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  
•       •       •

32832 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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all
 
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)
 
Displayed 50 of 783 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report