM

Grand_Moff_Joseph: GAT_00: Repeating myself since this might go green:

U.S. officials stressed that as of now, the sarin bombs hadn't been loaded onto planes and that Assad hadn't issued a final order to use them. But if he does, one of the officials said, "there's little the outside world can do to stop it."

No Fly Zone

Pair that with a visits from Seal Team 6, some Green Berets, and some of fine folks from MI6, and we got ourselves an international ass kicking of a despot.


yeah some major forces from EU and the US will be making a visit soon I do believe.
 
2012-12-05 09:30:21 PM
look, the guy was raised to be what? a dentist? his back is against the wall and he knows it. He's lost support of the sunni majority and I don't think the christian or druze minorities will want this to happen. unless russia lets him come live in some daika on the black sea he'll do whatever he can so the alawites don't lynch his ass 'cause they're running scared now too 'cause they've been walking around like a formerly oppressed minority suddenly in charge for decades now. at the same time, the Lebanese have all kinds of beefs, as do the iraqis considering how well their refugees were treated during America's most recent foray into idiocy.

and the turks? they sure as shiat don't want an expanded kurdistan on their southern and eastern border ('cause kurd people problems)

most obvious? israeli air strike in 5-4-3-2......
 
2012-12-05 09:30:36 PM

johncb76006: Muslims killing fellow Muslims in their own country.


Assad isn't Muslim....
 
2012-12-05 09:31:26 PM

Omahawg: most obvious? israeli air strike in 5-4-3-2......


Israel only attacks people who can't defend themselves. Syria has anti-air defenses.
 
2012-12-05 09:31:47 PM

Mentat: Sorry if we're a little more nuanced than "DUR SADDAM HUSSEIN DONE BLOWED UP THEM BUILDINGS WAR BABY AMERICA FARK YEAH WOOOO!"


Is that a direct quotation from a conservative politician or commentator? If so, could you please tell me which one? If not, why are you grotesquely caricaturing your opponents' arguments?

/the Mentats aren't enough, you also need +3 INT
 
2012-12-05 09:31:52 PM
Not our problem.

Let them gas, genocide, and destroy themselves till they are all dead and gone. That is evolution telling human nature that it needs to clean itself out.

Not, our, problem.

I do not give a shiat about women and children in syria, I do not give a shiat about civilians, I give a shiat about american lives and money, neither of which we can toss aimlessly into another faux heroics war and then piss another billion or 10 away building and running a country full of ass backward muslims that will ultimately hand the entire nation over to the muslim brotherhood anyway.

fark that, let them die themselves since they are gonna piss away the sacrifice creating another theocracy.
 
2012-12-05 09:32:05 PM

Mentat: Tumunga: WOOO-HOOOOO, The Libbies are in charge now!! It's okay! The Obama controls the military now!! It's okay to invade countries now!! Let's go bomb the shiat out of Syria, and turn it into a pile of glass!!

Hypocritical libtards.

/against invading any country without provication.

Sorry if we're a little more nuanced than "DUR SADDAM HUSSEIN DONE BLOWED UP THEM BUILDINGS WAR BABY AMERICA FARK YEAH WOOOO!"



LOL! Just look at the list of Dems who voted FOR the invasion of Iraq.

(One of them is pictured in TFA)
 
2012-12-05 09:32:16 PM

Omahawg: look, the guy was raised to be what? a dentist? his back is against the wall and he knows it. He's lost support of the sunni majority and I don't think the christian or druze minorities will want this to happen. unless russia lets him come live in some daika on the black sea he'll do whatever he can so the alawites don't lynch his ass 'cause they're running scared now too 'cause they've been walking around like a formerly oppressed minority suddenly in charge for decades now. at the same time, the Lebanese have all kinds of beefs, as do the iraqis considering how well their refugees were treated during America's most recent foray into idiocy.

and the turks? they sure as shiat don't want an expanded kurdistan on their southern and eastern border ('cause kurd people problems)

most obvious? israeli air strike in 5-4-3-2......


Eye doctor. Do you need glasses? He can help you with that.
 
2012-12-05 09:32:49 PM

Oznog: TFA: The nerve agents were locked and loaded inside the bombs. 

OK, I had to look this up. I know what "load" means, but WTF is "lock"??

Apparently the term is made up. Well, it's not a range command and "lock and load" doesn't seem to refer to anything in particular... even loading, apparently.


Load and lock, as it relates to weaponry is used for larger weapons such as cannons (and in my case torpedo tubes) where after you load the weapon into its tube you lock the breech door (usually via interlocks) so there aren't any accidents. I assume that it simply carried over to smaller automatic weapons where you load a magazine and then operated whatever mechanism on that type of weapon to put the round from the magazine into the breech of the weapon and then engage any safeties on the weapon..
 
2012-12-05 09:33:17 PM

BigBooper: Any one else think Assad might send a few towards Israel? If he going to go for a hail Mary type move, attacking Israel with chemical weapons, declaring holy war, and calling for all Islamic people to join them could start a wider mid-east war. Of course sparking that greater middle eastern war would require Israel to respond to chemical weapon attacks by using nuclear weapons on Syria, but I don't think Assad cares.

He knows he's dead if he uses gas. Why not gas the Jews.

/if he survives he would be a hero to many Muslims
//and be welcome in exile in many Islamic nations


Devious thoughts you have there, but realistic at the same time.
 
2012-12-05 09:33:17 PM

vodka: Oh no, I can hear the rattling from here.


And what benefit is there to take over Syria? Their oil? Their gold? No one is talking about pre-emptive war and oil contracts. They are talking about getting rid of a madman, who would use nerve gas on civilians, and letting the internationally recognized resistance fill the void until elections can happen. Maybe they won't be perfect but they have to be better than a genocidal tyrant.
 
2012-12-05 09:33:26 PM

Grand_Moff_Joseph: The Muthaship: About to cross the U.S.'s red line. What's one more war....

Fair point, but the use of chemical or biological weapons should be a red line for the entire world, not just America. No one even thinks of using these kinds of weapons for anything other than genocide, and humanity has a duty to itself to stop such insanity from coming to bear.


yeah, because the 45,000 deaths so far don't count. It is how people die, not whether they died.
great foreign policy.
 
2012-12-05 09:33:37 PM

UseUrHeadFred: [jaypgreene.files.wordpress.com image 618x347]

/Hot


Surprised it took so long for that one.
 
2012-12-05 09:33:59 PM
kendelrio: Honestly, I don't give a fark which side of the political spectrum you land on..... Using Sarin gas is farking HORRIFIC!!! The agony involved in the dying is farking horrible! We aren't talking about soldiers who are (or should be) prepared to fight in a chemical environment. We are talking about civilians; men, women and children.

It making you feel good is not a reason to go to war, especially if you aren't the one who is going to fight it.
 
2012-12-05 09:34:44 PM

Ogre840: DblDad: If true, then this is a nightmare - but I want to see a source cited other than "U.S. officials." I can't find any mention of this on the BBC, other British sites, Al Jazeera English, or other Middle Eastern news sites. The only other mention outside of the US media was from the Jerusalem Post. I'd think that if weapons had been loaded then the world media would be all over this.

Check out the side bar "Live Blog Syria"
Link

It's on Al Jazeera.


No it's not. Here's the latest entry:

Syria about 7 hours ago
Russia and Turkey are set to discuss new ideas on Syria, Kremlin says
 
2012-12-05 09:34:54 PM

Marine1: MorrisBird: My stomach hurts. Damn, we've turned this world into a cesspool.

Well, who's we?


0bama and Clinton.
Great foreign policy in action.
 
2012-12-05 09:34:59 PM

BigBurrito: mr lawson: Mentat: I think we've tried that a few dozen times already. Doesn't seem to help.

Maybe not, but it doesn't cost us a trillion dollars and thousands of US lives for the same results.


WW II had no costs in US dollars and US lives? We sat out of it while Europe burned because it was "not our problem"?

Syria has been going at it for awhile now. The British should have intervened, but I suppose they sit on their hands because, well simply Blair and his association with the war drumming for Iraq.

The use of Chemical Weapons will lead to a greater escalation in Syria and the region around it. We can try and prevent that escalation or we can sit back say "not our problem" and be sucked into a much larger problem later on.

This is a truly worrisome problem. It can not be underestimated. This is why SS Clinton is warning Asssad of the implications of a decision to use these weapons. If he does use them, expect to see a very large retaliation, most likely by the US, possibly NATO, or maybe the British, if they ever find their balls again.

Ah look at this Britian is stepping up:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/9721126/Br i tain-has-directly-warned-Assad-of-immediate-response-if-Syria-uses-che mical-weapons.html

Good.


Assad may be thinking he's about to be overrun. If he doesn't escalate to using these weapons he loses to the rebels.

If he uses these weapons then western powers may attack his military tilting the balance of power into the rebels hands.

He's in a low probability of success position but as of now I think he'll still use them as a last resort and then the onus is on the west to respond.
 
2012-12-05 09:35:05 PM

GAT_00: Repeating myself since this might go green:

U.S. officials stressed that as of now, the sarin bombs hadn't been loaded onto planes and that Assad hadn't issued a final order to use them. But if he does, one of the officials said, "there's little the outside world can do to stop it."

No Fly Zone


Artillery or missile deployment is a very real delivery method.
 
2012-12-05 09:35:10 PM

WhyteRaven74: johncb76006: Muslims killing fellow Muslims in their own country.

Assad isn't Muslim....


Alawites are kinda sorta Muslim, perhaps in the same way that Mormons are kinda sorta Christian.
 
2012-12-05 09:35:28 PM
Crap. Does this mean gas will be 4.50 a gallon in the morning?
 
2012-12-05 09:35:57 PM

Amos Quito: Anyone hear what the alleged SOURCE of this "intelligence" is?


An anonymous US official (so far). The story seems to have started here.
 
2012-12-05 09:36:01 PM

Amos Quito: Saddam's WMD's weren't "imaginary" - at least not in our minds, because we were stupid enough to believe the lies.

You really believe that they (or our perpetually paranoid regional "allies") haven't ruled out a "preemptive strike"?

Again I ask, what is the source of this "intelligence"?


What the hell does that even mean? Iraq's WMD's became real because we believed really really hard? Again, if Assad uses chemical weapons, it's no longer a hypothetical or an issue of "where the intelligence came from".
 
2012-12-05 09:36:14 PM

mr lawson: Repeat after me Fark.

NOT.. OUR ....FARKING.... PROBLEM!


I would think that mass genocide is everyone's problem, since standing by while it occurs would set a disturbing precedent.
 
2012-12-05 09:37:59 PM

JohnAnnArbor: Omahawg: look, the guy was raised to be what? a dentist? his back is against the wall and he knows it. He's lost support of the sunni majority and I don't think the christian or druze minorities will want this to happen. unless russia lets him come live in some daika on the black sea he'll do whatever he can so the alawites don't lynch his ass 'cause they're running scared now too 'cause they've been walking around like a formerly oppressed minority suddenly in charge for decades now. at the same time, the Lebanese have all kinds of beefs, as do the iraqis considering how well their refugees were treated during America's most recent foray into idiocy.

and the turks? they sure as shiat don't want an expanded kurdistan on their southern and eastern border ('cause kurd people problems)

most obvious? israeli air strike in 5-4-3-2......

Eye doctor. Do you need glasses? He can help you with that.


actually I do. too bad the guy just can't see it's over. If I was in his shoes....yeah. daika on the black sea. please, mr. putin?
 
KIA
2012-12-05 09:38:05 PM
The USS Eisenhower Strike Group reached the Syrian coast Tuesday, Dec. 4 in a heavy storm after sailing through the Suez Canal from the Persian Gulf. Aboard are 8 fighter bomber squadrons of Air Wing Seven and 8,000 sailors, airmen and Marines. Together with the USS Iwo Jima, the US has now posted opposite Syria 70 fighter-bombers, 17 warships including three amphibious craft, a guided missile cruiser, 10 destroyers and frigates, and 10,000 American fighting men. Four vessels also carry Aegis anti-missile weapons.
 
2012-12-05 09:38:28 PM

GAT_00: Lsherm: GAT_00: Lsherm: Where do we base the no-fly enforcement out of?

Hmm, I wonder what kind of ally we have in the area that we've given lots of weapons to? Oh right, Israel. And Turkey is in NATO and has been supporting the rebels for months. And we have a few bases in Saudi Arabia.

Nah, there's nowhere to base out of.

Can you read?

Your reasons are fairly superficial. You just dismiss that we can't use those places. The Iraqi zones were run from Saudi Arabia and Turkey. While Saudi Arabia may be farther, what legitimate reason can you give that we patrolled Northern Iraq from Turkey but can't patrol Syria?


Within the context of the original quote from the article you responded to:

U.S. officials stressed that as of now, the sarin bombs hadn't been loaded onto planes and that Assad hadn't issued a final order to use them. But if he does, one of the officials said, "there's little the outside world can do to stop it."

I pointed out that even if we did use those areas as staging for no-fly zones, it still wouldn't mean we could stop them. Then I pointed out why. I even included that we have a carrier group right off the damn coast and why that might not work.

Saying "no fly zone" doesn't automatically prevent a chemical weapons attack, even if the country in question wants to protect their airmen. They could easily launch short-range attacks that we can't stop regardless of where the staging area is. This is why this word is so important, and I'll bold it for you:

But all of this is a moot point

And I didn't dismiss that we could use those places, I pointed out that even if we could, it wouldn't necessarily prevent a chemical attack, which was your assertion. Hence my question about your literacy. Frankly, after your second response, I think you should go back and read my post again. The only staging area I dismissed was Israel. 

The only thing that's superficial is your assertion that a no fly zone can prevent the attack and, of course, your reading comprehension.
 
2012-12-05 09:38:29 PM

robhidalgo: mr lawson: Repeat after me Fark.

NOT.. OUR ....FARKING.... PROBLEM!

I would think that mass genocide is everyone's problem, since standing by while it occurs would set a disturbing precedent.


Yeah Darfur and Somolia really rattled cages in the world the past 10 years...


No one gives a shiat a bout genocide. We shouldn't. Unless it is done to us, we need to step back and let the world fix itself.
 
2012-12-05 09:38:39 PM

PirateKing: Weren't people bragging about missiles that can land in some guy's coffee cup from a thousand miles away? Why don't we just use those?


Or a drone if that is possible.
 
2012-12-05 09:38:59 PM

cig-mkr: BarkingUnicorn: Linkster: GAT_00: Repeating myself since this might go green:

U.S. officials stressed that as of now, the sarin bombs hadn't been loaded onto planes and that Assad hadn't issued a final order to use them. But if he does, one of the officials said, "there's little the outside world can do to stop it."

No Fly Zone

Nope, destroy the aircraft on the ground, NOW!

Yup.

Load the drones and send them in. NOW!


That would be an act of war and Congress might have something to say about it.

\all for it
 
2012-12-05 09:39:20 PM
You folks arguing over whether or not the US/NATO/neighboring countries/grey aliens/albigensians/battle pope/superman should intervene or not are taking the wrong approach. Syrian warplanes are bombing the outskirts of Damascus. Several sections of the countryside are effectively in rebel hands, and Assad is hearing reports from foreign media that his daddy's house of cards is falling around his ears.

He's desperate. His position is growing increasingly untenable politically and militarily. He can't run away, because he wouldn't be able to take all the Alawites with him, and they'd kill him if they thought he was leaving them to face the inevitable retribution once the rebels win. He probably can't fight and win conventionally, because he's running out of effective military power from defections, combat losses, and crippled logistics. If he uses his ace-in-the-hole (WMDs), the entire rest of the world will land on him with all four feet. He feels trapped, and a significant percentage of his military staff are probably thinking about making a deal involving his head on a platter. He's got to do something, or his own people will give him the Mussolini treatment in a (probably vain) attempt to curry favor with the victors.

We (the rest of the world) need to offer him some options that don't involve suicide by NATO and/or several hundred thousand dead and maimed civilians. FSM knows he doesn't deserve a break, but Assad and his backers need to have a reasonable belief that they could survive this charlie-foxtrot. Otherwise, there's the very real possibility of sarin-laden bombs and missiles landing on Syrian cities- and possibly Israeli, Turkish, and Jordanian cities, too.

I'm not in a position where my opinion carries any weight, but I submit it would be cheap at ten times the price to simply arrange for Assad and his top military and political flunkies (along with all their families) to be flown out of Syria to a lovely retirement villa in Tuscany/Provence/fill-in-the-blank-resort-area and given several million dollars each. Better that than regional/world war or even a few hundred thousand gassed civilians (of any nationality).

/My brace of small copper coins
 
2012-12-05 09:39:27 PM

EvilRacistNaziFascist: erik-k: In short, the British successfully tricked an appreciable fraction of earth's entire surface into a neverending flamewar with itself and escaped virtually unscathed by comparison, making the Royal Family probably the most enormously successful trolls of all time.

To say this is to assume that the Africans have no moral agency of their own -- i.e. that if Africans have only to be provoked in a certain way to automatically cause them to commit genocide against each other, through no fault of their own. If the map of the United States were to be rejiggered tomorrow by an outside power so that there were only 13 irregularly- shaped states instead of the current 57 (sic) would you Americans all suddenly go apesh*t and start killing each other? I mean Texans might, but everyone else? Colonialism gets the blame for all of Africa's and Middle East's problems, but ethnic strife has raged in these regions since time immemorial and the excuse is wearing a bit thin.


Give me complete control to draw political lines on the map and I bet you I could start a pan-European war, or at least cause massive social unrest, within 20 years.

Take people who historially don't like each other, then draw the lines so half of them benefit and the other half lose, do so without regard for historical demarcations or natural boundaries, and in a place where life is cheap... and you're going to have wars.

I didn't murder her, your honor, I just gave someone with a history of violence guns and egged him on by ranting about how horrible she was and told him where she lived.
 
2012-12-05 09:40:28 PM

mr lawson: Repeat after me Fark.

NOT.. OUR ....FARKING.... PROBLEM!



Actually it is,
We helped instigated it. We armed the rebels, and than their uprisings have led to a possible future of them getting gassed.

CBS NEWS/ August 1, 2012, 10:30 PM
Report: Obama authorizes covert Syrian rebel aid
Earlier this year, President Obama signed an intelligence "finding" authorizing U.S. intelligence agencies to support the opposition in Syria, Reuters reports.

The "finding" is largely a bureaucratic mechanism, and it has long been reported that the CIA is at least aiding in the flow of money and weapons from Saudi Arabia and Qatar to the opposition inside Syria. In June, CBS News correspondent David Martin reported the CIA has been advising other countries about which Syrian rebel groups are deserving of aid.

Additionally, the CIA is known to have been operating a small number of offices in Turkey, but none so far in Syria itself.
The Arab Spring Sources tell CBS News that the direction of U.S. involvement in Syria looks increasingly to be through coordination with Turkey.

That said, CBS News correspondent Margaret Brennan reports the U.S. Treasury authorized a private U.S. group to provide direct financing to the Free Syrian Army. Civilians can help buy Syrian rebels guns or whatever they need, thus working around U.S. policy, which is to avoid providing lethal aid to the opposition. 
 
2012-12-05 09:41:01 PM
Israel only attacks people who can't defend themselves. Syria has anti-air defenses.


Israel last bombed Syria in 2007
 
2012-12-05 09:41:07 PM

Popcorn Johnny: Linkster: Popcorn Johnny: Reports are the the USS Eisenhower is sitting of the coast of Syria, ready to strike.

TROLL OR MORON, I pick the Later!

Still waiting for an answer here, did you think that the USS Eisenhower had been decommissioned or that Syria was landlocked? It's okay to admit that you're wrong.


Eisenhower is in San Diego, Syria is land locked. So Your Point?
 
2012-12-05 09:41:44 PM

EvilRacistNaziFascist: Alawites are kinda sorta Muslim, perhaps in the same way that Mormons are kinda sorta Christian.


heh nice way to put it
 
2012-12-05 09:42:01 PM

tenpoundsofcheese: Marine1: MorrisBird: My stomach hurts. Damn, we've turned this world into a cesspool.

Well, who's we?

0bama and Clinton.
Great foreign policy in action.


Ahh you. Defective genetics in action.

Stop pretending that you aren't sitting there with a giant erection at the exciting prospect of genocide, so you can biatch about Obama. You will probably cum when the pictures start rolling in, sick fark.
 
2012-12-05 09:42:33 PM

way south: bim1154: The U.S. won't do shiat if they start using that crap other than wording strong letters of disapproval.

It won't be in our hands.
We've got a NATO member next door and a half a dozen allies less than a stones throw from this mess. If Assad starts lobbing gas, everyone downwind is gonna get awfully angry and demand something be done. Even if it means WWIII.

Russia is going to have to wear her big girl britches and either put Syria in its place or disown the situation. They won't back the use of chemical weapons.
They need to leash this guy, ASAP.


If the report is true, I'd say this is a pretty good sign that Russia has lost all control over their little client state at this point.
 
2012-12-05 09:42:37 PM

Mentat:
If Assad starts launching chemical weapons, then it's not a hypothetical anymore. That's the standard that President Obama set. We're not talking about invading a country based on imaginary WMD's.


Between the US 5th and 6th Fleets, US/Nato Bases in Turkey, Greece and Italy, The Israelis and the Turks; well, Syria has three of the top ten most capable and experienced air forces in the world who really don't want them to go ahead with this.

/This shiat will get out of control and we'll be lucky to live through it
 
2012-12-05 09:43:18 PM

Wenchmaster: I submit it would be cheap at ten times the price to simply arrange for Assad and his top military and political flunkies (along with all their families) to be flown out of Syria to a lovely retirement villa in Tuscany/Provence


Assad has already said that he's going to stay put.
 
2012-12-05 09:43:25 PM

Linkster: Syria is land locked


Eh? would be news to the russians
 
2012-12-05 09:43:47 PM
Reason 1,763 for me not wanting to live on this planet anymore.

Thousands of people dying with the possibility of thousands more to follow from another evil sob and people see it as an opportunity to take political jabs.



/yea, yea I know
//oblig welcome to fark .jpg
 
2012-12-05 09:43:58 PM

tlchwi02: mr lawson: Repeat after me Fark.

NOT.. OUR ....FARKING.... PROBLEM!

bingo. i don't care who owns that crappy section of desert as long as i didnt have to pay for it. i realize thats callous and cruel to say, but why should more of my friends die on the other side of the globe to try and sort things out in favor of a group who are no more fond of us than assad.


Because the world is very small.
 
2012-12-05 09:44:44 PM

whither_apophis: Allen. The end.: There's plenty the world could do, it's just the lack of will. What happened when Saddam Hussein gassed the Kurds? Not a damn thing...

Obama =! Reagan

/plus Saddam was an ally for that week


Not an ally but an enemy of our enemy and a major importer of oil. Syria is neither.
 
2012-12-05 09:47:26 PM

Mentat: We found the WMD's! Woo hoo!


Yeah the same ones that we found in Iraq. You know. The ones that didn't exist?
 
2012-12-05 09:47:51 PM

Linkster: Eisenhower is in San Diego, Syria is land locked. So Your Point?


Yeah, this guy won't be back in this thread.
 
2012-12-05 09:48:36 PM

zenobia: tlchwi02: mr lawson: Repeat after me Fark.

NOT.. OUR ....FARKING.... PROBLEM!

bingo. i don't care who owns that crappy section of desert as long as i didnt have to pay for it. i realize thats callous and cruel to say, but why should more of my friends die on the other side of the globe to try and sort things out in favor of a group who are no more fond of us than assad.

Because the world is very small.


Yes it is so tiny, we should completely continue to blow our budget and our friends lives on a bunch of people who generally believe we are the great satan. It is wonderful, hey why don't we just call the muslim brotherhood and ask them what nation they want next, we will be the militant branch of their global agenda! Because as soon as the president of syria is out of the way, they are going to move in. They did it in egypt, they did it in tripoli, and they are going to do it in syria too.
 
2012-12-05 09:48:40 PM

Grand_Moff_Joseph: GAT_00: Repeating myself since this might go green:

U.S. officials stressed that as of now, the sarin bombs hadn't been loaded onto planes and that Assad hadn't issued a final order to use them. But if he does, one of the officials said, "there's little the outside world can do to stop it."

No Fly Zone

Pair that with a visits from Seal Team 6, some Green Berets, and some of fine folks from MI6, and we got ourselves an international ass kicking of a despot.


Throw in some Spetznaz just to fark with people's heads.
 
2012-12-05 09:48:50 PM

Linkster: Oznog: TFA: The nerve agents were locked and loaded inside the bombs. 

OK, I had to look this up. I know what "load" means, but WTF is "lock"??

Apparently the term is made up. Well, it's not a range command and "lock and load" doesn't seem to refer to anything in particular... even loading, apparently.

LOCK refers to locking a magazine, LOAD refers to injecting a round into the breach, Try to keep the fark up!

Also, it is well documented that Saddam's WMD Were moved to Syria, along with a lot of other shiat.

What part of Treaties and Commitments to Turkey, Jordan, Israel, etc. NOT a US Problem? All you "Foriegn Policy" Geeks seem to forget shiat before you where born. Oil has nothing to do with it.

NATO is gonna play with their beard for a week when Israel and the US is ready and prepared to drop this shiat at the field and not let it get to 100K dead, have to Boots on the ground crap.


Are you always an asshole or have you just had a bad day?
 
2012-12-05 09:48:50 PM
I swear some of you never watched the tee vee news during the last quarter of the 20th century. there hasn't been a time in my life when bad shiat was going down somewhere on this planet.

www.historyplace.com

mr. pot is saying 'what's new under the sun, dawg?'
 
2012-12-05 09:50:19 PM
and you guys thought the mayans were wrong!
 
2012-12-05 09:51:11 PM

atomicmask: robhidalgo: mr lawson: Repeat after me Fark.

NOT.. OUR ....FARKING.... PROBLEM!

I would think that mass genocide is everyone's problem, since standing by while it occurs would set a disturbing precedent.

Yeah Darfur and Somolia really rattled cages in the world the past 10 years...


No one gives a shiat a bout genocide. We shouldn't. Unless it is done to us, we need to step back and let the world fix itself.


I do. There is no better use of such an absurdly powerful military than to stop thousands of civilians being murdered by a despot.
 
2012-12-05 09:51:35 PM

tenpoundsofcheese: Marine1: MorrisBird: My stomach hurts. Damn, we've turned this world into a cesspool.

Well, who's we?

0bama and Clinton.
Great foreign policy in action.


LIBS LIBS LIBS LIBS OBAMA OBAMA OBAMA OBAMA!!

What do you want, more of Bush Jr's style? More pointless wars on a credit card that farks up America even further? Are you suggesting that America makes a police state of every country in the Middle East? How about some nukes and a glass parking lot, sound good to you?

Tell us, O Wise One, what would you want Obama and the libs to do? How would you handle the Middle East?
 
2012-12-05 09:52:35 PM

erik-k: Take people who historially don't like each other, then draw the lines so half of them benefit and the other half lose, do so without regard for historical demarcations or natural boundaries, and in a place where life is cheap... and you're going to have wars.

I didn't murder her, your honor, I just gave someone with a history of violence guns and egged him on by ranting about how horrible she was and told him where she lived.


To be fair though, someone with a history of violence usually doesn't require much egging. To give you an example, after the 1994 massacres in Rwanda it was frequently alleged in the media that the colonialist Belgians were ultimately to blame for the atrocities, because of the sharp distinctions they drew between the Hutu and the Tutsi. We were never told that the tension between the two groups and their keen sense of ethnic self- awareness in fact dated back to the 15th century. I happen to believe that, if Africans can be given full credit for their positive achievements, they can also take full responsibility for their negative ones. To say any less would be to treat the various African peoples as if they were children, or merely pawns in the hands of more advanced civilizations.
 
2012-12-05 09:53:40 PM

kg2095: atomicmask: robhidalgo: mr lawson: Repeat after me Fark.

NOT.. OUR ....FARKING.... PROBLEM!

I would think that mass genocide is everyone's problem, since standing by while it occurs would set a disturbing precedent.

Yeah Darfur and Somolia really rattled cages in the world the past 10 years...


No one gives a shiat a bout genocide. We shouldn't. Unless it is done to us, we need to step back and let the world fix itself.

I do. There is no better use of such an absurdly powerful military than to stop thousands of civilians being murdered by a despot.


Then get up off your ass and enlist, you go bleed and die in some sand box shiat hole for people who will shake your hand one week then blindfold you and behead you the other.

We are caught up in 2 other shiat sandboxes and we have yet to get out of, we are bleeding money into nations that are worthless, we do not need another.
 
2012-12-05 09:54:25 PM
The US leads the world in research and production of chemical weapons. Yea us !
 
2012-12-05 09:54:51 PM
Not a war, unless you count Libya as a war. More of an all-out, "Oh, did you have a military? Well now you don't, asshole!" assault from the air, lasting a few weeks. No American boots on ground, just lots of good ol' made in the U.S. of A. high explosives.
 
2012-12-05 09:54:58 PM

RealAmericanHero: Amos Quito: You assume that the information we have been given is accurate.

I assume that there are games afoot, and remain VERY skeptical.

I believe in the sanity of a Democrat White House a lot more than a Republican White House. Most Republican's are certifiably nuts, so I can't really put their failures on anyone else.


upload.wikimedia.org

Woodrow Wilson - Democrat. Got us into WWI

upload.wikimedia.org

FDR - Democrat - got us into WWII

upload.wikimedia.org

Harry Truman, Democrat. Got us into the Korean War and the start of the Cold War

upload.wikimedia.org

JFK, Democrat. Really got the ball rolling in Vietnam

upload.wikimedia.org

LBJ, Democrat - drastically escalated the Vietnam war

Sorry but I don't share your enthusiasm for white house Democrats.

/Or Republicans, for that matter
//Tweedle (D)
///Tweedle (R)
 
2012-12-05 09:56:12 PM
I know this is going to sound horrible, but I hope they use them. Then Russia and China will get the fark out of the way and the West can finally help the people of Syria like they did in other Middle-Eastern countries in recent years. Until then, we have to worry about offending those assholes.
 
2012-12-05 09:56:29 PM

Evil High Priest: Ogre840: DblDad: If true, then this is a nightmare - but I want to see a source cited other than "U.S. officials." I can't find any mention of this on the BBC, other British sites, Al Jazeera English, or other Middle Eastern news sites. The only other mention outside of the US media was from the Jerusalem Post. I'd think that if weapons had been loaded then the world media would be all over this.

Check out the side bar "Live Blog Syria"
Link

It's on Al Jazeera.

No it's not. Here's the latest entry:

Syria about 7 hours ago
Russia and Turkey are set to discuss new ideas on Syria, Kremlin says


It helps if you use that little wheel on your mouse and scroll down:

Syria a day ago
"The NATO ministers unanimously expressed grave concern about reports ... of chemical weapons."
 
2012-12-05 09:57:33 PM
The Derp Squad must be pretty confused. Military spending is their only acceptable government expenditure to the point we're spending brazillions of dollars for the most advanced killing machines in history. Here's a chance to kill more brown Muslims. THERE ARE ACTUAL WMD THIS TIME! And all the sudden they want to follow the Monroe Doctrine.
 
2012-12-05 09:57:37 PM

Linkster: Popcorn Johnny: Linkster: Popcorn Johnny: Reports are the the USS Eisenhower is sitting of the coast of Syria, ready to strike.

TROLL OR MORON, I pick the Later!

Still waiting for an answer here, did you think that the USS Eisenhower had been decommissioned or that Syria was landlocked? It's okay to admit that you're wrong.

Eisenhower is in San Diego, Syria is land locked. So Your Point?


O RLY?
www.lonelyplanet.com
 
2012-12-05 09:57:42 PM

mr_larry: Brick-House: So, that's where those pesky Iraq WMD's went.

[www.sondrak.com image 434x297]

Are you sure that isn't the crowd at Burning Man leaving after the burn?


Nah. Way too organized.
 
2012-12-05 09:58:23 PM
What does a false flag smell like?
 
2012-12-05 09:58:24 PM

atomicmask: kg2095: atomicmask: robhidalgo: mr lawson: Repeat after me Fark.

NOT.. OUR ....FARKING.... PROBLEM!

I would think that mass genocide is everyone's problem, since standing by while it occurs would set a disturbing precedent.

Yeah Darfur and Somolia really rattled cages in the world the past 10 years...


No one gives a shiat a bout genocide. We shouldn't. Unless it is done to us, we need to step back and let the world fix itself.

I do. There is no better use of such an absurdly powerful military than to stop thousands of civilians being murdered by a despot.

Then get up off your ass and enlist, you go bleed and die in some sand box shiat hole for people who will shake your hand one week then blindfold you and behead you the other.

We are caught up in 2 other shiat sandboxes and we have yet to get out of, we are bleeding money into nations that are worthless, we do not need another.


Or you could march in front of the White House with a placard stating "I demand the US allow a dictator to use weapons of mass destruction, as long as I can still express an outsized sense of moral condescension".

Sometimes I wonder what happens to peoples' sense of basic morality.
 
2012-12-05 09:58:26 PM

mr lawson: Repeat after me Fark.

NOT.. OUR ....FARKING.... PROBLEM!


Plus 1

We need to sit this out, there are plenty of other people who can deal with this. The only time I saw we should get involved is if one of our drones has a clear shot at taking out Assad himself.
 
2012-12-05 09:59:40 PM

smells_like_meat: Syria is very close to our NATO bases in Turkey not to forget the carriers in the Med. Unless this a complete fabrication, ala "Saddam has chemical weapons", then Syria dare not use them. The Syrian bombers would likely never make it off the ground given our overwhelming air superiority. If they did get aloft then they'd be toast in the air within minutes.

Likely more hyperbole and posturing. Assad, a very bad man, will fall one way or another.

Russia has a major naval base in Syria and they, as a practical matter, need to have their interests appeased and protected.


You think Saddam having chemical weapons was a fabrication? Despite the fact that he has used them on his own people?
 
2012-12-05 10:01:01 PM

Parmenius: atomicmask: kg2095: atomicmask: robhidalgo: mr lawson: Repeat after me Fark.

NOT.. OUR ....FARKING.... PROBLEM!

I would think that mass genocide is everyone's problem, since standing by while it occurs would set a disturbing precedent.

Yeah Darfur and Somolia really rattled cages in the world the past 10 years...


No one gives a shiat a bout genocide. We shouldn't. Unless it is done to us, we need to step back and let the world fix itself.

I do. There is no better use of such an absurdly powerful military than to stop thousands of civilians being murdered by a despot.

Then get up off your ass and enlist, you go bleed and die in some sand box shiat hole for people who will shake your hand one week then blindfold you and behead you the other.

We are caught up in 2 other shiat sandboxes and we have yet to get out of, we are bleeding money into nations that are worthless, we do not need another.

Or you could march in front of the White House with a placard stating "I demand the US allow a dictator to use weapons of mass destruction, as long as I can still express an outsized sense of moral condescension".

Sometimes I wonder what happens to peoples' sense of basic morality.


My basic sense of morality is limited by the borders of my nation, I tend to let other people rise up and be morale, they have their own chances to do so and I have mine. Tell me? When you hear about a break in 100 miles away, do you jump in your car and drive there instantly to try and sort it all out? or do you leave it to people in that neck of the woods?
 
2012-12-05 10:01:30 PM
Dear Syria,

southparkstudios.mtvnimages.com

Really? Is this how you want it to go down? The international community doesn't want to get involved, so please stop twisting our arm.

Dear Russia and China,

southparkstudios.mtvnimages.com

I know some of the smaller nations you are allied with (Iran, North Korea, and Syria) wouldn't mind starting WWIII, but us grown up countries need to have a sit down. You don't want to fight us, and we don't want to fight you. Hell, I mean us and China have a pretty good business thing going. And Russia, we did the Cold War dance, it was fun and all, but in retrospect it was a waste of both our times and since then we've been pretty cool.

Point I'm getting at is that I doubt you want to see Syria get all chemical weapony, so please use your influence and get them to smarten up. And if they do end up using them, can you please keep some of the other nations at bay if we find ourselves in a combat situation? Even better, perhaps you could guys could go in and get Syria to smarten up? I doubt you want to see chemical weapons used against a population as well, and it would absolve us from getting involved.

I mean, c'mon.

/image is hot
 
2012-12-05 10:02:06 PM

Amos Quito: RealAmericanHero: Amos Quito: You assume that the information we have been given is accurate.

I assume that there are games afoot, and remain VERY skeptical.

I believe in the sanity of a Democrat White House a lot more than a Republican White House. Most Republican's are certifiably nuts, so I can't really put their failures on anyone else.

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x333]

Woodrow Wilson - Democrat. Got us into WWI

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x259]

FDR - Democrat - got us into WWII

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x281]

Harry Truman, Democrat. Got us into the Korean War and the start of the Cold War

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x269]

JFK, Democrat. Really got the ball rolling in Vietnam

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x293]

LBJ, Democrat - drastically escalated the Vietnam war

Sorry but I don't share your enthusiasm for white house Democrats.

/Or Republicans, for that matter
//Tweedle (D)
///Tweedle (R)


Both sides bad, etc.

WWI and WWII we kinda DID need to get involved in, and we spent most of WWI and half of WWII trying our best to stay out. Of course, our ships being sunk by German submarines and Japan attacking Pearl Harbor kinda put a damper on that.

How would you have handled those if you were president for either of them? Would you have been ready to sacrifice your allies in the name of "Leave me out of this" and feeling good about not fighting?
 
2012-12-05 10:02:18 PM
Still nothing about this on Al Jazeera. So far, this smells like bullshiat.
 
2012-12-05 10:02:35 PM
The only thing we need drones for is filming sporting events. Lets leave the other side of the planet alone and let them blow themselfs up while we laugh. Protect our borders. dang canuks
 
2012-12-05 10:02:51 PM
I'm guessing Susan Rice is perfectly happy not being the Secretary of State, and that Hillary wishes she could send a text saying, "Dude, I'm out."
 
2012-12-05 10:03:34 PM

Omahawg: most obvious? israeli air strike in 5-4-3-2......



Yeah, they're paranoid and trigger happy.

And we'd definitely give them a pass - the rest of the world? Who knows.


/Betting that the Mossad is the source of this disinformation
 
2012-12-05 10:04:04 PM

JohnAnnArbor: No-fly zone might help, since the rebels don't have planes and there's not a lot of airspace to cover (compared to past zones in Iraq).

The number of Russian SAMs the Syrians have would need to be taken into account.

Hypothetically.


HARMs, Alarms and whatever the Frenchies like to chuck at weapons directors.

Wouldn't take long.
 
2012-12-05 10:04:58 PM

Omahawg: I swear some of you never watched the tee vee news during the last quarter of the 20th century. there hasn't been a time in my life when bad shiat was going down somewhere on this planet. [snip image] mr. pot is saying 'what's new under the sun, dawg?'


The history of Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge in the mid- 1970s really has to be read to believed... whole cities being emptied of their inhabitants to appease the resentments of Marxist peasants; people being shot for having soft hands, talking too intelligently, or wearing glasses; children being trained as soldiers and encouraged to rat out their parents; and as much as a third of the population ending up dead in the end... it's a useful corrective for those who believe that Communism or some kind of hard- left centralized society is sure to work just great the next time -- or, for that matter, even just a corrective to those who believe that human beings are naturally good.
 
2012-12-05 10:05:45 PM

Gyrfalcon: Anyone know if little brother Maher al-Assad is still among the living? It's kind of important, since he was the head of the military and secret police, and he'd be the one actually ordering the bombing if he's still alive. Also, there were indications Assad was willing to step down in favor of Maher earlier this year...before the Damascus bombing in July.

If Assad's back is as against the wall as this nerve-gas threat seems to indicate, then maybe the US should be interested. The last thing we need is ANOTHER unsupported power vacuum in the Middle East. Not saying we should get involved, but maybe we want to see what Turkey and Jordan are going to do.


I was watching Charlie Rose and the discussion tonight was on Syria. This must have been taped before the news of loading up the chemical weapons. The big concern was that Assad knows that the revolution is turning and he saw what happened to Saddam and Qaddafi and doesn't want to end up like that. If he thinks hes going to be lynched he might just go all out (and take thousands of people with him). When he falls and most agree that he will. Who is going to assume power? I agree with you, lets see what the Turks do.

My opinion is this. The war has already killed 40000 or more people. If we were going to step in why not do it thousands of deaths ago? There are other genocides currently going on in the world, Sudan and Congo come to mind. Why not step in there as well? Why are chemical weapons the tipping point? Those other people are just as dead.

BTW: I support a no fly zone. The issue is Assad (at least according to the article) can also put these loads on rockets and missiles. The lack of air delivery will help mitigate the problem but there are the ground delivery systems in place as well. I would not want to send ground troops into yet another conflict.
 
2012-12-05 10:06:12 PM
www.thespoiledchild.com
Why wont you support out imperial war? WHERES YOUR BASIC SENSE OF MORALITY?
 
2012-12-05 10:07:08 PM

atomicmask: Parmenius: atomicmask: kg2095: atomicmask: robhidalgo: mr lawson: Repeat after me Fark.

NOT.. OUR ....FARKING.... PROBLEM!

I would think that mass genocide is everyone's problem, since standing by while it occurs would set a disturbing precedent.

Yeah Darfur and Somolia really rattled cages in the world the past 10 years...


No one gives a shiat a bout genocide. We shouldn't. Unless it is done to us, we need to step back and let the world fix itself.

I do. There is no better use of such an absurdly powerful military than to stop thousands of civilians being murdered by a despot.

Then get up off your ass and enlist, you go bleed and die in some sand box shiat hole for people who will shake your hand one week then blindfold you and behead you the other.

We are caught up in 2 other shiat sandboxes and we have yet to get out of, we are bleeding money into nations that are worthless, we do not need another.

Or you could march in front of the White House with a placard stating "I demand the US allow a dictator to use weapons of mass destruction, as long as I can still express an outsized sense of moral condescension".

Sometimes I wonder what happens to peoples' sense of basic morality.

My basic sense of morality is limited by the borders of my nation, I tend to let other people rise up and be morale, they have their own chances to do so and I have mine. Tell me? When you hear about a break in 100 miles away, do you jump in your car and drive there instantly to try and sort it all out? or do you leave it to people in that neck of the woods?


If your human morality is limited by national borders, that's called "turning a blind eye". It is not a system of morality - it is a failing of one.
 
2012-12-05 10:07:30 PM
Why would we go in there, are we the world cops or something?
Let the UN handle it, Oh, by the way, we kinda busy right now, how about the UN sends in troops from somewhere besides Americans.
 
2012-12-05 10:07:37 PM

OhioUGrad: mr lawson: Repeat after me Fark.

NOT.. OUR ....FARKING.... PROBLEM!

Plus 1

We need to sit this out, there are plenty of other people who can deal with this. The only time I saw we should get involved is if one of our drones has a clear shot at taking out Assad himself.


Only if the drone is packing 400kt of kablooey. Just to be sure
 
2012-12-05 10:07:45 PM

mr lawson: Repeat after me Fark.

NOT.. OUR ....FARKING.... PROBLEM!


atomicmask: Not our problem.

Let them gas, genocide, and destroy themselves till they are all dead and gone. That is evolution telling human nature that it needs to clean itself out.

Not, our, problem.


www.martinfrost.ws

'Not our problem,' amirite?
 
2012-12-05 10:08:28 PM

johncb76006: Muslims killing fellow Muslims in their own country.

I don't see the problem.


shiates and sunnis hate eachother more than they hate us

but i don't exactly see how a normal person can stomach innocents getting caught in the crossfire like this
 
2012-12-05 10:09:23 PM

The Muthaship: About to cross the U.S.'s red line. What's one more war....


We don't need a full on war, if we just impose a no fly zone and put the hurt on syrian military installations from the air, the rebels can handle themselves just fine.
 
2012-12-05 10:10:00 PM

Uranus Is Huge!: The Derp Squad must be pretty confused. Military spending is their only acceptable government expenditure to the point we're spending brazillions of dollars for the most advanced killing machines in history. Here's a chance to kill more brown Muslims. THERE ARE ACTUAL WMD THIS TIME! And all the sudden they want to follow the Monroe Doctrine.


This. Wtf guys. You were fine with multiple decade long nation building, budget sapping farking multi billion dollar defense contractor orgy wars that were mostly a mercenary power and money grab. But stopping an actual real live about to happen genocide is suddenly bad.

Actually, I take that back. I'm not surprised at all. If you analyze any situation and think, "hmm, what would Sauron do" you can pretty much bet that that is the side the GOP and their forum armies will choose.
 
2012-12-05 10:10:12 PM

Holocaust Agnostic: [www.thespoiledchild.com image 280x280]
Why wont you support out imperial war? WHERES YOUR BASIC SENSE OF MORALITY?


Imperial war?

Do you know what a damn empire is?
 
2012-12-05 10:10:18 PM

Ogre840: Evil High Priest: Ogre840: DblDad: If true, then this is a nightmare - but I want to see a source cited other than "U.S. officials." I can't find any mention of this on the BBC, other British sites, Al Jazeera English, or other Middle Eastern news sites. The only other mention outside of the US media was from the Jerusalem Post. I'd think that if weapons had been loaded then the world media would be all over this.

Check out the side bar "Live Blog Syria"
Link

It's on Al Jazeera.

No it's not. Here's the latest entry:

Syria about 7 hours ago
Russia and Turkey are set to discuss new ideas on Syria, Kremlin says

It helps if you use that little wheel on your mouse and scroll down:

Syria a day ago
"The NATO ministers unanimously expressed grave concern about reports ... of chemical weapons."


Scrolling is hard.
 
2012-12-05 10:10:20 PM

EvilRacistNaziFascist: erik-k: Take people who historially don't like each other, then draw the lines so half of them benefit and the other half lose, do so without regard for historical demarcations or natural boundaries, and in a place where life is cheap... and you're going to have wars.

I didn't murder her, your honor, I just gave someone with a history of violence guns and egged him on by ranting about how horrible she was and told him where she lived.

To be fair though, someone with a history of violence usually doesn't require much egging. To give you an example, after the 1994 massacres in Rwanda it was frequently alleged in the media that the colonialist Belgians were ultimately to blame for the atrocities, because of the sharp distinctions they drew between the Hutu and the Tutsi. We were never told that the tension between the two groups and their keen sense of ethnic self- awareness in fact dated back to the 15th century. I happen to believe that, if Africans can be given full credit for their positive achievements, they can also take full responsibility for their negative ones. To say any less would be to treat the various African peoples as if they were children, or merely pawns in the hands of more advanced civilizations.


I agree that what happens in Africa today and since colonialism is to the credit or shame of Africa alone.

But on the other hand, to be bluntly honest, colonial-era Africa was a series of pawns in the hands of technologically superior European countries' economic/military chess game. Europe's sin is having set the initial conditions in a way that made matters worse rather than better after decolonialization, and I will assert that it was at least part in calculated sabotage.

You're right that Europe's sin here is in the past and can't be changed, but we should remember what happened so we can avoid it happening again.
 
2012-12-05 10:10:59 PM
Um... Why doesn't Russia or China intervene on this one?? It's right on their front door step.

This is so NOT our problem.
 
2012-12-05 10:11:10 PM
At this rate, our Nobel Peace Prize winning President will be the longest serving war time President.
 
2012-12-05 10:11:18 PM

Parmenius: atomicmask: Parmenius: atomicmask: kg2095: atomicmask: robhidalgo: mr lawson: Repeat after me Fark.

NOT.. OUR ....FARKING.... PROBLEM!

I would think that mass genocide is everyone's problem, since standing by while it occurs would set a disturbing precedent.

Yeah Darfur and Somolia really rattled cages in the world the past 10 years...


No one gives a shiat a bout genocide. We shouldn't. Unless it is done to us, we need to step back and let the world fix itself.

I do. There is no better use of such an absurdly powerful military than to stop thousands of civilians being murdered by a despot.

Then get up off your ass and enlist, you go bleed and die in some sand box shiat hole for people who will shake your hand one week then blindfold you and behead you the other.

We are caught up in 2 other shiat sandboxes and we have yet to get out of, we are bleeding money into nations that are worthless, we do not need another.

Or you could march in front of the White House with a placard stating "I demand the US allow a dictator to use weapons of mass destruction, as long as I can still express an outsized sense of moral condescension".

Sometimes I wonder what happens to peoples' sense of basic morality.

My basic sense of morality is limited by the borders of my nation, I tend to let other people rise up and be morale, they have their own chances to do so and I have mine. Tell me? When you hear about a break in 100 miles away, do you jump in your car and drive there instantly to try and sort it all out? or do you leave it to people in that neck of the woods?

If your human morality is limited by national borders, that's called "turning a blind eye". It is not a system of morality - it is a failing of one.


Yeah, I love sending innocent men to their death to defend people that consider us an enemy anyway. Know what? There are about 100 other countries in the world completely capable of charging to the rescue of the poor innocent freedom fighters, let them step the fark up for a change. Do you not remember that we are bankrupt? Do you not remember we are in 2 other farking wars already? Slow your roll superman, or put on your god damn cape and do the fighting yourself.
 
2012-12-05 10:11:34 PM

EvilRacistNaziFascist: Omahawg: I swear some of you never watched the tee vee news during the last quarter of the 20th century. there hasn't been a time in my life when bad shiat was going down somewhere on this planet. [snip image] mr. pot is saying 'what's new under the sun, dawg?'

The history of Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge in the mid- 1970s really has to be read to believed... whole cities being emptied of their inhabitants to appease the resentments of Marxist peasants; people being shot for having soft hands, talking too intelligently, or wearing glasses; children being trained as soldiers and encouraged to rat out their parents; and as much as a third of the population ending up dead in the end... it's a useful corrective for those who believe that Communism or some kind of hard- left centralized society is sure to work just great the next time -- or, for that matter, even just a corrective to those who believe that human beings are naturally good.


No one has ever reported hauntings of the killing fields of Cambodia. I consider this to be among the strongest possible evidence that there is no such thing as ghosts.
 
2012-12-05 10:12:44 PM

Marine1: Holocaust Agnostic: [www.thespoiledchild.com image 280x280]
Why wont you support out imperial war? WHERES YOUR BASIC SENSE OF MORALITY?

Imperial war?

Do you know what a damn empire is?


A market with an army.
 
2012-12-05 10:12:54 PM

Lsherm: GAT_00: Lsherm: GAT_00: Lsherm: Where do we base the no-fly enforcement out of?

Hmm, I wonder what kind of ally we have in the area that we've given lots of weapons to? Oh right, Israel. And Turkey is in NATO and has been supporting the rebels for months. And we have a few bases in Saudi Arabia.

Nah, there's nowhere to base out of.

Can you read?

Your reasons are fairly superficial. You just dismiss that we can't use those places. The Iraqi zones were run from Saudi Arabia and Turkey. While Saudi Arabia may be farther, what legitimate reason can you give that we patrolled Northern Iraq from Turkey but can't patrol Syria?

Within the context of the original quote from the article you responded to:

U.S. officials stressed that as of now, the sarin bombs hadn't been loaded onto planes and that Assad hadn't issued a final order to use them. But if he does, one of the officials said, "there's little the outside world can do to stop it."

I pointed out that even if we did use those areas as staging for no-fly zones, it still wouldn't mean we could stop them. Then I pointed out why. I even included that we have a carrier group right off the damn coast and why that might not work.

Saying "no fly zone" doesn't automatically prevent a chemical weapons attack, even if the country in question wants to protect their airmen. They could easily launch short-range attacks that we can't stop regardless of where the staging area is. This is why this word is so important, and I'll bold it for you:

But all of this is a moot point

And I didn't dismiss that we could use those places, I pointed out that even if we could, it wouldn't necessarily prevent a chemical attack, which was your assertion. Hence my question about your literacy. Frankly, after your second response, I think you should go back and read my post again. The only staging area I dismissed was Israel. 

The only thing that's superficial is your assertion that a no fly zone can prevent the attack and, of c ...


yeah they can load those into mortars and fire them.
 
2012-12-05 10:13:28 PM

neongoats: Actually, I take that back. I'm not surprised at all. If you analyze any situation and think, "hmm, what would Sauron do" you can pretty much bet that that is the side the GOP and their forum armies will choose.


You make me giggle and jiggle in all the right places.
 
2012-12-05 10:13:36 PM
Wait... does syria have oil?
 
2012-12-05 10:14:38 PM

Amos Quito: RealAmericanHero: Amos Quito: You assume that the information we have been given is accurate.

I assume that there are games afoot, and remain VERY skeptical.

I believe in the sanity of a Democrat White House a lot more than a Republican White House. Most Republican's are certifiably nuts, so I can't really put their failures on anyone else.

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x333]

Woodrow Wilson - Democrat. Got us into WWI

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x259]

FDR - Democrat - got us into WWII

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x281]

Harry Truman, Democrat. Got us into the Korean War and the start of the Cold War

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x269]

JFK, Democrat. Really got the ball rolling in Vietnam

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x293]

LBJ, Democrat - drastically escalated the Vietnam war

Sorry but I don't share your enthusiasm for white house Democrats.

/Or Republicans, for that matter
//Tweedle (D)
///Tweedle (R)


Did you seriously use US involvement in world war 2 to make a case against the sanity of Democrats when it comes to war?
 
2012-12-05 10:17:05 PM
Yeah, we should probably help those Free Syrian Army rebels.
 
2012-12-05 10:17:23 PM

Keizer_Ghidorah: How would you have handled those if you were president for either of them? Would you have been ready to sacrifice your allies in the name of "Leave me out of this" and feeling good about not fighting?


They were called Isolationists and they were happy to let Europeans kill each other as long as they left the US and our on-again off-again flirtation with imperialism/colonialism in the western hemisphere alone.

It would've worked for as long as the USA could be its own self-contained technocratic state, but the existence of large-scale trade ultimately made it a dead end idea. That and the fact that the US hit peak oil not too long after WWII.
 
2012-12-05 10:17:54 PM

The Troof hurts: You think Saddam having chemical weapons was a fabrication? Despite the fact that he has used them on his own people?


Yes. do a bit of study on chemical weapons. They don't last long unless rigorously maintained. Usually only first world countries have the wherewithal to do this for any significant length of time.
 
2012-12-05 10:19:18 PM

Holocaust Agnostic: [www.thespoiledchild.com image 280x280]
Why wont you support out imperial war? WHERES YOUR BASIC SENSE OF MORALITY?


Hi there, could you please explain which "empire" is at stake here? Thanks so much.
 
2012-12-05 10:19:30 PM

firefly212: Amos Quito: RealAmericanHero: Amos Quito: You assume that the information we have been given is accurate.

I assume that there are games afoot, and remain VERY skeptical.

I believe in the sanity of a Democrat White House a lot more than a Republican White House. Most Republican's are certifiably nuts, so I can't really put their failures on anyone else.

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x333]

Woodrow Wilson - Democrat. Got us into WWI

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x259]

FDR - Democrat - got us into WWII

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x281]

Harry Truman, Democrat. Got us into the Korean War and the start of the Cold War

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x269]

JFK, Democrat. Really got the ball rolling in Vietnam

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x293]

LBJ, Democrat - drastically escalated the Vietnam war

Sorry but I don't share your enthusiasm for white house Democrats.

/Or Republicans, for that matter
//Tweedle (D)
///Tweedle (R)

Did you seriously use US involvement in world war 2 to make a case against the sanity of Democrats when it comes to war?


He's a Libertarian, both sides are bad no matter what.
 
2012-12-05 10:19:56 PM

mr lawson: Repeat after me Fark.

NOT.. OUR ....FARKING.... PROBLEM!


*sigh* It...actually kind of is ohdearlordIcan'tbelieveIjustsaidthat. But blatantly violating at least the spirit of the Geneva Convention? Yeah, that's everyone's business.

/Goddamnitsomuchonafarkingstick, Syria.
 
2012-12-05 10:20:13 PM

erik-k: EvilRacistNaziFascist: erik-k: Take people who historially don't like each other, then draw the lines so half of them benefit and the other half lose, do so without regard for historical demarcations or natural boundaries, and in a place where life is cheap... and you're going to have wars.

I didn't murder her, your honor, I just gave someone with a history of violence guns and egged him on by ranting about how horrible she was and told him where she lived.

To be fair though, someone with a history of violence usually doesn't require much egging. To give you an example, after the 1994 massacres in Rwanda it was frequently alleged in the media that the colonialist Belgians were ultimately to blame for the atrocities, because of the sharp distinctions they drew between the Hutu and the Tutsi. We were never told that the tension between the two groups and their keen sense of ethnic self- awareness in fact dated back to the 15th century. I happen to believe that, if Africans can be given full credit for their positive achievements, they can also take full responsibility for their negative ones. To say any less would be to treat the various African peoples as if they were children, or merely pawns in the hands of more advanced civilizations.

I agree that what happens in Africa today and since colonialism is to the credit or shame of Africa alone.

But on the other hand, to be bluntly honest, colonial-era Africa was a series of pawns in the hands of technologically superior European countries' economic/military chess game. Europe's sin is having set the initial conditions in a way that made matters worse rather than better after decolonialization, and I will assert that it was at least part in calculated sabotage.

You're right that Europe's sin here is in the past and can't be changed, but we should remember what happened so we can avoid it happening again.


I believe the French walked out of....Benin, I believe, and left them folks empty filing cabinets and no idea how the hell to run a country. all in all, it's been ugly but it still could have been worse.

post-colonial fall-out is also very much a factor in the present syria/iraq/lebanon/kurd/turk/palestine clusterfark

and, for the record, England suckered America into World War I which of course then led to WW2 and hail mary, hallelujah, isn't a wonder humanity has survived this long?
 
2012-12-05 10:20:20 PM

Jim_Tressel's_O-Face: mr lawson: Repeat after me Fark.

NOT.. OUR ....FARKING.... PROBLEM!

atomicmask: Not our problem.

Let them gas, genocide, and destroy themselves till they are all dead and gone. That is evolution telling human nature that it needs to clean itself out.

Not, our, problem.

[www.martinfrost.ws image 400x240]

'Not our problem,' amirite?


Oh good, we win the argument.

So uhh, ring up obama and tell him to pump the gas back out of the bombers, k?
 
Ehh
2012-12-05 10:22:03 PM

Grand_Moff_Joseph: Pair that with a visits from Seal Team 6, some Green Berets, and some of fine folks from MI6, and we got ourselves an international ass kicking of a despot.


I'm a peacenik, but I'm all for the ass-kicking of despots. If Assad uses chemical weapons, I'm OK with the big-time raid. I wonder if we know where he is.

/fark Russia
 
2012-12-05 10:22:57 PM
So the US assists rebels to remove a leader they don't approve of.
In desperation, said leader threatens the use of sarin on his own people.
US takes out leader and in his place, end up with a dictator of whom they approve.
Sound familiar?
South America comes to mind.
 
2012-12-05 10:23:46 PM

EvilRacistNaziFascist: Holocaust Agnostic: [www.thespoiledchild.com image 280x280]
Why wont you support out imperial war? WHERES YOUR BASIC SENSE OF MORALITY?

Hi there, could you please explain which "empire" is at stake here? Thanks so much.


The Ottoman!
 
2012-12-05 10:23:53 PM

Holocaust Agnostic: Oh good, we win the argument.

So uhh, ring up obama and tell him to pump the gas back out of the bombers, k?


Ducking behind claims of Godwin? Surrender accepted. Nice of you to admit you lack any soul to be troubled by potential mass deaths.
 
2012-12-05 10:24:06 PM

erik-k: Keizer_Ghidorah: How would you have handled those if you were president for either of them? Would you have been ready to sacrifice your allies in the name of "Leave me out of this" and feeling good about not fighting?

They were called Isolationists and they were happy to let Europeans kill each other as long as they left the US and our on-again off-again flirtation with imperialism/colonialism in the western hemisphere alone.

It would've worked for as long as the USA could be its own self-contained technocratic state, but the existence of large-scale trade ultimately made it a dead end idea. That and the fact that the US hit peak oil not too long after WWII.


And living by the "If I close my eyes, the problem goes away" mentality never works.
 
2012-12-05 10:24:50 PM

RayD8: US takes out leader and in his place, end up with a dictator of whom they approve.


You might want to check with the Department of State on what's going on in Egypt.
 
2012-12-05 10:24:54 PM

erik-k: Linkster: Popcorn Johnny: Linkster: Popcorn Johnny: Reports are the the USS Eisenhower is sitting of the coast of Syria, ready to strike.

TROLL OR MORON, I pick the Later!

Still waiting for an answer here, did you think that the USS Eisenhower had been decommissioned or that Syria was landlocked? It's okay to admit that you're wrong.

Eisenhower is in San Diego, Syria is land locked. So Your Point?

O RLY?
[www.lonelyplanet.com image 466x350]


How can they be land-locked? I thought they were Iran's route to the sea?
 
2012-12-05 10:25:11 PM
Which ever political side has a guy in the white house, that side is suddenly quicker to start lobbing missiles into god-forsaken places. The guys out of power for the moment start sounding like doves. Seen this most of my life.

Were GWB president right now, all these neo-interventionists would be screaming bloody murder about US intervention. And all these hyper-cautious doves would be demanding troops on the ground.

Folks... we are all being played.

/Flame on. I can take it.
 
2012-12-05 10:27:58 PM
I wish america would cut the crap on this charade of promoting "freedom" or "human rights" and just get back to supporting brutal dictators who happen to be friendly to US interests. C'mon, the USA loved the shah, Pinochet, and even saddam Hussein for a while.
 
2012-12-05 10:28:30 PM
So we care about possible genocide in Syria, but we don't care about actual genocide that's happening in Congo?

Ok then.
 
2012-12-05 10:28:30 PM

RayD8: So the US assists rebels to remove a leader they don't approve of.
In desperation, said leader threatens the use of sarin on his own people.
US takes out leader and in his place, end up with a dictator of whom they approve.
Sound familiar?
South America comes to mind.


what? stroessner, pinochet, and somoza were about freedom, man. FREEDOM.

lol

or, how do explain the popularity of a leftie blowhard like chavez? give lots of money to rightie blowards with fancy uniforms and death squads for a few decades. har har har
 
2012-12-05 10:28:54 PM

Ehh: Grand_Moff_Joseph: Pair that with a visits from Seal Team 6, some Green Berets, and some of fine folks from MI6, and we got ourselves an international ass kicking of a despot.

I'm a peacenik, but I'm all for the ass-kicking of despots. If Assad uses chemical weapons, I'm OK with the big-time raid. I wonder if we know where he is.

/fark Russia


So it's all wmd, right? I mean, if some asshole despot decides to kill all his or her people, and they do it the normal way, we're ok with that. But start gassing, and suddenly the world is all interested in your ex-people. Why?

Dead is dead. Killing is killing.
 
2012-12-05 10:29:41 PM

atomicmask: Parmenius: atomicmask: Parmenius: atomicmask: kg2095: atomicmask: robhidalgo: mr lawson: Repeat after me Fark.

NOT.. OUR ....FARKING.... PROBLEM!

Yeah, I love sending innocent men to their death

So far, nobody's talking about a ground invasion. The US has the demonstrable capacity to flatten Assad's air force with very little risk to its own forces, and eliminate the easiest means of delivering chemical weapons.

to defend people that consider us an enemy anyway.
We're talking about weapons of mass destruction, not about the typical civil war. That means civilians - women, children, non-combatant men. What makes you think they consider us an enemy? The average Syrian doesn't give a damn about the US. But if they don't like us, should that be a death sentence when we can lift it?

Know what? There are about 100 other countries in the world completely capable of charging to the rescue of the poor innocent freedom fighters, let them st ...
There may be 4 or 5. Turkey could, after some time, but Assad could argue that Turkey has declared war and perhaps use it to deflect attention. Russia? I sort of think they're afraid to show that they can't handle it. China can't. Germany probably can't - they don't have the logistics. England and France - yes, but not quickly. Only the US can steamroll Syria by itself, although it's much better if the others help.

I really don't get your objection. If the chemical weapons threat is real, this is one of those clear-cut tests they discuss in strategic cost/benefit - not to mention Ethics - as the "easy case". Threat of WMD, substantiated by folks rather more trustworthy than Curveball, projections of civilian death in the thousands, vs nearly assured US success in an air campaign with very low risk of casualties in the dozens. I've known military pilots, and they would give up their paychecks for an obvious opportunity to protect civilians by kicking some ass.
 
2012-12-05 10:31:27 PM

Jim_Tressel's_O-Face: Nice of you to admit you lack any soul to be troubled by potential mass deaths.


I also did not buy a house with my potential lottery winnings.
 
2012-12-05 10:31:48 PM

debug: So we care about possible genocide in Syria, but we don't care about actual genocide that's happening in Congo?

Ok then.


President assad has a scary muslim name

General King Kong Superman and president Hallajullah Simpsons is hard to make the public afraid of, even if they are murdering thousands of innocents.
 
2012-12-05 10:32:48 PM

Ehh: Grand_Moff_Joseph: Pair that with a visits from Seal Team 6, some Green Berets, and some of fine folks from MI6, and we got ourselves an international ass kicking of a despot.

I'm a peacenik, but I'm all for the ass-kicking of despots. If Assad uses chemical weapons, I'm OK with the big-time raid. I wonder if we know where he is.

/fark Russia


But already killing 45,000 people with 'ok' weapons means nothing? What if he doesn't use any chemical weapons but kills another 100,000 with traditional weapons? 200,000?

Just asking
 
2012-12-05 10:32:51 PM

Holocaust Agnostic: I also did not buy a house with my potential lottery winnings.


We get it. Sociopaths gonna sociopath.
 
2012-12-05 10:33:21 PM
We should make Russia do it. It's their fault that things got this far. Let them clean up their own mess.
 
2012-12-05 10:33:21 PM
You mean those same chemical weapons that were moved from Iraq? Now they're in Syria.

Or so the government would have you believe.

Fark all. The Mayans were right.
 
2012-12-05 10:34:39 PM
It amazes me how the W apologists keep trying to compare Iraq to this. Or this to Lybia. It's like they think they can suddenly get Obama to give up his second term if they just prove but Bush! one last time.
 
2012-12-05 10:34:39 PM

conjecture and hearsay: I wish america would cut the crap on this charade of promoting "freedom" or "human rights" and just get back to supporting brutal dictators who happen to be friendly to US interests. C'mon, the USA loved the shah, Pinochet, and even saddam Hussein for a while.


If it's only a "charade" then it must have some sinister or underhanded purpose behind it -- so could you please tell us what might that be, exactly? As far as I can see the US is acting directly against its own interests by preferring unfriendly dictators in the Middle East to friendly ones.
 
2012-12-05 10:34:49 PM
Bluffing, looking for asylum.

/or if I'm wrong tens of thousands of civilians will be killed. Hmm.
 
2012-12-05 10:34:54 PM
If Syria really wants to fark us over, then at some airbase that's upwind of the rebel, they load some Sarin bombs on a MiG-23, roll it onto the apron, then sound the air-raid sirens and scramble some fighters. Evacuate the few troops left at the base (or not and call them martyrs), shoot some AAA in the air randomly in the area and blow the plane up. They get to gas the rebels and blame us for the gas being dispersed.

/Yeah, I'm feeling kind of pessimistic right now
 
2012-12-05 10:35:17 PM
Wenchmaster 2012-12-05 09:39:20 PM

You folks arguing over whether or not the US/NATO/neighboring countries/grey aliens/albigensians/battle pope/superman should intervene or not are taking the wrong approach. Syrian warplanes are bombing the outskirts of Damascus. Several sections of the countryside are effectively in rebel hands, and Assad is hearing reports from foreign media that his daddy's house of cards is falling around his ears.

He's desperate. His position is growing increasingly untenable politically and militarily. He can't run away, because he wouldn't be able to take all the Alawites with him, and they'd kill him if they thought he was leaving them to face the inevitable retribution once the rebels win. He probably can't fight and win conventionally, because he's running out of effective military power from defections, combat losses, and crippled logistics....

I'm not in a position where my opinion carries any weight, but I submit it would be cheap at ten times the price to simply arrange for Assad and his top military and political flunkies (along with all their families) to be flown out of Syria to a lovely retirement villa in Tuscany/Provence/fill-in-the-blank-resort-area and given several million dollars each. Better that than regional/world war or even a few hundred thousand gassed civilians (of any nationality).


I say the pilot of that aircraft ought to have previously volunteered for a covert one way mission.

Right into the middle of some undetermined area of the Med Sea.

Where Assad and his shiatty-ass running dog killer cronies will never be seen or heard from again.
 
2012-12-05 10:35:28 PM

RealAmericanHero: I'm in the camp that we're obligated to help where we can, and if we don't, we're cowards. I also think everyone who would stand by is a coward, and has no real humanity about them. I understand why they say it, but I don't understand how their hearts can be so cold.


Sociopaths do not have the ability to feel empathy or compassion. It is a mental illness. Also a prerequisite for political or corporate success, most of the time.
 
2012-12-05 10:37:08 PM

Parmenius: atomicmask: Parmenius: atomicmask: Parmenius: atomicmask: kg2095: atomicmask: robhidalgo: mr lawson: Repeat after me Fark.

NOT.. OUR ....FARKING.... PROBLEM!

Yeah, I love sending innocent men to their death
So far, nobody's talking about a ground invasion. The US has the demonstrable capacity to flatten Assad's air force with very little risk to its own forces, and eliminate the easiest means of delivering chemical weapons.

to defend people that consider us an enemy anyway.
We're talking about weapons of mass destruction, not about the typical civil war. That means civilians - women, children, non-combatant men. What makes you think they consider us an enemy? The average Syrian doesn't give a damn about the US. But if they don't like us, should that be a death sentence when we can lift it?

Know what? There are about 100 other countries in the world completely capable of charging to the rescue of the poor innocent freedom fighters, let them st ...
There may be 4 or 5. Turkey could, after some time, but Assad could argue that Turkey has declared war and perhaps use it to deflect attention. Russia? I sort of think they're afraid to show that they can't handle it. China can't. Germany probably can't - they don't have the logistics. England and France - yes, but not quickly. Only the US can steamroll Syria by itself, although it's much better if the others help.

I really don't get your objection. If the chemical weapons threat is real, this is one of those clear-cut tests they discuss in strategic cost/benefit - not to mention Ethics - as the "easy case". Threat of WMD, substantiated by folks rather more trustworthy than Curveball, projections of civilian death in the thousands, vs nearly assured US success in an air campaign with very low risk of casualties in the dozens. I've known military pilots, and they would give up their paychecks for an obvious opportunity to protect civilians by kicking some ass.


1. We are broke. let me repeat that again, we do not have the money to toss another billion into some "heroic" war. This is not "we got the money, hey why not" this is "we cant keep the lights on anymore, our economy is shiat, and our roads and power lines are shiat" WE DO NOT HAVE THE MONEY TO PLAY SUPERMAN ANYMORE

2. We are in 2 other wars, to other shiatty pointless wars..

3. IT IS NOT OUR GOD DAMN JOB TO PLAY WORLD POLICE. What part of this is so hard to understand? WMD or not. Let israel handle that shiat, let them fight someone who can fight back for a change. They are the one so upset, let them farking deal with it.
 
2012-12-05 10:37:12 PM
 
2012-12-05 10:37:33 PM

debug: So we care about possible genocide in Syria, but we don't care about actual genocide that's happening in Congo?


Genocide Watch is showing something from two to seven hundred dead over the past few months. How close are they to turning into Rwanda?
 
2012-12-05 10:38:18 PM

debug: So we care about possible genocide in Syria, but we don't care about actual genocide that's happening in Congo?

Ok then.


Don't be fatuous and pretend that people can't care about more than thing at once. This is a thread about Syria and whether or not we go in. You're jacking about the Congo, which is horrible and also deserves more world involvement, but don't get on your high horse without any farking context to tie it to here. They are two different situations with different globalized baggage.
 
2012-12-05 10:39:27 PM
There's a lot of desperation in the air. Also a lot of crazy. People acting in very bad judgement all over the place. I would like to count on people using their humanity. Recent history has shown no evidence of humane treatment. Very bad mix.
 
2012-12-05 10:39:45 PM
I also love the claims of 'Saddam's WMD', as if Syria wouldn't have had a chemical weapons program of its own.
 
2012-12-05 10:40:33 PM

rev. dave: There's a lot of desperation in the air. Also a lot of crazy. People acting in very bad judgement all over the place. I would like to count on people using their humanity. Recent history has shown no evidence of humane treatment. Very bad mix.


Same as it ever was, I'm afraid.
 
2012-12-05 10:40:38 PM
Well I just logged on the white house website and wrote a letter, I think I'll stay up and wait for his personal response:

Please Mr. President, don't allow the Syrian regime to use chemical weapons against its own people.

Like many Americans, I am tired of war, and of needlessly interventionist foreign policy, but passivity in the face of unspeakable evil is not nobility.

This must be stopped, acting in a broad coalition is preferable, but any eventuality that allows the regime to carry out such an act is unacceptable.

Thank you:
xxxxx xxxxxxx
 
2012-12-05 10:40:49 PM

EvilRacistNaziFascist: conjecture and hearsay: I wish america would cut the crap on this charade of promoting "freedom" or "human rights" and just get back to supporting brutal dictators who happen to be friendly to US interests. C'mon, the USA loved the shah, Pinochet, and even saddam Hussein for a while.

If it's only a "charade" then it must have some sinister or underhanded purpose behind it -- so could you please tell us what might that be, exactly? As far as I can see the US is acting directly against its own interests by preferring unfriendly dictators in the Middle East to friendly ones.


No, I'm saying it would be cleaner if it got back to the brutal yet friendly dictators. and by brutal, i only mean towards their own people. The charade is that the USA would make a lick of difference to the democracy or human rights of the people there.
 
2012-12-05 10:42:18 PM

GAT_00: Omahawg: most obvious? israeli air strike in 5-4-3-2......

Israel only attacks people who can't defend themselves. Syria has anti-air defenses.


Never stopped 'em before.
 
2012-12-05 10:42:21 PM

Holocaust Agnostic: Marine1: Holocaust Agnostic: [www.thespoiledchild.com image 280x280]
Why wont you support out imperial war? WHERES YOUR BASIC SENSE OF MORALITY?

Imperial war?

Do you know what a damn empire is?

A market with an army.


You know, if there were some huge conspiracy for the West (particularly the US) to set up an empire just to control the Middle East, I'd support it fully. Why? Because it's a clusterfark.

"Your ancestors were of a different tribe than mine? Death to you!"
"You have differing political views? I'll blow up your car with you in it!"
"Think Jesus is the Son of God? I'll kill you, infidel!"

The list goes on and on and on and on and on. Now, compare that to the countries in NATO, particularly, the US, UK, and Canada. Really, how could the Middle East get any worse if we took, say, Stephen Harper and told everyone in Syria, "This man is now in charge."? Hell, the Canadians don't like him, so if this Assad butthole gets shanked in the crap chute like Gaddafi, I say we send him over. A trade could be arranged. Maybe, just MAYBE, then we could have these countries being run without some farking crisis every three days.

There are very, very few parts of the earth I view with utter contempt. Basically, it's the state of Kansas and the Middle East. I view the Middle East with contempt, because it's a shiathole with a bunch of guys dead-set on killing anyone they disagree with. It doesn't even have some uber-mensch reasoning to it, where they toughest survive and somehow life gets better through a society-permeating Darwinism. It's just one dickbag after another, and somehow, through this incredible amount of white guilt (for lack of a better term), we've convinced ourselves that it's our fault for screwing them up. I honestly don't get it.
 
2012-12-05 10:44:07 PM

Amos Quito: Sorry but I don't share your enthusiasm for white house Democrats.


Oh lord.
 
2012-12-05 10:44:36 PM

dforkus: Well I just logged on the white house website and wrote a letter, I think I'll stay up and wait for his personal response:

Please Mr. President, don't allow the Syrian regime to use chemical weapons against its own people.

Like many Americans, I am tired of war, and of needlessly interventionist foreign policy, but passivity in the face of unspeakable evil is not nobility.

This must be stopped, acting in a broad coalition is preferable, but any eventuality that allows the regime to carry out such an act is unacceptable.

Thank you:
xxxxx xxxxxxx


Dear Citizen,

I can't fap to this.

Signed,

Barack Obama

/sorry, I'm too juvenile for anything serious
 
2012-12-05 10:45:47 PM

vygramul: GAT_00: Omahawg: most obvious? israeli air strike in 5-4-3-2......

Israel only attacks people who can't defend themselves. Syria has anti-air defenses.

Never stopped 'em before.


Bekaa Valley turkey shoot part deux?
 
2012-12-05 10:47:06 PM
A couple, three Los Angeles class submarines off the coast. Sats and drones keeping an eye on where the weapons are being held. Drivers even go near a truck, and there go the airfields and heavy artillery. Send a few at the ministry of defense, air defense command, and Assad's home. Sorry charley, but if you step across that line, your nearest and dearest become targets. Doubt us? Talk to Saddam's boys.
 
2012-12-05 10:47:53 PM

atomicmask: 1. We are broke. let me repeat that again, we do not have the money to toss another billion into some "heroic" war. This is not "we got the money, hey why not" this is "we cant keep the lights on anymore, our economy is shiat, and our roads and power lines are shiat" WE DO NOT HAVE THE MONEY TO PLAY SUPERMAN ANYMORE

No, we are not broke. We owe a lot of money on low-interest loans that take 30 years to mature. We are in debt. That is not "broke", especially when everyone in the neighborhood is falling over themselves to invest in our system. Can that change? Yep. That fear seems a weak justification for ignoring civilian slaughter.

2. We are in 2 other wars, to other shiatty pointless wars..
Afghanistan, and.. ?? And, ignoring the red herring, why is this relevant when we do have the capacity to undertake this?

3. IT IS NOT OUR GOD DAMN JOB TO PLAY WORLD POLICE. What part of this is so hard to understand? WMD or not. Let israel handle that shiat, let them fight someone who can fight back for a change. They are the one so upset, let them farking deal with it.
Israel might. It would work better politically if we do - no single bit of information could unite the Syrians with Assad like the fact of having Israel involved.

And, I would ask you, who is the world police?
 
2012-12-05 10:47:57 PM
Best of all, none of our pilots are at risk.
 
2012-12-05 10:49:23 PM

Marine1: Really, how could the Middle East get any worse if we took, say, Stephen Harper and told everyone in Syria, "This man is now in charge."?


backalleysoapbox.files.wordpress.com 

"I have a kitten and I'm prepared to use it."
 
2012-12-05 10:50:53 PM
If one cuts out the moral equation.

Assad's datd was supported by the USSR, and has always been not so friendly to the US, by helping install the new people one can finally get friendly types in both Lebanon and Syria. So that there is a golden opportunity for a diplomatic restart button.

Lenanon (a Syrian satellite) could then be pressured to undermine Hizbollah and maybe start educating and giving rights to the Palestinians within their borders (maybe I'm dreaming there). But certainly it allows for the US to gain a friendlier foothold in the region, and remove Iran's ally.

But the moral cause I think has a strong argument going for it too.

/That was for the "It's not our problem types, it may not be a problem but it is an opportunity
 
2012-12-05 10:51:32 PM

WTF Indeed: How many Arab countries do we need to bomb until we get one for free?


Probably already been addressed, but Syria isn't Arabic. They are Persian, like Iran. Best to just let Turkey do its thing with our support. Less outrage that way at one Muslim country taking on two others. And yeah, I am expecting Iran to get into this mess too. I just hope Turkey has recieved proper anti-pixel training. And chemical warfare training.
 
2012-12-05 10:51:49 PM
trailers.apple.com

Fark yeah!
 
rka
2012-12-05 10:53:03 PM

nigeman: , by helping install the new people one can finally get friendly types in both Lebanon and Syria.


Recent history says otherwise.
 
2012-12-05 10:55:16 PM

xaveth: At this rate, our Nobel Peace Prize winning President will be the longest serving war time President.


War is peace.
 
2012-12-05 10:55:49 PM
I dont know... I find it hard to believe they would purposely bring the hammer down on themselves like that... could be US propaganda. I mean, look at how we got into the Iraq war...
 
2012-12-05 10:56:26 PM
Wenchmaster

You folks arguing over whether or not the US/NATO/neighboring countries/grey aliens/albigensians/battle pope/superman should intervene or not are taking the wrong approach. Syrian warplanes are bombing the outskirts of Damascus. Several sections of the countryside are effectively in rebel hands, and Assad is hearing reports from foreign media that his daddy's house of cards is falling around his ears.

He's desperate. His position is growing increasingly untenable politically and militarily. He can't run away, because he wouldn't be able to take all the Alawites with him, and they'd kill him if they thought he was leaving them to face the inevitable retribution once the rebels win. He probably can't fight and win conventionally, because he's running out of effective military power from defections, combat losses, and crippled logistics. If he uses his ace-in-the-hole (WMDs), the entire rest of the world will land on him with all four feet. He feels trapped, and a significant percentage of his military staff are probably thinking about making a deal involving his head on a platter. He's got to do something, or his own people will give him the Mussolini treatment in a (probably vain) attempt to curry favor with the victors.

We (the rest of the world) need to offer him some options that don't involve suicide by NATO and/or several hundred thousand dead and maimed civilians. FSM knows he doesn't deserve a break, but Assad and his backers need to have a reasonable belief that they could survive this charlie-foxtrot. Otherwise, there's the very real possibility of sarin-laden bombs and missiles landing on Syrian cities- and possibly Israeli, Turkish, and Jordanian cities, too.

I'm not in a position where my opinion carries any weight, but I submit it would be cheap at ten times the price to simply arrange for Assad and his top military and political flunkies (along with all their families) to be flown out of Syria to a lovely retirement villa in Tuscany/Provence/fill-in-the-blank-resort-area and given several million dollars each. Better that than regional/world war or even a few hundred thousand gassed civilians (of any nationality).


Might be doable. However, Obama ought to have Clinton on the phone to Vlad to see if he'd be willing to commit some excess tonnage plying the Eastern Med to making the pickup in Tartus. Should Assad and family actually get out before being strung up Il duce style by his own folks, then I'm sure there'd be some co-optable General Officers ($$$) that would reveal the location of all the goodies in the arsenal.

U.S. might see its way to providing the russkies a bit of air cover but I'd not consider anything more. Make Vlad eat the dead if the plan goes busto.
 
2012-12-05 10:56:50 PM

Parmenius: atomicmask: 1. We are broke. let me repeat that again, we do not have the money to toss another billion into some "heroic" war. This is not "we got the money, hey why not" this is "we cant keep the lights on anymore, our economy is shiat, and our roads and power lines are shiat" WE DO NOT HAVE THE MONEY TO PLAY SUPERMAN ANYMORE

No, we are not broke. We owe a lot of money on low-interest loans that take 30 years to mature. We are in debt. That is not "broke", especially when everyone in the neighborhood is falling over themselves to invest in our system. Can that change? Yep. That fear seems a weak justification for ignoring civilian slaughter.

2. We are in 2 other wars, to other shiatty pointless wars..
Afghanistan, and.. ?? And, ignoring the red herring, why is this relevant when we do have the capacity to undertake this?

3. IT IS NOT OUR GOD DAMN JOB TO PLAY WORLD POLICE. What part of this is so hard to understand? WMD or not. Let israel handle that shiat, let them fight someone who can fight back for a change. They are the one so upset, let them farking deal with it.
Israel might. It would work better politically if we do - no single bit of information could unite the Syrians with Assad like the fact of having Israel involved.

And, I would ask you, who is the world police?


Nobody. It should be nobody.
 
2012-12-05 10:57:43 PM

Marine1: Holocaust Agnostic: Marine1: Holocaust Agnostic: [www.thespoiledchild.com image 280x280]
Why wont you support out imperial war? WHERES YOUR BASIC SENSE OF MORALITY?

Imperial war?

Do you know what a damn empire is?

A market with an army.

You know, if there were some huge conspiracy for the West (particularly the US) to set up an empire just to control the Middle East, I'd support it fully. Why? Because it's a clusterfark.

"Your ancestors were of a different tribe than mine? Death to you!"
"You have differing political views? I'll blow up your car with you in it!"
"Think Jesus is the Son of God? I'll kill you, infidel!"

The list goes on and on and on and on and on. Now, compare that to the countries in NATO, particularly, the US, UK, and Canada. Really, how could the Middle East get any worse if we took, say, Stephen Harper and told everyone in Syria, "This man is now in charge."? Hell, the Canadians don't like him, so if this Assad butthole gets shanked in the crap chute like Gaddafi, I say we send him over. A trade could be arranged. Maybe, just MAYBE, then we could have these countries being run without some farking crisis every three days.

There are very, very few parts of the earth I view with utter contempt. Basically, it's the state of Kansas and the Middle East. I view the Middle East with contempt, because it's a shiathole with a bunch of guys dead-set on killing anyone they disagree with. It doesn't even have some uber-mensch reasoning to it, where they toughest survive and somehow life gets better through a society-permeating Darwinism. It's just one dickbag after another, and somehow, through this incredible amount of white guilt (for lack of a better term), we've convinced ourselves that it's our fault for screwing them up. I honestly don't get it.


I couldn't find a better version but it's incredibly hilarious.

Did I mention the f$#king sand?
 
2012-12-05 10:58:16 PM
read
https://www.facebook.com/Reaping/posts/229337493752962

note the date,
then read

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/12/05/15706380-syria-loads-ch e mical-weapons-into-bombs-military-awaits-assads-order?lite
 
2012-12-05 10:58:56 PM
Dear Princess Celestia,

17 years ago, a bunch of Japanese cultists did something very bad on a subway. In the ensuing media panic, I learned that basic solutions like washing soda (sodium carbonate), household bleach (sodium hypochlorite, and diluting it a bit is a decent idea), or even lye (sodium hydroxide, and diluting it is really important), all followed by a good rinse with water - were good ideas. I also learned that acidic solutions were bad ideas, so if Bear Grylls (who nobody'd heard of back then) shows up and suggests rinsing with uric acid, you should probably stop him before he makes an already bad situation worse.

I've never needed to remember that, but at the time, it sounded important enough not to forget. So today, I'm just gonna write it down again while continuing to hope that nobody here, nor anybody else half a world away, on any side of any conflict, ever needs to remember it.

Your faithful (but getting annoyed with the state of humanity these days) student,
Twilight Farkle.
 
2012-12-05 10:59:13 PM
Look. This war will pay for itself and the people will love us for liberating the shiat out of them. We'll build them some nice hospitals, schools and improve their infrastructure we cant afford here in America once we rearrange their place. It will take your mind off the ball that we're bankrupt and rocketed off the fiscal cliff.

Look, just put this war on America's charge card. Yes, it's over the limit and Uncle Sam has a debt problem, but he needs another war. Be afraid. No not because of cake this time, it's chemicals.
 
2012-12-05 10:59:38 PM

rka: nigeman: , by helping install the new people one can finally get friendly types in both Lebanon and Syria.

Recent history says otherwise.


which country are you referring to? Libya and Afghanistan are as friendly as ever. Iraq was a shambles that allowed Iran to use its existing infrastructure to invade in a more convincing way, however, both Iraw and afghanistan, though worth the cost, are friendlier than previous regimes. I think it is porbably better to look at limited military exercises such as in the balkans and Libya rather than the full invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, which, by all accounts, were not successes.
 
2012-12-05 11:00:02 PM

brandent: Marine1: Holocaust Agnostic: Marine1: Holocaust Agnostic: [www.thespoiledchild.com image 280x280]
Why wont you support out imperial war? WHERES YOUR BASIC SENSE OF MORALITY?

Imperial war?

Do you know what a damn empire is?

A market with an army.

You know, if there were some huge conspiracy for the West (particularly the US) to set up an empire just to control the Middle East, I'd support it fully. Why? Because it's a clusterfark.

"Your ancestors were of a different tribe than mine? Death to you!"
"You have differing political views? I'll blow up your car with you in it!"
"Think Jesus is the Son of God? I'll kill you, infidel!"

The list goes on and on and on and on and on. Now, compare that to the countries in NATO, particularly, the US, UK, and Canada. Really, how could the Middle East get any worse if we took, say, Stephen Harper and told everyone in Syria, "This man is now in charge."? Hell, the Canadians don't like him, so if this Assad butthole gets shanked in the crap chute like Gaddafi, I say we send him over. A trade could be arranged. Maybe, just MAYBE, then we could have these countries being run without some farking crisis every three days.

There are very, very few parts of the earth I view with utter contempt. Basically, it's the state of Kansas and the Middle East. I view the Middle East with contempt, because it's a shiathole with a bunch of guys dead-set on killing anyone they disagree with. It doesn't even have some uber-mensch reasoning to it, where they toughest survive and somehow life gets better through a society-permeating Darwinism. It's just one dickbag after another, and somehow, through this incredible amount of white guilt (for lack of a better term), we've convinced ourselves that it's our fault for screwing them up. I honestly don't get it.

I couldn't find a better version but it's incredibly hilarious.

Did I mention the f$#king sand?


Let's try that link again:

Did I mention the f$#king sand?
 
2012-12-05 11:00:13 PM

nvmac: dforkus: Well I just logged on the white house website and wrote a letter, I think I'll stay up and wait for his personal response:

Please Mr. President, don't allow the Syrian regime to use chemical weapons against its own people.

Like many Americans, I am tired of war, and of needlessly interventionist foreign policy, but passivity in the face of unspeakable evil is not nobility.

This must be stopped, acting in a broad coalition is preferable, but any eventuality that allows the regime to carry out such an act is unacceptable.

Thank you:
xxxxx xxxxxxx

Dear Citizen,

I can't fap to this.

Signed,

Barack Obama

/sorry, I'm too juvenile for anything serious


Have you hacked my email?
 
2012-12-05 11:01:06 PM
that last effeort, was woeful, let me edit


which country are you referring to? Libya and Afghanistan are as friendly as ever. Iraq was a shambles that allowed Iran to use its existing infrastructure to invade in a more convincing way, however, both Iraq and afghanistan, though certainly notworth the cost, are friendlier than previous regimes. I think it is porbably better to look at limited military exercises such as in the balkans and Libya rather than the full invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, which, by all accounts, were not successes.
 
2012-12-05 11:01:41 PM

atomicmask: Nobody. It should be nobody.


Fine. We'll just pull our Navy back to our coasts and let the sea lanes police themselves.
 
2012-12-05 11:02:05 PM

Amos Quito: cman: cman: cameroncrazy1984: cman: Look what happened with Bush and Iraq. Mushroom Cloud Smoking Gun, remember that? This doesnt concern us

Wait, how is this in any way similar to Iraq?

Because, remember, Saddam Hussein had WMD's and was committing genocide against his own people, right? We were played for fools then; lets not get played for fools now.

[media.tumblr.com image 323x384]

^^^ Never thought he would agree with cman ^^^


SUCKERS!


GULF WAR 2.0
 
2012-12-05 11:02:24 PM

yagottabefarkinkiddinme: Look, just put this war on America's charge card. Yes, it's over the limit and Uncle Sam has a debt problem, but he needs another war. Be afraid. No not because of cake this time, it's chemicals.


Who's afraid?
 
2012-12-05 11:03:01 PM

yagottabefarkinkiddinme: Look. This war will pay for itself and the people will love us for liberating the shiat out of them. We'll build them some nice hospitals, schools and improve their infrastructure we cant afford here in America once we rearrange their place. It will take your mind off the ball that we're bankrupt and rocketed off the fiscal cliff.

Look, just put this war on America's charge card. Yes, it's over the limit and Uncle Sam has a debt problem, but he needs another war. Be afraid. No not because of cake this time, it's chemicals.


I remember the same thing being said about Libya. Surprisingly, the US hasn't collapsed into a chaotic mess since that whole operation.
 
2012-12-05 11:03:11 PM
And this is why we shouldn't let nations run by crazy people attempt to acquire WMD's. If this situation blows up (not that I want that to happen) the silver lining might be a lot more international pressure on other (politically and\or mentally) unstable countries to stay away from the development or stockpiling of WMD's or the rest of the world might do a bit of preventative maintenance on their facilities. And by preventative maintenance I mean destroy them completely before it becomes a problem.
 
2012-12-05 11:03:54 PM
 
2012-12-05 11:06:10 PM

Marine1: yagottabefarkinkiddinme: Look. This war will pay for itself and the people will love us for liberating the shiat out of them. We'll build them some nice hospitals, schools and improve their infrastructure we cant afford here in America once we rearrange their place. It will take your mind off the ball that we're bankrupt and rocketed off the fiscal cliff.

Look, just put this war on America's charge card. Yes, it's over the limit and Uncle Sam has a debt problem, but he needs another war. Be afraid. No not because of cake this time, it's chemicals.

I remember the same thing being said about Libya. Surprisingly, the US hasn't collapsed into a chaotic mess since that whole operation.


Couple thousand black people got the axe though.

inb4 snotty liberal comments about "are you saying Obama doesn't care about black people?"
 
2012-12-05 11:06:57 PM

Gdalescrboz: kendelrio: Honestly, I don't give a fark which side of the political spectrum you land on..... Using Sarin gas is farking HORRIFIC!!! The agony involved in the dying is farking horrible! We aren't talking about soldiers who are (or should be) prepared to fight in a chemical environment. We are talking about civilians; men, women and children.

It making you feel good is not a reason to go to war, especially if you aren't the one who is going to fight it.


Who said anything about me feeling good? I'm talking about civilians being murdered. Besides, I fought my war. Desert Storm 1 The Phantom Menace....


/0811
//A 1/12
 
2012-12-05 11:07:59 PM

Alonjar: I dont know... I find it hard to believe they would purposely bring the hammer down on themselves like that... could be US propaganda. I mean, look at how we got into the Iraq war...


Yes, we're the only ones who use propaganda.

www.welovetheiraqiinformationminister.com

/hot
 
2012-12-05 11:08:51 PM

Smeggy Smurf: xaveth: At this rate, our Nobel Peace Prize winning President will be the longest serving war time President.

War is peace.


Is there any reason the NPP keeps being brought up?
 
2012-12-05 11:09:31 PM
I have lots of contacts in Syria, and I chat with them daily. (The fact that they still have internet blows my mind.). Anyway, interestingly, this morning I got a video that is supposedly of rebels with chemical weapons they "captured" that they claim to be planning on using to kill Alawites. Who knows if this is true. Do you? Exactly. The point being that neither does anybody else, and this "news" can easily be used to forward the agenda of a power. Not that such a thing has ever been done before....cough.
 
2012-12-05 11:09:55 PM

Mentat: yagottabefarkinkiddinme: Look, just put this war on America's charge card. Yes, it's over the limit and Uncle Sam has a debt problem, but he needs another war. Be afraid. No not because of cake this time, it's chemicals.

Who's afraid?


I don't know.

I'm not afraid, I don't think Assad is working with Alqueda, or is planning to attack America.
I don't think we should invade Syria with a half million man Army, or occupy it for 10 years either.

But I do think if we (the royal we, as in first world nations in general not just the USA) have the capability (and I'm not saying we do, but if we do) and yet do absolutely nothing to stop a for-real sarin gas attack on Syrian civilians because "sigh, we're tired of war, an who said we are the worlds policeman anyways?", well then that's a sad indictment on the human race, almost as sad a the sociopathic bastard that would carry out the bombing in the first place...
 
2012-12-05 11:09:58 PM

Linkster: GAT_00: Repeating myself since this might go green:

U.S. officials stressed that as of now, the sarin bombs hadn't been loaded onto planes and that Assad hadn't issued a final order to use them. But if he does, one of the officials said, "there's little the outside world can do to stop it."

No Fly Zone

Nope, destroy the aircraft on the ground, NOW!


That's actually a good idea. I would be ok with us doing that.
 
2012-12-05 11:10:00 PM
vegtastic.net 

I can't wait to see how all this ends...
 
2012-12-05 11:10:02 PM

Keizer_Ghidorah: Is there any reason the NPP keeps being brought up?


Irony mostly...
 
2012-12-05 11:10:08 PM

Marine1: I remember the same thing being said about Libya. Surprisingly, the US hasn't collapsed into a chaotic mess since that whole operation.


... because bankruptcy is a gradual process. But what am I saying, surely any unnecessary foreign military intervention must be justified as long as a Nobel prize winner is presiding over it?
 
2012-12-05 11:12:10 PM

Radioactive Ass: And this is why we shouldn't let nations run by crazy people attempt to acquire WMD's. If this situation blows up (not that I want that to happen) the silver lining might be a lot more international pressure on other (politically and\or mentally) unstable countries to stay away from the development or stockpiling of WMD's or the rest of the world might do a bit of preventative maintenance on their facilities. And by preventative maintenance I mean destroy them completely before it becomes a problem.


Doubtful.

You know, you really have to wonder... at what point will the Middle East eventually cry "Uncle!" ? It's not unprecedented. Europe was more or less a bloodbath from the collapse of the Roman Empire (if the Church hadn't been around, it might have been even worse, but that's another discussion) up until 1945. They were always ready for war. It took a war that involved mechanized genocide and 30 million deaths for them to stop. Eventually, the destruction will simply be too much for even the most well-prepared sections of their society to bear... but what will it take? Nuclear detonations? Decade-long mechanized warfare? What's the trigger for surrender?
 
2012-12-05 11:13:14 PM
Ha Ha, Glad there is some people here that did pass Geography.

Still, The Point remains, This Asshat needs Stopped. You all have it fingered out. good luck!
 
2012-12-05 11:14:00 PM

pudding7: Linkster: GAT_00: Repeating myself since this might go green:

U.S. officials stressed that as of now, the sarin bombs hadn't been loaded onto planes and that Assad hadn't issued a final order to use them. But if he does, one of the officials said, "there's little the outside world can do to stop it."

No Fly Zone

Nope, destroy the aircraft on the ground, NOW!

That's actually a good idea. I would be ok with us doing that.


If they are already loaded, you just did their job for them.

/Unless you want to Nuke the airfields
 
2012-12-05 11:14:03 PM

EvilRacistNaziFascist: Marine1: I remember the same thing being said about Libya. Surprisingly, the US hasn't collapsed into a chaotic mess since that whole operation.

... because bankruptcy is a gradual process. But what am I saying, surely any unnecessary foreign military intervention must be justified as long as a Nobel prize winner is presiding over it?


I don't like Obama either.

We've been through much worse as a nation than what we're in now. We'll dig out. It won't be through constant biatching and through ignoring moral atrocities, though, so you can cut that act.
 
2012-12-05 11:15:32 PM

Marine1: Radioactive Ass: And this is why we shouldn't let nations run by crazy people attempt to acquire WMD's. If this situation blows up (not that I want that to happen) the silver lining might be a lot more international pressure on other (politically and\or mentally) unstable countries to stay away from the development or stockpiling of WMD's or the rest of the world might do a bit of preventative maintenance on their facilities. And by preventative maintenance I mean destroy them completely before it becomes a problem.

Doubtful.

You know, you really have to wonder... at what point will the Middle East eventually cry "Uncle!" ? It's not unprecedented. Europe was more or less a bloodbath from the collapse of the Roman Empire (if the Church hadn't been around, it might have been even worse, but that's another discussion) up until 1945. They were always ready for war. It took a war that involved mechanized genocide and 30 million deaths for them to stop. Eventually, the destruction will simply be too much for even the most well-prepared sections of their society to bear... but what will it take? Nuclear detonations? Decade-long mechanized warfare? What's the trigger for surrender?


www.ldolphin.org

lol
 
2012-12-05 11:16:02 PM

Mentat: atomicmask: Nobody. It should be nobody.

Fine. We'll just pull our Navy back to our coasts and let the sea lanes police themselves.


Sounds good
 
2012-12-05 11:16:07 PM

Linkster: Popcorn Johnny: Linkster: Popcorn Johnny: Reports are the the USS Eisenhower is sitting of the coast of Syria, ready to strike.

TROLL OR MORON, I pick the Later!

Still waiting for an answer here, did you think that the USS Eisenhower had been decommissioned or that Syria was landlocked? It's okay to admit that you're wrong.

Eisenhower is in San Diego, Syria is land locked. So Your Point?



You're even worse at trolling than I am.
 
2012-12-05 11:17:59 PM

Omahawg: Marine1: Radioactive Ass: And this is why we shouldn't let nations run by crazy people attempt to acquire WMD's. If this situation blows up (not that I want that to happen) the silver lining might be a lot more international pressure on other (politically and\or mentally) unstable countries to stay away from the development or stockpiling of WMD's or the rest of the world might do a bit of preventative maintenance on their facilities. And by preventative maintenance I mean destroy them completely before it becomes a problem.

Doubtful.

You know, you really have to wonder... at what point will the Middle East eventually cry "Uncle!" ? It's not unprecedented. Europe was more or less a bloodbath from the collapse of the Roman Empire (if the Church hadn't been around, it might have been even worse, but that's another discussion) up until 1945. They were always ready for war. It took a war that involved mechanized genocide and 30 million deaths for them to stop. Eventually, the destruction will simply be too much for even the most well-prepared sections of their society to bear... but what will it take? Nuclear detonations? Decade-long mechanized warfare? What's the trigger for surrender?

[www.ldolphin.org image 644x315]

lol


I think even the ol' J-Man would probably pass on going through there.

"That place has really gone down hill since I left."- 2nd Lebowski 4:20
 
2012-12-05 11:18:37 PM

Marine1: Radioactive Ass: And this is why we shouldn't let nations run by crazy people attempt to acquire WMD's. If this situation blows up (not that I want that to happen) the silver lining might be a lot more international pressure on other (politically and\or mentally) unstable countries to stay away from the development or stockpiling of WMD's or the rest of the world might do a bit of preventative maintenance on their facilities. And by preventative maintenance I mean destroy them completely before it becomes a problem.

Doubtful.

You know, you really have to wonder... at what point will the Middle East eventually cry "Uncle!" ? It's not unprecedented. Europe was more or less a bloodbath from the collapse of the Roman Empire (if the Church hadn't been around, it might have been even worse, but that's another discussion) up until 1945. They were always ready for war. It took a war that involved mechanized genocide and 30 million deaths for them to stop. Eventually, the destruction will simply be too much for even the most well-prepared sections of their society to bear... but what will it take? Nuclear detonations? Decade-long mechanized warfare? What's the trigger for surrender?


That's the problem.

We're talking about an area where most of the population believes that it's quite all right to off innocent civilians in martyrdom suicide bombings. That is OK to stone people to death for being raped.

The worst atrocities of what we call world wars, to these folks....are called "Thursday". Yea, yea, "religion of peace" and all that. Until a cartoonist come along.

You cannot attribute what we call morals to a belief structure that puts positive rewards onto those that kills women, children, and / or innocent and otherwise uninvolved civilians. Period.
 
2012-12-05 11:19:38 PM

atomicmask: Mentat: atomicmask: Nobody. It should be nobody.

Fine. We'll just pull our Navy back to our coasts and let the sea lanes police themselves.

Sounds good


I hope you aren't too big on shipped goods. You know, food, vehicles, electronics, medicine...
 
2012-12-05 11:20:04 PM

Radioactive Ass: Keizer_Ghidorah: Is there any reason the NPP keeps being brought up?

Irony mostly...


How is it ironic? It wasn't given to him because he proposed to make a utopia or banish war, and he was thinking "WTF?" along with the rest of us when it was handed to him.

Besides, is there some sort of law or expectation that says someone who gets a NPP must turn into a whimpering peacenik?
 
2012-12-05 11:20:53 PM

Ehh: Grand_Moff_Joseph: Pair that with a visits from Seal Team 6, some Green Berets, and some of fine folks from MI6, and we got ourselves an international ass kicking of a despot.

I'm a peacenik, but I'm all for the ass-kicking of despots. If Assad uses chemical weapons, I'm OK with the big-time raid. I wonder if we know where he is.

/fark Russia



Is that like having a black friend?
 
2012-12-05 11:21:23 PM
FTFA: The Syrian military is prepared to use chemical weapons against its own people and is awaiting final orders from President Bashar Assad, U.S. officials told NBC News on Wednesday.

If this is true, Assad has just signed his own death warrant.
 
rka
2012-12-05 11:21:27 PM

Marine1: It took a war that involved mechanized genocide and 30 million deaths for them to stop.


And two superpowers rattling nuclear sabers over their prostrate bodies for a generation or two.

And they didn't really stop, they just stopped killing on their own soil until the Balkans. Not 5 years after WWII many European countries were in Korea. Not to mention Algeria. Vietnam. Suez. East Africa. Britain still gets a hard-on every time Uncle Sam revs up the war machine.
 
2012-12-05 11:22:07 PM

Marine1: We've been through much worse as a nation than what we're in now. We'll dig out. It won't be through constant biatching and through ignoring moral atrocities, though, so you can cut that act.


I'm not acting at all, you pretentious twat. If you disagree with my opinions that's one thing, but it's another to pretend you have the magical ability to read minds of complete strangers on the internet and to discern who is sincere and who is not.
 
2012-12-05 11:22:14 PM

xaks: Marine1: Radioactive Ass: And this is why we shouldn't let nations run by crazy people attempt to acquire WMD's. If this situation blows up (not that I want that to happen) the silver lining might be a lot more international pressure on other (politically and\or mentally) unstable countries to stay away from the development or stockpiling of WMD's or the rest of the world might do a bit of preventative maintenance on their facilities. And by preventative maintenance I mean destroy them completely before it becomes a problem.

Doubtful.

You know, you really have to wonder... at what point will the Middle East eventually cry "Uncle!" ? It's not unprecedented. Europe was more or less a bloodbath from the collapse of the Roman Empire (if the Church hadn't been around, it might have been even worse, but that's another discussion) up until 1945. They were always ready for war. It took a war that involved mechanized genocide and 30 million deaths for them to stop. Eventually, the destruction will simply be too much for even the most well-prepared sections of their society to bear... but what will it take? Nuclear detonations? Decade-long mechanized warfare? What's the trigger for surrender?

That's the problem.

We're talking about an area where most of the population believes that it's quite all right to off innocent civilians in martyrdom suicide bombings. That is OK to stone people to death for being raped.

The worst atrocities of what we call world wars, to these folks....are called "Thursday". Yea, yea, "religion of peace" and all that. Until a cartoonist come along.

You cannot attribute what we call morals to a belief structure that puts positive rewards onto those that kills women, children, and / or innocent and otherwise uninvolved civilians. Period.


Well, that's just it... Europe was the exact same way. Hell, the early colonial period in North America was as well.
 
2012-12-05 11:23:16 PM

EvilRacistNaziFascist: Marine1: We've been through much worse as a nation than what we're in now. We'll dig out. It won't be through constant biatching and through ignoring moral atrocities, though, so you can cut that act.

I'm not acting at all, you pretentious twat. If you disagree with my opinions that's one thing, but it's another to pretend you have the magical ability to read minds of complete strangers on the internet and to discern who is sincere and who is not.


Go to bed, honey.
 
2012-12-05 11:23:39 PM
Just what the fark *do* you Americans spend that defence budget on if the USN and USAF don't have a sufficient supply of jet fuel and munitions to conduct an "oh no you don't" strike without tipping the entire nation into bankruptcy?

I assume all operational training has also been halted?
 
2012-12-05 11:26:01 PM

Marine1: xaks: Marine1: Radioactive Ass: And this is why we shouldn't let nations run by crazy people attempt to acquire WMD's. If this situation blows up (not that I want that to happen) the silver lining might be a lot more international pressure on other (politically and\or mentally) unstable countries to stay away from the development or stockpiling of WMD's or the rest of the world might do a bit of preventative maintenance on their facilities. And by preventative maintenance I mean destroy them completely before it becomes a problem.

Doubtful.

You know, you really have to wonder... at what point will the Middle East eventually cry "Uncle!" ? It's not unprecedented. Europe was more or less a bloodbath from the collapse of the Roman Empire (if the Church hadn't been around, it might have been even worse, but that's another discussion) up until 1945. They were always ready for war. It took a war that involved mechanized genocide and 30 million deaths for them to stop. Eventually, the destruction will simply be too much for even the most well-prepared sections of their society to bear... but what will it take? Nuclear detonations? Decade-long mechanized warfare? What's the trigger for surrender?

That's the problem.

We're talking about an area where most of the population believes that it's quite all right to off innocent civilians in martyrdom suicide bombings. That is OK to stone people to death for being raped.

The worst atrocities of what we call world wars, to these folks....are called "Thursday". Yea, yea, "religion of peace" and all that. Until a cartoonist come along.

You cannot attribute what we call morals to a belief structure that puts positive rewards onto those that kills women, children, and / or innocent and otherwise uninvolved civilians. Period.

Well, that's just it... Europe was the exact same way. Hell, the early colonial period in North America was as well.


Yep.

Here's the problem.

Look at what ended up being done in order to get rid of that shiat.

Now look at the region in question, and think about politics and modern weaponry.

This IS no 'right answer' for this mess, there never has been, and there likely won't be. Someone is going to have to step up and deal with it, or it will simply continue as it has for a long damned time.

I just really, really hope is isn't us that does.
 
2012-12-05 11:26:35 PM

costermonger: Just what the fark *do* you Americans spend that defence budget on if the USN and USAF don't have a sufficient supply of jet fuel and munitions to conduct an "oh no you don't" strike without tipping the entire nation into bankruptcy?

I assume all operational training has also been halted?


What do you mean we don't have a sufficient supply line?

Hell, it was the European members of NATO who were buying munitions from us at-cost to finish off the Libyans after they ran out of bombs.

That's some mighty fine level of preparedness there, Lou.
 
2012-12-05 11:28:37 PM

xaks: Marine1: xaks: Marine1: Radioactive Ass: And this is why we shouldn't let nations run by crazy people attempt to acquire WMD's. If this situation blows up (not that I want that to happen) the silver lining might be a lot more international pressure on other (politically and\or mentally) unstable countries to stay away from the development or stockpiling of WMD's or the rest of the world might do a bit of preventative maintenance on their facilities. And by preventative maintenance I mean destroy them completely before it becomes a problem.

Doubtful.

You know, you really have to wonder... at what point will the Middle East eventually cry "Uncle!" ? It's not unprecedented. Europe was more or less a bloodbath from the collapse of the Roman Empire (if the Church hadn't been around, it might have been even worse, but that's another discussion) up until 1945. They were always ready for war. It took a war that involved mechanized genocide and 30 million deaths for them to stop. Eventually, the destruction will simply be too much for even the most well-prepared sections of their society to bear... but what will it take? Nuclear detonations? Decade-long mechanized warfare? What's the trigger for surrender?

That's the problem.

We're talking about an area where most of the population believes that it's quite all right to off innocent civilians in martyrdom suicide bombings. That is OK to stone people to death for being raped.

The worst atrocities of what we call world wars, to these folks....are called "Thursday". Yea, yea, "religion of peace" and all that. Until a cartoonist come along.

You cannot attribute what we call morals to a belief structure that puts positive rewards onto those that kills women, children, and / or innocent and otherwise uninvolved civilians. Period.

Well, that's just it... Europe was the exact same way. Hell, the early colonial period in North America was as well.

Yep.

Here's the problem.

Look at what ended up being done in order to get rid ...


Well, short of the EU growing a spine on this sort of thing, it is going to be us.

That's the downside of being the superpower in the world. Even more so now that international relations are expected to be carried out with a certain level of morality.
 
2012-12-05 11:32:34 PM

BarkingUnicorn: tirob: Amos Quito: Anyone hear what the alleged SOURCE of this "intelligence" is?

"U.S. reconnaissance satellites and other tools last week detected increased activity at several chemical weapons depots in Syria, including movement of some weapons into position where President Assad's forces could more quickly deliver them by aircraft or artillery, two U.S. officials said in interviews."



Look, the answer he's fishing for is "The Jews," okay?
 
2012-12-05 11:32:38 PM

xaks: This IS no 'right answer' for this mess, there never has been, and there likely won't be. Someone is going to have to step up and deal with it, or it will simply continue as it has for a long damned time.


After we pretty well wiped out Europe and Japan, and at the same time Russia and China got the shiat kicked out of their respective lands, it seemed like actual fighting ended. I mean, Korea and Vietnam, but neither of those have had a good war since we got the whole awesome killing machine thing down.

Maybe the Bible is onto something about a second coming of Jesus after the entire middle east gets blown up. Not in a literal sense, but at that point we might finally be on a path to stop blowing each other up so much.

After that, we just need to solve the War On Drugs and we can probably retard mass violence to college campuses and movie theaters.

/only half-joking
 
2012-12-05 11:33:48 PM

Marine1: You know, you really have to wonder... at what point will the Middle East eventually cry "Uncle!" ? It's not unprecedented. Europe was more or less a bloodbath from the collapse of the Roman Empire (if the Church hadn't been around, it might have been even worse, but that's another discussion) up until 1945. They were always ready for war. It took a war that involved mechanized genocide and 30 million deaths for them to stop. Eventually, the destruction will simply be too much for even the most well-prepared sections of their society to bear... but what will it take? Nuclear detonations? Decade-long mechanized warfare? What's the trigger for surrender?


Europe (and Japan for that matter) didn't so much cry uncle as it did have "Uncle" forced upon them by the major players from the outside (the United States and Russia). Britain had some influence as did France in the form of the UN Security Council but most of the events were out of their hands outside of becoming staging points during the Cold War. The Cold War (along with the Marshall Plan) was probably the main reason that Europe didn't fall back into chaos. By having just two sides (NATO and Warsaw Pact) it was easier to tell who was on whose side. Pre-WWII it was multiple sides all looking out for just their own best interests and there's no reason to think that without any outside influence that it wouldn't have happened again.

If the US had simply pulled out of Europe and left it to its own means starting in May of 1945 (like it did in 1918) there probably would've been a WWIII back in the 50's or 60's. After a generation or three of peace and prosperity being essentially forced upon them they wised up and realized that they had it good now and didn't want to see that go away. I'm afraid that that will be the only way that the Middle East will ever sort itself out. I'm not saying or even suggesting that the US be the one to force stability on the region but someone will eventually need to step up to the plate and give it a try or the region will eventually burn itself to the ground and stability will come from nobody being left alive to fight each other.
 
2012-12-05 11:34:21 PM

Marine1: Eventually, the destruction will simply be too much for even the most well-prepared sections of their society to bear... but what will it take? Nuclear detonations? Decade-long mechanized warfare? What's the trigger for surrender?


Well said. I think we need to be supportive of efforts of freeing Syria, we also do not need to get too involved in their efforts. We should have gone into Baghdad the first time we were there. We should not be entrenched in Afghanistan, but we are. It is a tribal country and that has never worked, ask G. Khan. With a little support Turkey will be able to take care of themselves. This is one mess we need to stay away from.

The wars in the Mid-East have been going on for centuries (probably since the beginning of man-kind). Let them fight. It was the British who drew the boundaries of Israel, let them take care of that shait. Let get back to focusing on the USA and what we are good at, innovation, ingenuity, and the feeling that we can overcome.

So, does anyone else think that religion is a creation of man, so he can rage wars?
 
2012-12-05 11:35:18 PM

Marine1: Radioactive Ass: And this is why we shouldn't let nations run by crazy people attempt to acquire WMD's. If this situation blows up (not that I want that to happen) the silver lining might be a lot more international pressure on other (politically and\or mentally) unstable countries to stay away from the development or stockpiling of WMD's or the rest of the world might do a bit of preventative maintenance on their facilities. And by preventative maintenance I mean destroy them completely before it becomes a problem.

Doubtful.

You know, you really have to wonder... at what point will the Middle East eventually cry "Uncle!" ? It's not unprecedented. Europe was more or less a bloodbath from the collapse of the Roman Empire (if the Church hadn't been around, it might have been even worse, but that's another discussion) up until 1945. They were always ready for war. It took a war that involved mechanized genocide and 30 million deaths for them to stop. Eventually, the destruction will simply be too much for even the most well-prepared sections of their society to bear... but what will it take? Nuclear detonations? Decade-long mechanized warfare? What's the trigger for surrender?


How far is too far? For many who have lived with violence most of their lives, too far is much farther than you or I would even consider on our worst days. These acts not only support their beliefs, they are in defense of them and some believe they are rewarded for that defense, regardless of how brutal it may be.

Peace at all costs is something a zealous person would rarely consider, and they will likely be branded a heretic if they do. If people would let go of the fear of death, life would be much more peaceful.
 
2012-12-05 11:35:21 PM

Marine1: What do you mean we don't have a sufficient supply line?

Hell, it was the European members of NATO who were buying munitions from us at-cost to finish off the Libyans after they ran out of bombs.

That's some mighty fine level of preparedness there, Lou.


Sarcastic jab at the "we can't afford it!" idiocy. With a carrier nearby, and being conveniently located near allied air bases, I find it hard to believe that a significant portion of Syria's air power couldn't be eliminated for the cost of a week's training during Red Flag.
 
2012-12-05 11:37:06 PM

atomicmask: Mentat: atomicmask: Nobody. It should be nobody.

Fine. We'll just pull our Navy back to our coasts and let the sea lanes police themselves.

Sounds good


I doubt you would still feel that way after the third day.
 
2012-12-05 11:37:40 PM

ATRDCI:
Who's next?


I like Tom Lehrer as much as the next guy, but as much as he wanted to be next, nope, not his.

Omahawg: skull valley, 1968. never forget....

[upload.wikimedia.org image 260x208]


Funny thing about bleach. What could have come in handy in Japan, would also have helped for that fat sheep, my diminutive equine, or even a skinny puppy.

Don't throw the past away,
You might need it some rainy day.
Nightmares come true again,
When everything old is new again...
 
2012-12-05 11:38:06 PM

mr lawson: Mentat: Yes, it is. This has the potential to engulf the entire Middle East including several of our allies who may or may not end up on the same side. This isn't the same situation as Iraq.

Nope...Let's try letting them killing off each other for a while. The whole Middle East seem to want war. Fine. Let'em have it.

NOT OUR PROBLEM


Amazing. And here I thought people who believed in a disconnected world of discrete nation-states only existed in history books. I'm not saying it's America's fault, but to think that this is not our problem is some deliciously 15th Century thinking.
 
2012-12-05 11:39:04 PM

Mentat: atomicmask: Mentat: atomicmask: Nobody. It should be nobody.

Fine. We'll just pull our Navy back to our coasts and let the sea lanes police themselves.

Sounds good

I doubt you would still feel that way after the third day.


Really? I live in farm land in the middle of no where, I will live without my Audi's and foreign cars.
 
2012-12-05 11:40:32 PM
I'm not a bible person. But I found this interesting.

"The beast I saw resembled a leopard, but had feet like those of a bear and a mouth like that of a lion. The dragon gave the beast his power and his throne and great authority."
Revelation 13:2

Russian bears we all know.
The dragon is the chinese "national animal."
The leopard is Iran's national animals.
The lion is often used by Jihadists to describe people making actions in the name of Jihad.
 
2012-12-05 11:44:35 PM

Radioactive Ass: If the US had simply pulled out of Europe and left it to its own means starting in May of 1945 (like it did in 1918) there probably would've been a WWIII back in the 50's or 60's. After a generation or three of peace and prosperity being essentially forced upon them they wised up and realized that they had it good now and didn't want to see that go away. I'm afraid that that will be the only way that the Middle East will ever sort itself out. I'm not saying or even suggesting that the US be the one to force stability on the region but someone will eventually need to step up to the plate and give it a try or the region will eventually burn itself to the ground and stability will come from nobody being left alive to fight each other.


Nation building is almost an obviously required step. Home field also plays a part though, it would seem. Once things get horrific enough, you just don't want to let things go that far twice.

For the US, the Civil War seemed to be that breaking point. I think part of why 9/11 hit home so badly was that the mainland hadn't seen that kind of loss since the 1860's. We've had our problems, but even 150 years later most of the population is not going to tolerate a shooting war in their own backyard.

For Europe and most of Asia WW1 was the start of the battle, but WW2 pretty well ended it. Obviously helping rebuild the destroyed areas made things happen more quickly, but really the areas that saw the worst of it have been the areas that have shown the least intrest in getting involved in another neighborhood battle as well.

All of those areas had reconstruction occur after the wars as well, which is something we haven't quite seemed to figure out in the middle east yet. Not to say it can't work, but maybe we just need to step back and let things really fall apart before we can really help them to rebuild. NIMBY's do a lot of harm, but when it comes to war they probably have the right idea.

Obviously, we have to keep track of WMD's and make sure we know where they are, but maybe we just have to finally let the middle east blow up to actually let them find peace?

I know it sounds terrible, but I just wonder if any other option will actually work.
 
2012-12-05 11:45:02 PM

Marine1: Go to bed, honey.


"Honey"? Is this one of these don't ask, don't tell things?
 
2012-12-05 11:46:26 PM

scubamage: I'm not a bible person. But I found this interesting.

"The beast I saw resembled a leopard, but had feet like those of a bear and a mouth like that of a lion. The dragon gave the beast his power and his throne and great authority."
Revelation 13:2

Russian bears we all know.
The dragon is the chinese "national animal."
The leopard is Iran's national animals.
The lion is often used by Jihadists to describe people making actions in the name of Jihad.


How did they know about bears in that region back then?

If the Bible had been written elsewhere, the Beast would have the body of a jaguar, the tail of a caiman, and the head of a howler monkey. Or the body of a walrus, the legs of a moose, and a mouth like an orca.

/imagine if instead of a serpent, it was a manatee who tempted Eve
 
2012-12-05 11:47:31 PM

Keizer_Ghidorah: If the Bible had been written elsewhere, the Beast would have the body of a jaguar, the tail of a caiman, and the head of a howler monkey. Or the body of a walrus, the legs of a moose, and a mouth like an orca.

/imagine if instead of a serpent, it was a manatee who tempted Eve


I just knew that narwhals had an evil side.
 
2012-12-05 11:47:52 PM

Omahawg: Marine1: Radioactive Ass: And this is why we shouldn't let nations run by crazy people attempt to acquire WMD's. If this situation blows up (not that I want that to happen) the silver lining might be a lot more international pressure on other (politically and\or mentally) unstable countries to stay away from the development or stockpiling of WMD's or the rest of the world might do a bit of preventative maintenance on their facilities. And by preventative maintenance I mean destroy them completely before it becomes a problem.

Doubtful.

You know, you really have to wonder... at what point will the Middle East eventually cry "Uncle!" ? It's not unprecedented. Europe was more or less a bloodbath from the collapse of the Roman Empire (if the Church hadn't been around, it might have been even worse, but that's another discussion) up until 1945. They were always ready for war. It took a war that involved mechanized genocide and 30 million deaths for them to stop. Eventually, the destruction will simply be too much for even the most well-prepared sections of their society to bear... but what will it take? Nuclear detonations? Decade-long mechanized warfare? What's the trigger for surrender?

[www.ldolphin.org image 644x315]

lol


Heh, you know what else started in Syria?
www.trashydiva.com
Not far from the Plains of Megedo.
 
2012-12-05 11:47:53 PM

GAT_00: mr lawson: cameroncrazy1984: Wait, how is this in any way similar to Iraq?

The fact, like Iraq, Syria is NOT OUR PROBLEM.

/oil be damned!

Yeah, we really shouldn't give a fark about a ruler using chemical warfare against his citizens.


like the united states does everyday?
 
2012-12-05 11:50:34 PM

davidphogan: Keizer_Ghidorah: If the Bible had been written elsewhere, the Beast would have the body of a jaguar, the tail of a caiman, and the head of a howler monkey. Or the body of a walrus, the legs of a moose, and a mouth like an orca.

/imagine if instead of a serpent, it was a manatee who tempted Eve

I just knew that narwhals had an evil side.


Well, look at them. Pretending to be unicorns and shiat with that spiral horn thing.
 
2012-12-05 11:50:46 PM

Keizer_Ghidorah: Smeggy Smurf: xaveth: At this rate, our Nobel Peace Prize winning President will be the longest serving war time President.

War is peace.

Is there any reason the NPP keeps being brought up?


It used to mean something before they started giving it to terrorists and war criminals. Fartbongo had to earn his war criminal status after he got it which makes him even more despotic than the others.
 
2012-12-05 11:52:31 PM
I'm tired of all the middle east wars. Why can't we have a good old fashioned land war in Asia?
 
2012-12-05 11:52:35 PM
If they actually use Sarin gas, the effects are not going to be able to be hidden. Nerve gasses kill on an industrial scale, and are obvious in the way they do so.
 
2012-12-05 11:52:50 PM
If he crosses the line, Billy Jay and H-Rod will have a chat to Vlad, Cool Black Dude will get the new chinese guy on the phone and give them a chance to either abstain or get in on the omnishambles that will be coming Assad's way.

Ground war: Turkish and other NATO forces, friends-with-benifits providing special forces
Air War: NATO and friends (maybe the Saudi's, Jordan, Egypt etc.)

Post Fall:
Peacekeeping: Primarily Turkey in the north, Jordan and Egypt in the south and west. Closer to what happend in Timor than Iraq or Afghanistan. Seriously, you yanks are farking hopeless at nation building. No wonder your own country is falling to bits. Please, stay out of it. When we need megadeath, we'll call you.

Just as long as Iran decides to stay the @#$% out and Israel doesn't do anything stupid, everything should be coming up Millhouse.

/Couple of big if's
 
2012-12-05 11:54:30 PM

Bauer: like the united states does everyday?


The US uses Organophosphate Chemical Weapons against it's own citizens in violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention of 1977?

Shocking. Someone call Anderson Cooper. This needs to be out there!

/oh, wait. They don't. Idiot.
 
2012-12-05 11:55:19 PM

phrawgh: I'm tired of all the middle east wars. Why can't we have a good old fashioned land war in Asia?


Inconceivable !
/Oh and I think we are.
 
2012-12-05 11:56:49 PM
Just in case anyone wants the hook up, I can give you a good deal!

api.ning.com

www.proprofs.com
 
2012-12-05 11:59:17 PM

costermonger: Just what the fark *do* you Americans spend that defence budget on if the USN and USAF don't have a sufficient supply of jet fuel and munitions to conduct an "oh no you don't" strike without tipping the entire nation into bankruptcy?


Toilet seats, mainly.

We seem to be divided into two camps tonight.

1. We must stop the slaughter of innocents and we can do it quickly and cheaply.

2. We're going to get dragged into another 10-year trillion dollar ground war and for what?

I'd like to see the U. S. zip in, destroy the sarin threat, and get out. No hanging around to "advise" rebels or rebuild the rubble.
 
2012-12-06 12:01:44 AM

BarkingUnicorn: costermonger: Just what the fark *do* you Americans spend that defence budget on if the USN and USAF don't have a sufficient supply of jet fuel and munitions to conduct an "oh no you don't" strike without tipping the entire nation into bankruptcy?

Toilet seats, mainly.

We seem to be divided into two camps tonight.

1. We must stop the slaughter of innocents and we can do it quickly and cheaply.

2. We're going to get dragged into another 10-year trillion dollar ground war and for what?

I'd like to see the U. S. zip in, destroy the sarin threat, and get out. No hanging around to "advise" rebels or rebuild the rubble.


This.
 
2012-12-06 12:02:57 AM

Smeggy Smurf: Keizer_Ghidorah: Smeggy Smurf: xaveth: At this rate, our Nobel Peace Prize winning President will be the longest serving war time President.

War is peace.

Is there any reason the NPP keeps being brought up?

It used to mean something before they started giving it to terrorists and war criminals. Fartbongo had to earn his war criminal status after he got it which makes him even more despotic than the others.


What did he do to be labeled a war criminal? And no, taking out a former American who publicly denounced his citizenship and fled the country to join his new friends and help them cause death and terror doesn't count.
 
2012-12-06 12:07:08 AM

Omahawg: atomic-age: MelGoesOnTour: Why am suddenly reminded of something I heard and ignored back when I was a kid, something in the Bible about Revelations and that "middle eastern" neck of the woods and all which might involve a "big bear"....

Is the bear hairy? Is the bear scary?

YES

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x299]

nothing about this will end well. not for us, not for mr. weak chin assad, not for no one nowhere, no sirree.

 

Yes, he was a hairy bear; he was a scary bear. We beat a hasty retreat from his lair.
 
2012-12-06 12:07:57 AM

BarkingUnicorn: costermonger: Just what the fark *do* you Americans spend that defence budget on if the USN and USAF don't have a sufficient supply of jet fuel and munitions to conduct an "oh no you don't" strike without tipping the entire nation into bankruptcy?

Toilet seats, mainly.

We seem to be divided into two camps tonight.

1. We must stop the slaughter of innocents and we can do it quickly and cheaply.

2. We're going to get dragged into another 10-year trillion dollar ground war and for what?

I'd like to see the U. S. zip in, destroy the sarin threat, and get out. No hanging around to "advise" rebels or rebuild the rubble.


The problem with doing that is you end up with:

3) We do #1, leave, and watch Syria devolve into a massive civil war with the entire region piling on to try and end up with their guy in charge.
 
2012-12-06 12:08:49 AM

Keizer_Ghidorah: scubamage: I'm not a bible person. But I found this interesting.

"The beast I saw resembled a leopard, but had feet like those of a bear and a mouth like that of a lion. The dragon gave the beast his power and his throne and great authority."
Revelation 13:2

Russian bears we all know.
The dragon is the chinese "national animal."
The leopard is Iran's national animals.
The lion is often used by Jihadists to describe people making actions in the name of Jihad.

How did they know about bears in that region back then?


Syrian Brown Bear
 
2012-12-06 12:08:52 AM

BronyMedic: If they actually use Sarin gas, the effects are not going to be able to be hidden. Nerve gasses kill on an industrial scale, and are obvious in the way they do so.


Turkey and Jordan will send the signals. There are already postwar coordinators in Jordan, and I'm sure Erdowan and Obama have an agreement in place on how an emergency response will be conducted. There won't be a way to keep the effects of chemical weapons far enough from Turkey's borders as it is.
 
2012-12-06 12:09:32 AM

atomicmask: Really? I live in farm land in the middle of no where, I will live without my Audi's and foreign cars.


Most farmers and ranchers have an excellent understanding of foreign markets and their importance. They also understand the implications of the inability to get their product to market. There is a reason AG-ED course cover international business. Farmers and Ranchers tend not to be isolationists.
 
2012-12-06 12:10:23 AM

meyerkev: BarkingUnicorn: costermonger: Just what the fark *do* you Americans spend that defence budget on if the USN and USAF don't have a sufficient supply of jet fuel and munitions to conduct an "oh no you don't" strike without tipping the entire nation into bankruptcy?

Toilet seats, mainly.

We seem to be divided into two camps tonight.

1. We must stop the slaughter of innocents and we can do it quickly and cheaply.

2. We're going to get dragged into another 10-year trillion dollar ground war and for what?

I'd like to see the U. S. zip in, destroy the sarin threat, and get out. No hanging around to "advise" rebels or rebuild the rubble.

The problem with doing that is you end up with:

3) We do #1, leave, and watch Syria devolve into a massive civil war with the entire region piling on to try and end up with their guy in charge.


I don't have a problem with # 3. I have a problem with # 2.
 
2012-12-06 12:11:37 AM

meyerkev: 3) We do #1, leave, and watch Syria devolve into a massive civil war with the entire region piling on to try and end up with their guy in charge.


Excuse me. Devolve?
 
2012-12-06 12:11:40 AM

thamike: Oh yeah, you know, Saddam's best friend Syria. Derpityderp


"Hey, want some free WMD's?" -SH
"LOL, Sure thing, CHUMP" -Assad
"(hehe...sucker)" -SH
 
2012-12-06 12:14:20 AM
This is what Sarin Gas Does.

It is a horrible death.

upload.wikimedia.org

4.bp.blogspot.com

news.bbc.co.uk

lynnjohnsonphoto.com

The long-term survivors of Sarin Gas attacks have chronic illnesses that resemble Muscular Dystrophy and advanced Leukemias. They are crippled for the rest of their life unless antidotes are administered repeatedly and immediately.
 
2012-12-06 12:14:43 AM

EvilRacistNaziFascist: Mentat: Sorry if we're a little more nuanced than "DUR SADDAM HUSSEIN DONE BLOWED UP THEM BUILDINGS WAR BABY AMERICA FARK YEAH WOOOO!"

Is that a direct quotation from a conservative politician or commentator? If so, could you please tell me which one? If not, why are you grotesquely caricaturing your opponents' arguments?

/the Mentats aren't enough, you also need +3 INT


images4.wikia.nocookie.net

No, no, Mentats are +5 Intelligence and +5 Perception, but 5% chance of addiction.
 
2012-12-06 12:14:49 AM

BronyMedic: BarkingUnicorn: costermonger: Just what the fark *do* you Americans spend that defence budget on if the USN and USAF don't have a sufficient supply of jet fuel and munitions to conduct an "oh no you don't" strike without tipping the entire nation into bankruptcy?

Toilet seats, mainly.

We seem to be divided into two camps tonight.

1. We must stop the slaughter of innocents and we can do it quickly and cheaply.

2. We're going to get dragged into another 10-year trillion dollar ground war and for what?

I'd like to see the U. S. zip in, destroy the sarin threat, and get out. No hanging around to "advise" rebels or rebuild the rubble.

This.


Seconded. America is really good at blowing shiat up, but when peacekeeping Americans act like, well, a bunch of stereotypical American tourists. Except with guns. That are used to shoot the people that America was suppossed to be helping.

Blow shiat up, then leave the rebuilding to nations that don't have decaying infrastructure in their own back yard.
 
2012-12-06 12:14:58 AM

meyerkev: We do #1, leave, and watch Syria devolve into a massive civil war with the entire region piling on to try and end up with their guy in charge.


i.imgur.com

Syria is surrounded by allies of the U.S: Iraq, Jordan, Israel, Turkey and Lebanon. if anything, eliminated Assad is probably the only way to ever restabilize Lebanon---Syria's been piling on them and essentially using them as a proxy state against Israel for decades. The issue is Russia and they are talking to Syria right now--probably telling them that if they use chemical weapons they'll be on their own. No one will attack a Russian base anyway.
 
2012-12-06 12:15:46 AM
Now it begins.
 
2012-12-06 12:17:34 AM

KhamanV: debug: So we care about possible genocide in Syria, but we don't care about actual genocide that's happening in Congo?

Ok then.

Don't be fatuous and pretend that people can't care about more than thing at once. This is a thread about Syria and whether or not we go in. You're jacking about the Congo, which is horrible and also deserves more world involvement, but don't get on your high horse without any farking context to tie it to here. They are two different situations with different globalized baggage.


Just saying, we don't care enough to go in and do anything in the Congo, so why should we care enough to go in and do anything in Syria?

Why is Syria somehow more important than the Congo that we feel the need to intervene there? I don't see how that's an idioc question.
 
2012-12-06 12:18:58 AM

debug: Just saying, we don't care enough to go in and do anything in the Congo, so why should we care enough to go in and do anything in Syria?

Why is Syria somehow more important than the Congo that we feel the need to intervene there? I don't see how that's an idioc question.


Because warlords in the Congo were not using weapons which could decimate entire cities, and which most modern, civilized countries have not even considered using since the end of World War I because of the heinousness of their effects?
 
2012-12-06 12:19:36 AM

ShadowLAnCeR: The real question is, can you live with yourself knowing that your country could have done something to stop it and didn't? Will you just shrug off the millions this country's "leader" would kill to remain in power?


What's stopping you from going over there?
 
2012-12-06 12:19:46 AM

debug: Just saying, we don't care enough to go in and do anything in the Congo, so why should we care enough to go in and do anything in Syria?

Why is Syria somehow more important than the Congo that we feel the need to intervene there? I don't see how that's an idioc question.


I'm curious too, but just idly.
 
2012-12-06 12:20:03 AM

Linkster: Popcorn Johnny: Linkster: Popcorn Johnny: Reports are the the USS Eisenhower is sitting of the coast of Syria, ready to strike.

TROLL OR MORON, I pick the Later!

Still waiting for an answer here, did you think that the USS Eisenhower had been decommissioned or that Syria was landlocked? It's okay to admit that you're wrong.

Eisenhower is in San Diego, Syria is land locked. So Your Point?


I reiterate - we need some king of WTF?! vote to go with smart and funny. I'd suggest retarded, but frankly I have too much respect for the Beckys and Corkys of this world than to lump entities like Linkster in with them.
 
2012-12-06 12:20:39 AM

BronyMedic: debug: Just saying, we don't care enough to go in and do anything in the Congo, so why should we care enough to go in and do anything in Syria?

Why is Syria somehow more important than the Congo that we feel the need to intervene there? I don't see how that's an idioc question.

Because warlords in the Congo were not using weapons which could decimate entire cities, and which most modern, civilized countries have not even considered using since the end of World War I because of the heinousness of their effects?


Nope. As others have noted, dead is dead.
 
2012-12-06 12:22:46 AM

firefly212: Amos


firefly212: Amos Quito: RealAmericanHero: Amos Quito: You assume that the information we have been given is accurate.

I assume that there are games afoot, and remain VERY skeptical.

I believe in the sanity of a Democrat White House a lot more than a Republican White House. Most Republican's are certifiably nuts, so I can't really put their failures on anyone else.

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x333]

Woodrow Wilson - Democrat. Got us into WWI

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x259]

FDR - Democrat - got us into WWII

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x281]

Harry Truman, Democrat. Got us into the Korean War and the start of the Cold War

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x269]

JFK, Democrat. Really got the ball rolling in Vietnam

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x293]

LBJ, Democrat - drastically escalated the Vietnam war

Sorry but I don't share your enthusiasm for white house Democrats.

/Or Republicans, for that matter
//Tweedle (D)
///Tweedle (R)

Did you seriously use US involvement in world war 2 to make a case against the sanity of Democrats when it comes to war?



No, I use it (and the others) as an example of the INSANITY of people blindly believing that their governments have their best interests at heart - regardless of the party.
 
2012-12-06 12:23:10 AM

BronyMedic: Just in case anyone wants the hook up, I can give you a good deal!

[api.ning.com image 400x203]

[www.proprofs.com image 594x266]


Nah, got plenty of belladonna nightshade in the back yard. I have all the atropine I'll ever need.
 
2012-12-06 12:23:39 AM

BarkingUnicorn: Nope. As others have noted, dead is dead.


Sorry, I beg to differ.

Dead may be dead, but the method of doing so is different. A bullet is rather discriminate. It's only going to kill who you shoot it in the general direction of.

Sarin Gas? It's indiscriminate, and horrific. It's a slow, painful and suffering death, and the survivors will continue to suffer long after the shells are gone, and the war has ended. It doesn't care about men, women, or children. Infants or the elderly. It doesn't care if you're involved in the conflict, or just trying to flee the area.

It's murder on a scale unthinkable. A single shell can kill thousands of people in a civilian area.



4.bp.blogspot.com

But dead is dead, right?
 
2012-12-06 12:24:55 AM

Mr. Eugenides: Nah, got plenty of belladonna nightshade in the back yard. I have all the atropine I'll ever need.


How much Protopam you got? You'll need the oxidizing agent with Organophosphates like Sarin and Tabum.
 
2012-12-06 12:29:21 AM

BronyMedic: It's murder on a scale unthinkable. A single shell can kill thousands of people in a civilian area.


Chemical weapons actually require quite a few rounds to create a reasonable kill zone. Yeah, drop a 155 off Sarin in a basketball stadium, and you can kill the 20,000 people there. Drop it on an apartment complex, you can kill everyone in the 100-unit building. But drop it on the street outside, and most of the people will survive.

Of course, no one who has a 155mm Sarin round will have just the one.
 
2012-12-06 12:30:28 AM

BarkingUnicorn: BronyMedic: debug: Just saying, we don't care enough to go in and do anything in the Congo, so why should we care enough to go in and do anything in Syria?

Why is Syria somehow more important than the Congo that we feel the need to intervene there? I don't see how that's an idioc question.

Because warlords in the Congo were not using weapons which could decimate entire cities, and which most modern, civilized countries have not even considered using since the end of World War I because of the heinousness of their effects?

Nope. As others have noted, dead is dead.


The Congo isn't a good example. Use Rwanda - the UN was already there when the killing started, and it wouldn't have taken much to stop it.
 
2012-12-06 12:32:03 AM

Twilight Farkle: ATRDCI:
Who's next?

I like Tom Lehrer as much as the next guy, but as much as he wanted to be next, nope, not his.

Omahawg: skull valley, 1968. never forget....

[upload.wikimedia.org image 260x208]

Funny thing about bleach. What could have come in handy in Japan, would also have helped for that fat sheep, my diminutive equine, or even a skinny puppy.

Don't throw the past away,
You might need it some rainy day.
Nightmares come true again,
When everything old is new again...


You can't rhyme again with again!

Back to magical kindergarten for you!
 
2012-12-06 12:32:14 AM

vygramul: Chemical weapons actually require quite a few rounds to create a reasonable kill zone. Yeah, drop a 155 off Sarin in a basketball stadium, and you can kill the 20,000 people there. Drop it on an apartment complex, you can kill everyone in the 100-unit building. But drop it on the street outside, and most of the people will survive.

Of course, no one who has a 155mm Sarin round will have just the one.


True. And that's the thing. They're not even targeting "rebels" with their attacks. They're going to kill ANYONE in the area to make a statement. If you resist us, you're dead.

They don't care if it's a newborn, or an 89 year old man. It's dead.
 
2012-12-06 12:32:51 AM

BronyMedic: BarkingUnicorn: Nope. As others have noted, dead is dead.

Sorry, I beg to differ.

Dead may be dead, but the method of doing so is different. A bullet is rather discriminate. It's only going to kill who you shoot it in the general direction of.

Sarin Gas? It's indiscriminate, and horrific. It's a slow, painful and suffering death, and the survivors will continue to suffer long after the shells are gone, and the war has ended. It doesn't care about men, women, or children. Infants or the elderly. It doesn't care if you're involved in the conflict, or just trying to flee the area.

It's murder on a scale unthinkable. A single shell can kill thousands of people in a civilian area.

But dead is dead, right?


At the end of the day, yes. Dead is dead whether it's by poison or by bullets or with a machete. One is just more efficient than the others but both can and have been used for genocides.

It's also usually frowned upon here to post images of dead animals, much less people. Link to them with a warning instead or face a vacation (or worse), if it's not too late already.
 
2012-12-06 12:36:12 AM

BronyMedic: BarkingUnicorn: Nope. As others have noted, dead is dead.

Sorry, I beg to differ.

Dead may be dead, but the method of doing so is different. A bullet is rather discriminate. It's only going to kill who you shoot it in the general direction of.

Sarin Gas? It's indiscriminate, and horrific. It's a slow, painful and suffering death, and the survivors will continue to suffer long after the shells are gone, and the war has ended. It doesn't care about men, women, or children. Infants or the elderly. It doesn't care if you're involved in the conflict, or just trying to flee the area.

It's murder on a scale unthinkable. A single shell can kill thousands of people in a civilian area.



[4.bp.blogspot.com image 540x360]

But dead is dead, right?


Yes, it is. Dead is farking dead. How is that particular form of death worse then being burned alive? (congo) Raped and mutilated by machettes? (congo) beheaded? (congo)

Oh this one gives you more heebie jeebies then the rest?
 
2012-12-06 12:36:31 AM

debug: KhamanV: debug: So we care about possible genocide in Syria, but we don't care about actual genocide that's happening in Congo?

Ok then.

Don't be fatuous and pretend that people can't care about more than thing at once. This is a thread about Syria and whether or not we go in. You're jacking about the Congo, which is horrible and also deserves more world involvement, but don't get on your high horse without any farking context to tie it to here. They are two different situations with different globalized baggage.

Just saying, we don't care enough to go in and do anything in the Congo, so why should we care enough to go in and do anything in Syria?

Why is Syria somehow more important than the Congo that we feel the need to intervene there? I don't see how that's an idioc question.



Proximity to relevant interests.

Scratch that.

THE relevant interest.
 
2012-12-06 12:36:36 AM

Radioactive Ass: BronyMedic: BarkingUnicorn: Nope. As others have noted, dead is dead.

Sorry, I beg to differ.

Dead may be dead, but the method of doing so is different. A bullet is rather discriminate. It's only going to kill who you shoot it in the general direction of.

Sarin Gas? It's indiscriminate, and horrific. It's a slow, painful and suffering death, and the survivors will continue to suffer long after the shells are gone, and the war has ended. It doesn't care about men, women, or children. Infants or the elderly. It doesn't care if you're involved in the conflict, or just trying to flee the area.

It's murder on a scale unthinkable. A single shell can kill thousands of people in a civilian area.

But dead is dead, right?

At the end of the day, yes. Dead is dead whether it's by poison or by bullets or with a machete. One is just more efficient than the others but both can and have been used for genocides.

It's also usually frowned upon here to post images of dead animals, much less people. Link to them with a warning instead or face a vacation (or worse), if it's not too late already.


I'm not posting them to be funny, or to troll. The apathy regarding the use of Nerve Gas by an ostensibly civilized nation against it's own people is sickening. Historical images of the dying get posted on here all the time. Any holocaust thread will be rife with victim photos.

People need to see the human face of what this does. What dying while choking on your own vomit and secretions, while your muscles go limp and every muscle in your body involuntarily spasms, and you slowly suffocate looks like.

Victims of the Halabja gas attack. Dead kids. Lots of them.
 
2012-12-06 12:37:12 AM

doglover: Twilight Farkle: ATRDCI:
Who's next?

I like Tom Lehrer as much as the next guy, but as much as he wanted to be next, nope, not his.

Omahawg: skull valley, 1968. never forget....

[upload.wikimedia.org image 260x208]

Funny thing about bleach. What could have come in handy in Japan, would also have helped for that fat sheep, my diminutive equine, or even a skinny puppy.

Don't throw the past away,
You might need it some rainy day.
Nightmares come true again,
When everything old is new again...

You can't rhyme again with again!

Back to magical kindergarten for you!


Not that I don't agree. Learn history or you will be history.
 
2012-12-06 12:38:48 AM

atomicmask: Yes, it is. Dead is farking dead. How is that particular form of death worse then being burned alive? (congo) Raped and mutilated by machettes? (congo) beheaded? (congo)

Oh this one gives you more heebie jeebies then the rest?


According to this logic, the holocaust wasn't any worse than some guy getting shot down on the corner near your house. Right?

5,500 people were killed by Sarin, Tabun, and Mustard in Halabja in a matter of minutes. Tens of thousands more have died of complications since then.
 
2012-12-06 12:40:45 AM

BronyMedic: BarkingUnicorn: Nope. As others have noted, dead is dead.

Sorry, I beg to differ.

Dead may be dead, but the method of doing so is different. A bullet is rather discriminate. It's only going to kill who you shoot it in the general direction of.

Sarin Gas? It's indiscriminate, and horrific. It's a slow, painful and suffering death, and the survivors will continue to suffer long after the shells are gone, and the war has ended. It doesn't care about men, women, or children. Infants or the elderly. It doesn't care if you're involved in the conflict, or just trying to flee the area.

It's murder on a scale unthinkable. A single shell can kill thousands of people in a civilian area.



[4.bp.blogspot.com image 540x360]

But dead is dead, right?


Yep. Sometimes dead is better than living.

Estimates of war-related deaths in the Congo range between 678K and 5.4 million. Is that any less horrific because sarin wasn't used there? Link Is it less "unthinkable" because the killing was spread out over time?

I'm afraid I still don't understand why the prospect of Syrian deaths is more intolerable than what we have tolerated in the Congo.
 
2012-12-06 12:40:46 AM
These are the real people that we are arming in Syria.

http://fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/syrian-rebels-when-we-finish-wi t h-assad-we-will-fight-the-u-s/27443/
 
2012-12-06 12:42:13 AM

atomicmask: BronyMedic: BarkingUnicorn: Nope. As others have noted, dead is dead.

Sorry, I beg to differ.

Dead may be dead, but the method of doing so is different. A bullet is rather discriminate. It's only going to kill who you shoot it in the general direction of.

Sarin Gas? It's indiscriminate, and horrific. It's a slow, painful and suffering death, and the survivors will continue to suffer long after the shells are gone, and the war has ended. It doesn't care about men, women, or children. Infants or the elderly. It doesn't care if you're involved in the conflict, or just trying to flee the area.

It's murder on a scale unthinkable. A single shell can kill thousands of people in a civilian area.



[4.bp.blogspot.com image 540x360]

But dead is dead, right?

Yes, it is. Dead is farking dead. How is that particular form of death worse then being burned alive? (congo) Raped and mutilated by machettes? (congo) beheaded? (congo)

Oh this one gives you more heebie jeebies then the rest?


Pretty much what the world decided. The US firebombed Tokyo and killed in one night more than either atomic weapon did, but it's the atomics that are the horrible thing. Mass destruction with so little effort disturbs people, especially when civilians are involved, and so the world decided to frown upon those kinds of shenanigans. Sure, the world has been inconsistent in their application of the rules, but that's a separate argument.
 
2012-12-06 12:42:28 AM

BronyMedic: atomicmask: Yes, it is. Dead is farking dead. How is that particular form of death worse then being burned alive? (congo) Raped and mutilated by machettes? (congo) beheaded? (congo)

Oh this one gives you more heebie jeebies then the rest?

According to this logic, the holocaust wasn't any worse than some guy getting shot down on the corner near your house. Right?

5,500 people were killed by Sarin, Tabun, and Mustard in Halabja in a matter of minutes. Tens of thousands more have died of complications since then.


NO, its not. 1 million people or 1 person, the result is the same, a cold dead corpse. Again I gotta ask why it is worse to you, is one victim somehow held to a higher standard then another? Oh the children of the congo didn't die of SARIN GAS....who gives a shiat...Oh but poor syrian babies...sarin gas makes them more special!

Yeah I guess the little girls of the congo who are raped to "get rid of aids" are not as sad as people who were gassed and gasped for a little bit then died.
 
2012-12-06 12:43:37 AM

BronyMedic: Radioactive Ass: BronyMedic: BarkingUnicorn: Nope. As others have noted, dead is dead.

Sorry, I beg to differ.

Dead may be dead, but the method of doing so is different. A bullet is rather discriminate. It's only going to kill who you shoot it in the general direction of.

Sarin Gas? It's indiscriminate, and horrific. It's a slow, painful and suffering death, and the survivors will continue to suffer long after the shells are gone, and the war has ended. It doesn't care about men, women, or children. Infants or the elderly. It doesn't care if you're involved in the conflict, or just trying to flee the area.

It's murder on a scale unthinkable. A single shell can kill thousands of people in a civilian area.

But dead is dead, right?

At the end of the day, yes. Dead is dead whether it's by poison or by bullets or with a machete. One is just more efficient than the others but both can and have been used for genocides.

It's also usually frowned upon here to post images of dead animals, much less people. Link to them with a warning instead or face a vacation (or worse), if it's not too late already.

I'm not posting them to be funny, or to troll. The apathy regarding the use of Nerve Gas by an ostensibly civilized nation against it's own people is sickening. Historical images of the dying get posted on here all the time. Any holocaust thread will be rife with victim photos.

People need to see the human face of what this does. What dying while choking on your own vomit and secretions, while your muscles go limp and every muscle in your body involuntarily spasms, and you slowly suffocate looks like.

Victims of the Halabja gas attack. Dead kids. Lots of them.


yup. all those folks in here whining 'not my business' and 'don't want to spend the money' SHOULD have to look at pictures of a bunch of dead kids. 'cause that is what we're talking about here. And if that doesn't bother you I suggest you do all the rest of us a favor and go jump off a bridge. at the farkin' mooooon

at some point people need to pull their heads outta their asses. dead kids, man? that dont' bug you? what did your parents do to you, ya farkin' sociopaths?
 
2012-12-06 12:44:23 AM

Bit'O'Gristle: Initial symptoms following exposure to sarin are a runny nose, tightness in the chest and constriction of the pupils. Soon after, the victim has difficulty breathing and experiences nausea and drooling. As the victim continues to lose control of bodily functions, the victim vomits, defecates and urinates. This phase is followed by twitching and jerking. Ultimately, the victim becomes comatose and suffocates in a series of convulsive spasms.


I thought we were talking about chemical weapons in this thread, not watching episodes of Jersey Shore ... ?
 
2012-12-06 12:45:01 AM

atomicmask: BronyMedic: atomicmask: Yes, it is. Dead is farking dead. How is that particular form of death worse then being burned alive? (congo) Raped and mutilated by machettes? (congo) beheaded? (congo)

Oh this one gives you more heebie jeebies then the rest?

According to this logic, the holocaust wasn't any worse than some guy getting shot down on the corner near your house. Right?

5,500 people were killed by Sarin, Tabun, and Mustard in Halabja in a matter of minutes. Tens of thousands more have died of complications since then.

NO, its not. 1 million people or 1 person, the result is the same, a cold dead corpse. Again I gotta ask why it is worse to you, is one victim somehow held to a higher standard then another? Oh the children of the congo didn't die of SARIN GAS....who gives a shiat...Oh but poor syrian babies...sarin gas makes them more special!

Yeah I guess the little girls of the congo who are raped to "get rid of aids" are not as sad as people who were gassed and gasped for a little bit then died.


Meh. One death is a tragedy; a million is a statistic.

/let's get it on
 
2012-12-06 12:45:37 AM

BarkingUnicorn: BronyMedic: BarkingUnicorn: Nope. As others have noted, dead is dead.

Sorry, I beg to differ.

Dead may be dead, but the method of doing so is different. A bullet is rather discriminate. It's only going to kill who you shoot it in the general direction of.

Sarin Gas? It's indiscriminate, and horrific. It's a slow, painful and suffering death, and the survivors will continue to suffer long after the shells are gone, and the war has ended. It doesn't care about men, women, or children. Infants or the elderly. It doesn't care if you're involved in the conflict, or just trying to flee the area.

It's murder on a scale unthinkable. A single shell can kill thousands of people in a civilian area.



[4.bp.blogspot.com image 540x360]

But dead is dead, right?

Yep. Sometimes dead is better than living.

Estimates of war-related deaths in the Congo range between 678K and 5.4 million. Is that any less horrific because sarin wasn't used there? Link Is it less "unthinkable" because the killing was spread out over time?

I'm afraid I still don't understand why the prospect of Syrian deaths is more intolerable than what we have tolerated in the Congo.


who is saying it's tolerable? there's been all kinds of horrible evil crap going on there for years while the rest of the world goes dum de dum de dum.

maybe I had better hopes for this century.

meh
 
2012-12-06 12:45:37 AM

BarkingUnicorn: Yep. Sometimes dead is better than living.

Estimates of war-related deaths in the Congo range between 678K and 5.4 million. Is that any less horrific because sarin wasn't used there? Link Is it less "unthinkable" because the killing was spread out over time?

I'm afraid I still don't understand why the prospect of Syrian deaths is more intolerable than what we have tolerated in the Congo.


Who should we have fought in the Congo? What national government condoned the genocide that occured there? What government armed them? What Government gave them financial backing to commit their atrocities?

We actually DID do things to curb the violence in the congo. International sanctions on arms, bans on trade of blood diamonds and drugs, etc. There were calls for direct action, that went either unanswered by the first world, or were voted down by Government representatives

The difference is this is the ostensible Government of the Syrian people who are using weapons of mass destruction against their own people, sanctioned BY their government. Weapons which they claimed they were decommissioning and destroying, and which we have independent knowledge they have had for decades. (Ironically, they're so damn incompetent they can't keep from blowing up their own chemical weapons depos.)

This is Government sanctioned genocide. Nothing less. The idea that modern countries shouldn't act to stop it is sickening. This is something that even the Allies wouldn't have considered using against Nazi Germany, for Christ-sakes. And we nuked the Axis.
 
2012-12-06 12:45:54 AM
U.S. officials stressed that as of now, the sarin bombs hadn't been loaded onto planes and that Assad hadn't issued a final order to use them. But if he does, one of the officials said, "there's little the outside world can do to stop it."

Step 1: Make it clear to the Syrian Air Force that any pilot involved in use of those weapons will be prosecuted for war crimes. Also offer $1 million if they defect with their aircraft, $3 million if it has sarin bombs attached.
 
2012-12-06 12:46:12 AM

flynn80: These are the real people that we are arming in Syria.

http://fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/syrian-rebels-when-we-finish-wi t h-assad-we-will-fight-the-u-s/27443/


This, this right here, is exactly why I am 100% unconcerned with them getting gassed. It is the same, farking, movement that we have seen in egypt, lybia, Tripoli, Iraq, and afghanistan. It is the muslim brotherhood/al quada/whatever name they are using to pretend to be a political movement but instead is a facist theocratic movement.

So assad is in the right on this one. He is showing he is not someone to be farked around with like Kadafi. Ever notice how the moment our delightful rebel friends win, they instantly start burning US flags and attacking embassies? Its ONE GOD DAMN POLITICAL MOVEMENT, and it is ANTI WEST.
 
2012-12-06 12:47:59 AM

atomicmask: This, this right here, is exactly why I am 100% unconcerned with them getting gassed. It is the same, farking, movement that we have seen in egypt, lybia, Tripoli, Iraq, and afghanistan. It is the muslim brotherhood/al quada/whatever name they are using to pretend to be a political movement but instead is a facist theocratic movement.

So assad is in the right on this one. He is showing he is not someone to be farked around with like Kadafi. Ever notice how the moment our delightful rebel friends win, they inst