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

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

32849 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Dec 2012 at 8:12 PM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Newest

 
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.
 
Displayed 50 of 783 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Newest


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

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

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

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report