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.

(Reuters)   Syria gases own people again. So Assad is a bad guy. Unless it's propaganda. In that case, al Queda are the bad guys. Again   (reuters.com) divider line 73
    More: Sad, Damascus, National Coalition Party, propaganda, U.N. Security Council, military aid, chemical weapons  
•       •       •

1638 clicks; posted to Main » on 21 Aug 2013 at 8:47 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-08-21 08:48:10 AM
Why not both?
 
2013-08-21 08:52:36 AM

IdBeCrazyIf: Why not both?


Agreed. There's no shortage of blame to go around.

/shortage of love, tho
//put an apostrophe in that its, Subby
/pedantic
 
2013-08-21 08:57:19 AM
Sarin terrifies me.
 
2013-08-21 08:59:45 AM
Can't hardly wait for Ted Cruz to renounce his Syrian citizenship.
 
2013-08-21 09:01:47 AM

megarian: Sarin terrifies me.


Don't let it get on your nerves.
 
2013-08-21 09:02:48 AM
Are people still riled up for us to get involved there?  Have they decided which side we should take?  We can either back a sociopathic dictator or al Qaeda, you chose.
 
2013-08-21 09:03:05 AM

Outrageous Muff: megarian: Sarin terrifies me.

Don't let it get on your nerves.


Heheheheheeeee
 
2013-08-21 09:05:31 AM
So does this mean Obama is going to bomb Syria? Because I think that would be a good time to have a cruise missile go wrong and blow up Snowden.
 
2013-08-21 09:07:33 AM
They say it was Assad, but the rule is, the one who smelt it, dealt it.
 
2013-08-21 09:07:39 AM
Wall off the whole place and let them fight it out.
 
2013-08-21 09:09:23 AM

pag1107: Are people still riled up for us to get involved there?  Have they decided which side we should take?  We can either back a sociopathic dictator or al Qaeda, you chose.


Or...and I know this is crazy so hear me out... we stay the fark away and let the UK, France, Germany or anyone that wants to, go there and play world police.

Did go in and intercede in Africa when many more than 600 people were/are killed in a single day during their non-stop wars?

fark the middle east.

/ill tell you how I really feel after a few drinks...
 
2013-08-21 09:10:12 AM
But let's keep shipping them a farkton of our tax dollars, anyway, assholes.
Thanks, IRS, DOD, and the White House.
 
2013-08-21 09:10:57 AM
Funny that we invaded Iraq for WMDs, which didn't exist, yes we won't bother when we actually know of overt nerve gas/WMD use.

Something-something oil in Iraq, gotcha.
 
2013-08-21 09:14:57 AM
This is the beauty of fighting an enemy that has allied itself a known terrorist organization with a history of crying wolf.

You can do almost anything you want and want and just point to the terrorists who have shown that they have no compunction about killing civillians to advance their cause.

The FSA should get clear of them ASAP if they want to win this war and have any international legitimacy in the end.
 
2013-08-21 09:18:45 AM
Nuke 'em all!
 
2013-08-21 09:24:33 AM

megarian: Sarin terrifies me.


i.imgur.com
 
2013-08-21 09:25:02 AM
Somewhere a flower weeps
 
2013-08-21 09:27:18 AM
Somewhere, a flower weeps
 
2013-08-21 09:32:02 AM
Some are reporting 1300 dead.  Jesus Christ.
 
2013-08-21 09:33:07 AM
Welp, there goes that whole "not currently invading a country" thing.
 
2013-08-21 09:37:16 AM
I thought his wife was "the REAL dictator..." Anyone remember those emails?
 
2013-08-21 09:38:03 AM
We can't do anything. Either we back an oppressive regime, or we back an opposition that is equally, and potentially worse.

Or we can deny them the right to self-determination.
 
2013-08-21 09:38:47 AM

ikanreed: Welp, there goes that whole "not currently invading a country" thing.


Why bother? Just let them all go at it. We can sit this one out.
 
2013-08-21 09:39:32 AM
Somewhere a flower, weeps.
 
2013-08-21 09:43:07 AM
I think it's pretty suspicious that the Syrian government used chemical weapons in Damascus just days after 20 UN Chemical Weapons Inspectors show up in Damascus.
 
2013-08-21 09:46:41 AM
Obama keeps moving back the line in the sand.
 
2013-08-21 09:47:05 AM

Lucky LaRue: I think it's pretty suspicious that the Syrian government used chemical weapons in Damascus just days after 20 UN Chemical Weapons Inspectors show up in Damascus.


So either:
A) they don't care and have been building up to this attack as the world has done nothing

B) rebel false flag

C) Someone in the military f**ked up and Assad isn't really in control

D) The weapons embargo is working and they care but are so low on stores or things are mislabeled they used the weapons they had

The military has had luck pushing rebels back the past week so it does seem a little odd
 
2013-08-21 09:53:05 AM
Somewhere a, flower weeps.
 
2013-08-21 09:53:41 AM
perhaps there are no good guys or bad guys in the real world?

maybe sometimes doing the right thing means making tough choices.
 
2013-08-21 09:56:35 AM
No worries, we'll just keep changing the definition of WMDs so we don't have to get involved, like we did with "genocide" to avoid Rwanda.

/words only have meanings under a Republican president
//now if only we could figure out why the world stops respecting our authority when we have a Democrat president
///if you can't respect the man or the office, at least respect the conpletely well-earned Nobel Peace Prize
 
2013-08-21 10:00:03 AM
Those WMDs that never existed in Iraq in 2004, that were watched by bird (SAT) be transported into Syria in 11 RUSSIAN trucks were not used in this and all other previous WMD incidents.

These are not the droids you are looking for...

Huh, it's not working on me and "Bush 43 is a liar and a goofball for getting the whole WMDs wrong". Remember your MSM programming or be ridiculed and shamed in spite of any fact of evidence to the contrary.
 
2013-08-21 10:00:40 AM

brimed03: IdBeCrazyIf: Why not both?

Agreed. There's no shortage of blame to go around.

/shortage of love, tho
//put an apostrophe in that its, Subby
/pedantic


Not much love to go around?
Must be a real land of confusion.
 
2013-08-21 10:11:17 AM

Relatively Obscure: brimed03: IdBeCrazyIf: Why not both?

Agreed. There's no shortage of blame to go around.

/shortage of love, tho
//put an apostrophe in that its, Subby
/pedantic

Not much love to go around?
Must be a real land of confusion.


31.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-08-21 10:11:40 AM

IdBeCrazyIf: Why not both?


Yeah there actually isn't a lesser evil in this case. They both are bad news and both deserve to be gassed in mass until the only thing left alive in the region are vultures.
 
2013-08-21 10:12:43 AM
Much like the Spanish Civil War, it is smart to stay out of it. Both sides are evil.
 
2013-08-21 10:13:19 AM
Talk about your conundrums.  Assad is gassing rebels aligned to Al Queda.  And we're morally obligated to support said rebels. And of course to offset the military support Pooty Poot is giving Assad.

Thanks alot Fartbongo.
 
2013-08-21 10:39:52 AM
Somewhere a flower weeps,.
 
2013-08-21 10:39:56 AM

Not_Todd: Much like the Spanish Civil War, it is smart to stay out of it. Both sides are evil.


Yep.

Heard a guy on an NPR call in last night who condemned Obama for being weak for not getting involved, and then went on to outline his preferred plan of action - which was to try and stay completely out of it.

/He did get called out by NPR host though
 
2013-08-21 10:47:03 AM
Experts who have commented on the issue, rather than just reporting it like Reuters does, says it's not a sarin gas attack because none of the supposed victims have the symptoms of having been exposed to sarin gas, namely muscle spasms.

People who die from sarin gas will apparently be contorted from the muscle spasms it causes.

Also they question the timing of this coinciding with the UN arriving to determine exactly if gas has been used.


I don't know how many animals are in the supposedly affected area. But the experts also asked for evidence of dead animals, as would occur with an sarin gas attack.

---

Some forms of tear gas is really nasty, and can kill as well. Ie. the 36 prisoners that were killed by it the other day in Egypt when it was used in closed quarters.

But tear gas is not forbidden to use under international law.
 
2013-08-21 11:02:53 AM
Like Nazis fighting the Klan... both suck and need destroyed
 
2013-08-21 11:05:37 AM
Rudyard Kipling's Poem "Gethsemane" comes to mind here.


The Garden called Gethsemane
  In Picardy it was,
And there the people came to see
 The English soldiers pass.
We used to pass-we used to pass
   Or halt, as it might be,
And ship our masks in case of gas
   Beyond Gethsemane.

The Garden called Gethsemane,
   It held a pretty lass,
But all the time she talked to me
   I prayed my cup might pass.
The officer sat on the chair,
   The men lay on the grass,
And all the time we halted there
   I prayed my cup might pass.

It didn't pass-it didn't pass-
   It didn't pass from me.
I drank it when we met the gas
   Beyond Gethsemane!

/written during a time when gas was common on the battlefields.
 
2013-08-21 11:06:16 AM

tkwasny: Those WMDs that never existed in Iraq in 2004, that were watched by bird (SAT) be transported into Syria in 11 RUSSIAN trucks were not used in this and all other previous WMD incidents.


You would think Obama would use his NSA spy network to determine who supplied Syria with these WMDs and at least demand sanctions against them in a closed UN session. The fact that he won't seems to indicate revealing the true source of Syria's WMDs would be too politically damaging to him to even suggest it.

/and probably damaging to the mental health of the "Saddam had no WMDs!" crowd that forms his core political constituency.
//hey, maybe they didn't come from Saddam after all... maybe we shipped them to Syria to "prove" Assad wouldn't use them, and provide a balance to Israeli nukes after they destroyed Assad's reactor
///sort of like those guns we shipped to Mexican drug lords, to "prove" that they have no problem acquiring such dangerous weapons as long as the US continues to make them
 
2013-08-21 11:08:48 AM
Set up catapults in Israel and fling them gas masks. There, we helped.
 
2013-08-21 11:10:43 AM
Indoctrination is for your own good.

1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-08-21 11:15:07 AM
The more I read the fewer people were actually killed.  They need to keep writing that article so I can keep reading it!!
 
2013-08-21 11:15:40 AM

Tatterdemalian: tkwasny: Those WMDs that never existed in Iraq in 2004, that were watched by bird (SAT) be transported into Syria in 11 RUSSIAN trucks were not used in this and all other previous WMD incidents.

You would think Obama would use his NSA spy network to determine who supplied Syria with these WMDs and at least demand sanctions against them in a closed UN session. The fact that he won't seems to indicate revealing the true source of Syria's WMDs would be too politically damaging to him to even suggest it.

/and probably damaging to the mental health of the "Saddam had no WMDs!" crowd that forms his core political constituency.
//hey, maybe they didn't come from Saddam after all... maybe we shipped them to Syria to "prove" Assad wouldn't use them, and provide a balance to Israeli nukes after they destroyed Assad's reactor
///sort of like those guns we shipped to Mexican drug lords, to "prove" that they have no problem acquiring such dangerous weapons as long as the US continues to make them


Holy shiat you don't see many of these in the wild. I think we've got an actual real life "Saddam DID have WMD and shipped them to Syria".

farking awesomeness.
 
2013-08-21 11:19:38 AM
www.zcommunications.org
 
2013-08-21 11:29:17 AM

macadamnut: [www.zcommunications.org image 500x361]


erbsegoesmmo.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-08-21 11:34:04 AM

spawn73: But tear gas is not forbidden to use under international law.



That might explain the weepy flower we've been hearing about.
 
2013-08-21 11:43:00 AM
Assuming chemical weapons were used, the obvious question should be by who? Who benefits?

Pretty sure it isn't Assad.
 
Displayed 50 of 73 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report