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.

(Yahoo)   Kerry, "The use of chemical weapons is reminiscent of Ghengis Khan." Syria calls Kerry a liar, says, "They never used chemical weapons in Cambodia at Christmas time"   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 293
    More: Interesting, Ghengis Khan, Associated Press photographer, chemical warfares, Christmastime, Doctors Without Borders, Damascus, chemical weapons  
•       •       •

3718 clicks; posted to Main » on 27 Aug 2013 at 10:09 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-08-27 11:50:12 AM  
How's that Nobel Peace Prize doing?
 
2013-08-27 11:50:25 AM  

mainstreet62: justaguy516: mainstreet62: UrukHaiGuyz: mainstreet62: Ned Stark: sign_of_Zeta: Ned Stark: sign_of_Zeta: You know, I know that we got [deleted]

Did I ever say that in my post? I would like to think of myself as philanthropic. Unfortunately, the math sucks at time. Do you kill hundreds of Assad's troops to save millions, or do you not kill any and watch Assad slaughter a big piece of the population? There is no 3rd choice that avoids killing. None. Zero.
 

How do you fight someone who ob ...

You don't even know that Assad did it. The last time an American secretary of state opened his big mouth about WMDs, he was lying. And you suddenly believe it this time?

Way to cut off the rest of my post, idiot. I suggest you reread it.


The most likely will be proof coming part? Yeah, I found that funny.
 
2013-08-27 11:50:36 AM  

RexTalionis: More reminiscent of Ronald Reagan, who helped Saddam Hussein attack Iran with sarin nerve gas.


Oh no. This is the 10th time I have seen this libe. Is this the new Democrat talking point of the day? A better one would be that no matter how much we tried to help the Middle East the Middle East would just turn around and bite us no matter who was president. Either Genghis Khan the place or stay out of there.

/partisan politics suck donkey balls
 
2013-08-27 11:51:08 AM  
Bontesla:
I don't think it's possible to end the violence but there are things that can be done to limit it.
...Why not just implement a Berlin like wall?

i.chzbgr.com
 
2013-08-27 11:52:17 AM  

Bontesla: Not historically. Say we do topple Assad, what then? There's no way we don't have a hand in forcing the creation of a new, Western-friendly government. To do that, we need influence on the ground, which means long term intervention, which means more casualties and continued guerilla fighting. It won't end well, or quickly.

Assad is a symptom of a larger problem. Why topple him? We aren't obligated to pick the winners.


Yes we are. That's the lesson we learned from Afghanistan decades ago, when we left the locals to pick up the pieces and they ended up oppressed by warlords and theocrats in a lawless haven for anti-Western terrorists. How'd that work out for us?
 
2013-08-27 11:53:09 AM  
John Kerry?
Oh, you mean,,,"
That was not the last time John Kerry was to be of use to our enemies either. During John Kerry's 1971 Senate testimony, he recounted stories from the "The Winter Soldier Investigation". That event was organized, in part, by Vietnam Veterans against the War, and it featured large amounts of fraudulent testimony from  "fake witnesses who had appropriated the names of real Vietnam Veterans". Kerry repeated their lies in front of the world and accused our troops of torture, rape, and acting like the hordes of Genghis Kahn among other things. Kerry's speech caught the ear of the Vietcong, who actually played his testimony to our soldiers in POW camps in an effort to break their will. Then there was the time Kerry joined  traitorous anti-war protestor Jane Fonda in theback of a pick-up truck in order to speak out against the war, Kerry's medals, which hepretended to throw away, and the atrocities that Kerry admitted he committed in Vietnam (which makes you wonder if Lyndie England could run for President in 30 years). Understandably, John Kerry doesn't spend a lot of time talking about this period of his life on the campaign trail, but he should be deeply ashamed of his actions.
Later in life, John Kerry became a big man in Massachusetts politics."

Yea, that one.
What a farking joke on ya'll to bring that prick into the light.
And you people let him speak in public, claim to be a caring human and generally go about all that gooberment chit.
WOW! just WOW!
 
2013-08-27 11:53:11 AM  
You guys are all missing the point.  I don't care about collateral damage, whether or not WMD's actually exist, or whether the whole farking place will go full civil mode for over a decade requiring thousands of US troops to die and many tens of thousands with horrific injuries and PTSD that costs us trillions in debt that will take generations to cover.  What REALLY matters is whether we get some purple fingers out of this. Seriously, this is important fartbongo, don't screw this up! I WANT SOME PURPLE farkING FINGERS*

xcontra.files.wordpress.com

*Bonus if on on qt3.14 syrian waifus
 
2013-08-27 11:53:33 AM  

Marcus Aurelius: We didn't intervene in Rwanda.

We haven't intervened in Darfur.

Why in God's name would we go anywhere near Syria?  They're a Russian proxy, let Putin sort it out.


Bravo!

So bitter and apathetic.
 
2013-08-27 11:54:08 AM  
It's interesting to see the conversation (both on Fark and in the general public) quickly go from finding out which "side" is responsible for indiscriminate civilian casualties and then just move on to assigning blame on Assad without evidence. The Syrian rebels aren't composed of the nicest of people if you'll notice - their ranks are filled with foreign fighters of the ideological bent, non-Sunni minorities in Syria are already in their crosshairs in rebel controlled territory, and one faction (al-Nursa) is already reported to have sarin gas of their own.

This is after the US has already ignored previous use of chemical weapons there which is contested who is responsible with al-Nursa being a likely suspect. Now that there is a well publicized second incident, the US  and UK governments see keen to go kill Assad without doing the legwork of, you know, figuring out who did. I mean Kerry himself said it was common sense that Assad was responsible for this one action that he knows will lead to American involvement and this was before the UN team there even conducted an investigation.

The US, UK, and their allies already had made up their mind that in order to strengthen their regional hegemony Assad was going to have to bite it. It doesn't matter that the groups Assad is fighting are orders of magnitudes worse than he is because a US intervention was never planned on moral or humanitarian grounds - only geo-political power.
 
2013-08-27 11:56:11 AM  

ninotchka: RexTalionis: More reminiscent of Ronald Reagan, who helped Saddam Hussein attack Iran with sarin nerve gas.

Oh no. This is the 10th time I have seen this libe. Is this the new Democrat talking point of the day? A better one would be that no matter how much we tried to help the Middle East the Middle East would just turn around and bite us no matter who was president. Either Genghis Khan the place or stay out of there.

/partisan politics suck donkey balls


Bringing the Kerry sack o chit back into the government theatre is way beyond stupid partisanship.
It is an insult to every "real" American.

Are they really that short on sociopathic talking heads?
 
2013-08-27 11:56:54 AM  

Magorn: So those of you who want us to do nothing are basically okay with giving world leaders carte blanche for war crimes and genocide?

I'm the last person who wants us to go to war to support the rebels who want to overthrow Assad, the bulk of the rebel forces are the exactl same people who were shooting at US troops in Iraq while calling themselves Al-qaeda in Iraq. (Militant Syrian Salafist extremists-backed by Saudi cash)  but, doing this to civillians is not okay either.  It wasn't okay in Germany in the 40's nor Bosnia or Rawanda in the 90's or the Sudan in the 2000's.  There has to be a line over which no leader or ruler cannot cross without major consquences and Syria is over that line.

My solution?  Remove his stockpiles of chemical weapons and ability to deliver them.   A combined Tomahwak /Drone/B-2 raid on all his known chemical weapons stockpiles and airfields is perfectly appropriate and extremely low risk response by the US.   If we also struck his major artillery  stockpiles, Assad would lose the capability of waging offense war and force the civil to a negotiated end


Careful.....
(from wikipedia) "The U.S. policy on the use of chemical weapons is to reserve the right to retaliate.  "
 
2013-08-27 11:58:52 AM  

Rixel: Magorn: So those of you who want us to do nothing are basically okay with giving world leaders carte blanche for war crimes and genocide?

I'm the last person who wants us to go to war to support the rebels who want to overthrow Assad, the bulk of the rebel forces are the exactl same people who were shooting at US troops in Iraq while calling themselves Al-qaeda in Iraq. (Militant Syrian Salafist extremists-backed by Saudi cash)  but, doing this to civillians is not okay either.  It wasn't okay in Germany in the 40's nor Bosnia or Rawanda in the 90's or the Sudan in the 2000's.  There has to be a line over which no leader or ruler cannot cross without major consquences and Syria is over that line.

My solution?  Remove his stockpiles of chemical weapons and ability to deliver them.   A combined Tomahwak /Drone/B-2 raid on all his known chemical weapons stockpiles and airfields is perfectly appropriate and extremely low risk response by the US.   If we also struck his major artillery  stockpiles, Assad would lose the capability of waging offense war and force the civil to a negotiated end

Careful.....
(from wikipedia) "The U.S. policy on the use of chemical weapons is to reserve the right to retaliate.  "


And, first of all, the stockpiles are not "his". Bought, paid for, and installed on site by the CIA.
 
2013-08-27 11:59:22 AM  
thoughtless: [rant rife with grammatical errors]

wow I really need to preview comments, huh?
 
2013-08-27 11:59:33 AM  

snocone: John Kerry?
Oh, you mean,,,"
That was not the last time John Kerry was to be of use to our enemies either. During John Kerry's 1971 Senate testimony, he recounted stories from the "The Winter Soldier Investigation". That event was organized, in part, by Vietnam Veterans against the War, and it featured large amounts of fraudulent testimony from  "fake witnesses who had appropriated the names of real Vietnam Veterans". Kerry repeated their lies in front of the world and accused our troops of torture, rape, and acting like the hordes of Genghis Kahn among other things. Kerry's speech caught the ear of the Vietcong, who actually played his testimony to our soldiers in POW camps in an effort to break their will. Then there was the time Kerry joined  traitorous anti-war protestor Jane Fonda in theback of a pick-up truck in order to speak out against the war, Kerry's medals, which hepretended to throw away, and the atrocities that Kerry admitted he committed in Vietnam (which makes you wonder if Lyndie England could run for President in 30 years). Understandably, John Kerry doesn't spend a lot of time talking about this period of his life on the campaign trail, but he should be deeply ashamed of his actions.
Later in life, John Kerry became a big man in Massachusetts politics."

Yea, that one.
What a farking joke on ya'll to bring that prick into the light.
And you people let him speak in public, claim to be a caring human and generally go about all that gooberment chit.
WOW! just WOW!


No the John Kerry who actually got off his ass an went to war for his country, something that a lot of his detractros couldn't seem to have bothered doing.  The John kerry who performed hroically enough under fire to earn himself several medals, and the John Kerry who  was so disillusioned about what he saw in Vietnam that he came home and spoke about it even though it would have been a lot easier for him personally and poltically to have just shut up and basked in his war hero status.   Also the John Kerry who actually DID something about the financial networks financing global terrorism by taking down the bank of COmmerce and Credit International- a money launderer for terrorists, while the GOP were still enrinching terrorists by swapping weapons for hostages.
 
2013-08-27 11:59:45 AM  

Rixel: Magorn: So those of you who want us to do nothing are basically okay with giving world leaders carte blanche for war crimes and genocide?

I'm the last person who wants us to go to war to support the rebels who want to overthrow Assad, the bulk of the rebel forces are the exactl same people who were shooting at US troops in Iraq while calling themselves Al-qaeda in Iraq. (Militant Syrian Salafist extremists-backed by Saudi cash)  but, doing this to civillians is not okay either.  It wasn't okay in Germany in the 40's nor Bosnia or Rawanda in the 90's or the Sudan in the 2000's.  There has to be a line over which no leader or ruler cannot cross without major consquences and Syria is over that line.

My solution?  Remove his stockpiles of chemical weapons and ability to deliver them.   A combined Tomahwak /Drone/B-2 raid on all his known chemical weapons stockpiles and airfields is perfectly appropriate and extremely low risk response by the US.   If we also struck his major artillery  stockpiles, Assad would lose the capability of waging offense war and force the civil to a negotiated end

Careful.....
(from wikipedia) "The U.S. policy on the use of chemical weapons is to reserve the right to retaliate.  "


Hmmm... my preferred option would be this also. As you say, both sides of this war are repugnant. I just want the US to limit civilian casualties as much as possible.
 
2013-08-27 12:01:09 PM  
Annnd oil is up 3.50 a barrel. Thanks a-holes.
 
2013-08-27 12:02:00 PM  

sign_of_Zeta: You know, I know that we got involved in two shiatty wars we never should have and that caused a backlash, but the fact is if we in America truly want to be a better country, we have to help protect innocent people around the world. Work with other major powers and stop atrocities. People's right to live, the most basic of rights, is being flagrantly violated, yet so many of us want to do nothing. It makes me sad to be in a country where so many people would choose to ignore that rather than help.


Because after 10 years of this crap it is only getting worse. The more we get involved from Carter until Obama we just get into a bigger mess. Until we clone Genghis Khan to straighten things out we are wasting money and our own men's lives.

My husband served in Afghanistan and Iraq. He survived both. (Came close to losing him in Iraq) Time to either fight a real war or just leave it alone.

Again sorry I am so bitter.
 
2013-08-27 12:02:10 PM  
www.tailgate365.com

justaguy516: You don't even know that Assad did it.

 
2013-08-27 12:03:10 PM  

RexTalionis: More reminiscent of Ronald Reagan, who helped Saddam Hussein attack Iran with sarin nerve gas.


That's how we know Saddam had WMDs... we had the receipts!
 
2013-08-27 12:05:45 PM  

Hiro-ACiD: Kerry? You mean the "liberal" married to the Ketchup fortune? He must have been shocked, shocked I tell you, to find out all this immoral activity is taking place..


wtf does this even mean?
 
2013-08-27 12:06:07 PM  

sign_of_Zeta: Rixel: Magorn: So those of you who want us to do nothing are basically okay with giving world leaders carte blanche for war crimes and genocide?

I'm the last person who wants us to go to war to support the rebels who want to overthrow Assad, the bulk of the rebel forces are the exactl same people who were shooting at US troops in Iraq while calling themselves Al-qaeda in Iraq. (Militant Syrian Salafist extremists-backed by Saudi cash)  but, doing this to civillians is not okay either.  It wasn't okay in Germany in the 40's nor Bosnia or Rawanda in the 90's or the Sudan in the 2000's.  There has to be a line over which no leader or ruler cannot cross without major consquences and Syria is over that line.

My solution?  Remove his stockpiles of chemical weapons and ability to deliver them.   A combined Tomahwak /Drone/B-2 raid on all his known chemical weapons stockpiles and airfields is perfectly appropriate and extremely low risk response by the US.   If we also struck his major artillery  stockpiles, Assad would lose the capability of waging offense war and force the civil to a negotiated end

Careful.....
(from wikipedia) "The U.S. policy on the use of chemical weapons is to reserve the right to retaliate.  "

Hmmm... my preferred option would be this also. As you say, both sides of this war are repugnant. I just want the US to limit civilian casualties as much as possible.


That's a nice sentiment, but not always possible. This isn't a low-tech Rwandan genocide, where putting some people with guns in between the parties stops the violence. It's not a war of nation vs. nation where you can bomb Iraqi tanks until they leave Kuwait and negotiate a treaty. This is an ugly, a-symmetrical battlefield with a desperate dictator on one side and a hodgepodge of Syrian revolutionaries and Islamist fanatics from all over the region on the other. It's not simple or clean, and it's not our fight.
 
2013-08-27 12:06:17 PM  

sign_of_Zeta: Rixel: Magorn: So those of you who want us to do nothing are basically okay with giving world leaders carte blanche for war crimes and genocide?

I'm the last person who wants us to go to war to support the rebels who want to overthrow Assad, the bulk of the rebel forces are the exactl same people who were shooting at US troops in Iraq while calling themselves Al-qaeda in Iraq. (Militant Syrian Salafist extremists-backed by Saudi cash)  but, doing this to civillians is not okay either.  It wasn't okay in Germany in the 40's nor Bosnia or Rawanda in the 90's or the Sudan in the 2000's.  There has to be a line over which no leader or ruler cannot cross without major consquences and Syria is over that line.

My solution?  Remove his stockpiles of chemical weapons and ability to deliver them.   A combined Tomahwak /Drone/B-2 raid on all his known chemical weapons stockpiles and airfields is perfectly appropriate and extremely low risk response by the US.   If we also struck his major artillery  stockpiles, Assad would lose the capability of waging offense war and force the civil to a negotiated end

Careful.....
(from wikipedia) "The U.S. policy on the use of chemical weapons is to reserve the right to retaliate.  "

Hmmm... my preferred option would be this also. As you say, both sides of this war are repugnant. I just want the US to limit civilian casualties as much as possible.


That's what you assholes said about Libya. No fly zone! Ceasefire! We have to save those people!


But then when the muzzle was off its all nessecary measures and ceasefires are being rejected outright and water treatment plants are being leveled and black people"mercenaries" are going into mass graves.
 
2013-08-27 12:06:25 PM  

mainstreet62: spawn73: SlothB77: If Syria is allowed to get away with this unpunished, get ready to see Iran and North Korea run amuck.

You're ignorant.

He might be a troll at times, but he's right in this case. American inaction will only embolden other assholes to mimic Assad's BS.


He mentioned two specific countries.

So, no, ignorant.
 
2013-08-27 12:07:01 PM  

snocone: John Kerry?
Oh, you mean,,,"
That was not the last time John Kerry was to be of use to our enemies either. During John Kerry's 1971 Senate testimony, he recounted stories from the "The Winter Soldier Investigation". That event was organized, in part, by Vietnam Veterans against the War, and it featured large amounts of fraudulent testimony from  "fake witnesses who had appropriated the names of real Vietnam Veterans". Kerry repeated their lies in front of the world and accused our troops of torture, rape, and acting like the hordes of Genghis Kahn among other things. Kerry's speech caught the ear of the Vietcong, who actually played his testimony to our soldiers in POW camps in an effort to break their will. Then there was the time Kerry joined  traitorous anti-war protestor Jane Fonda in theback of a pick-up truck in order to speak out against the war, Kerry's medals, which hepretended to throw away, and the atrocities that Kerry admitted he committed in Vietnam (which makes you wonder if Lyndie England could run for President in 30 years). Understandably, John Kerry doesn't spend a lot of time talking about this period of his life on the campaign trail, but he should be deeply ashamed of his actions.
Later in life, John Kerry became a big man in Massachusetts politics."

Yea, that one.
What a farking joke on ya'll to bring that prick into the light.
And you people let him speak in public, claim to be a caring human and generally go about all that gooberment chit.
WOW! just WOW!


not to nit pick but you mean a war that was started over a fictitious event (Gulf of Tonkin) that killed or maimed 10's of thousands of drafted US soldiers in an effort to stop the red scare ? over 60k us servicemen died in Vietnam over a lie.

A War Kerry actually fought in, He might be a complete asshole but he at least answered the call. He went to war and he didn't get 5 deferments or his daddy didn't get him in to the air national guard etc.
 
2013-08-27 12:07:13 PM  

someonelse: Hiro-ACiD: Kerry? You mean the "liberal" married to the Ketchup fortune? He must have been shocked, shocked I tell you, to find out all this immoral activity is taking place..

wtf does this even mean?


Someone prefers RedGold.
 
2013-08-27 12:08:15 PM  

Marcus Aurelius: SlothB77: If Syria is allowed to get away with this unpunished, get ready to see Iran and North Korea run amuck.

You mean the civil war in Syria will be so appealing to them that they'll decide they need civil wars of their own?

Because that's what it sounds like you're saying.


I am saying they will be more inclined to use chemical weapons on their own citizens without the fear of retribution from outside parties, like the US.
 
2013-08-27 12:08:51 PM  

fireclown: So, the use of chemical weapons in plain sight is to go unpunished?  I'm for staying out of this gorram mess too, but we should discuss the outcome of that action.


Some symbolic bombing seems in order.

Maybe Assad has some palaces or something like that, just try not to kill any of his family members.


Of course being damn sure that it was actually Assad that used chemical weapons is in order.
 
2013-08-27 12:09:52 PM  

snocone: John Kerry?
Oh, you mean,,,"
That was not the last time John Kerry was to be of use to our enemies either. During John Kerry's 1971 Senate testimony, he recounted stories from the "The Winter Soldier Investigation". That event was organized, in part, by Vietnam Veterans against the War, and it featured large amounts of fraudulent testimony from  "fake witnesses who had appropriated the names of real Vietnam Veterans". Kerry repeated their lies in front of the world and accused our troops of torture, rape, and acting like the hordes of Genghis Kahn among other things. Kerry's speech caught the ear of the Vietcong, who actually played his testimony to our soldiers in POW camps in an effort to break their will. Then there was the time Kerry joined  traitorous anti-war protestor Jane Fonda in theback of a pick-up truck in order to speak out against the war, Kerry's medals, which hepretended to throw away, and the atrocities that Kerry admitted he committed in Vietnam (which makes you wonder if Lyndie England could run for President in 30 years). Understandably, John Kerry doesn't spend a lot of time talking about this period of his life on the campaign trail, but he should be deeply ashamed of his actions.
Later in life, John Kerry became a big man in Massachusetts politics."

Yea, that one.
What a farking joke on ya'll to bring that prick into the light.
And you people let him speak in public, claim to be a caring human and generally go about all that gooberment chit.
WOW! just WOW!


Srsly, you just copypasta'd this guy?

upload.wikimedia.org
 
2013-08-27 12:09:58 PM  

Marcus Aurelius: SlothB77: If Syria is allowed to get away with this unpunished, get ready to see Iran and North Korea run amuck.

You mean the civil war in Syria will be so appealing to them that they'll decide they need civil wars of their own?

Because that's what it sounds like you're saying.


To me it more sounded like his cat walked over his keyboard, and it randomly spelled out a sentence.
 
2013-08-27 12:12:44 PM  

ontariolightning: Iran, despite being mean to its people (like half the countries in this world) does not deserve the treatment they have been getting. Quit painting them as bastards.
Say, didn't the US give Saddam chem weapons and tell them where to use them against Iran? Yeah screw off jack.


Indeed

i.telegraph.co.uk
 
2013-08-27 12:12:56 PM  
So, these chemical weapons...would they by any chance have "For Iraq, Made in the USA" stamped on them?
 
2013-08-27 12:13:20 PM  

thoughtless: wow I really need to preview comments, huh?


nah...most people are on here just to reread their own posts anyway...no one will notice...:)
 
2013-08-27 12:14:04 PM  

ninotchka: Because after 10 years of this crap it is only getting worse. The more we get involved from Carter until Obama we just get into a bigger mess. Until we clone Genghis Khan to straighten things out we are wasting money and our own men's lives.

My husband served in Afghanistan and Iraq. He survived both. (Came close to losing him in Iraq) Time to either fight a real war or just leave it alone.

Again sorry I am so bitter.


You have a right to feel that way.  Your family made sacrifices I can't even imagine.  At the same time, seeing children struggling to breathe after a chemical attack and knowing countless more died is something that we, as not just Americans, but citizens of the world, cannot let occur if we want to live in a just world.  If we are fine talking about Human Rights while completely ignoring others basic right to live, we may as well just give up.

And you're correct, we have screwed up so many times.  Getting involved in places we never should have while ignoring places we shouldn't have.  I am sure we will continue to fail in many situations.  However, we can't stop trying.
 
2013-08-27 12:15:51 PM  
For any british farkers out there, what is the mood like in Britain? I checked the guardian and the daily mail, but couldn't get any strong indicators.
 
2013-08-27 12:19:03 PM  

sign_of_Zeta: ninotchka: Because after 10 years of this crap it is only getting worse. The more we get involved from Carter until Obama we just get into a bigger mess. Until we clone Genghis Khan to straighten things out we are wasting money and our own men's lives.

My husband served in Afghanistan and Iraq. He survived both. (Came close to losing him in Iraq) Time to either fight a real war or just leave it alone.

Again sorry I am so bitter.

You have a right to feel that way.  Your family made sacrifices I can't even imagine.  At the same time, seeing children struggling to breathe after a chemical attack and knowing countless more died is something that we, as not just Americans, but citizens of the world, cannot let occur if we want to live in a just world.  If we are fine talking about Human Rights while completely ignoring others basic right to live, we may as well just give up.

And you're correct, we have screwed up so many times.  Getting involved in places we never should have while ignoring places we shouldn't have.  I am sure we will continue to fail in many situations.  However, we can't stop trying.


This is one of those times we should not be involved, at any rate not without a full UN mandate. Don't be manipulated by your own government using your compassion to justify further destruction. It won't benefit us, and in the long run I don't think it benefits Syria either to open up a power vacuum we'd be responsible for filling.
 
2013-08-27 12:20:14 PM  

Magorn: snocone: John Kerry?
Oh, you mean,,,"
That was not the last time John Kerry was to be of use to our enemies either. During John Kerry's 1971 Senate testimony, he recounted stories from the "The Winter Soldier Investigation". That event was organized, in part, by Vietnam Veterans against the War, and it featured large amounts of fraudulent testimony from  "fake witnesses who had appropriated the names of real Vietnam Veterans". Kerry repeated their lies in front of the world and accused our troops of torture, rape, and acting like the hordes of Genghis Kahn among other things. Kerry's speech caught the ear of the Vietcong, who actually played his testimony to our soldiers in POW camps in an effort to break their will. Then there was the time Kerry joined  traitorous anti-war protestor Jane Fonda in theback of a pick-up truck in order to speak out against the war, Kerry's medals, which hepretended to throw away, and the atrocities that Kerry admitted he committed in Vietnam (which makes you wonder if Lyndie England could run for President in 30 years). Understandably, John Kerry doesn't spend a lot of time talking about this period of his life on the campaign trail, but he should be deeply ashamed of his actions.
Later in life, John Kerry became a big man in Massachusetts politics."

Yea, that one.
What a farking joke on ya'll to bring that prick into the light.
And you people let him speak in public, claim to be a caring human and generally go about all that gooberment chit.
WOW! just WOW!

No the John Kerry who actually got off his ass an went to war for his country, something that a lot of his detractros couldn't seem to have bothered doing.  The John kerry who performed hroically enough under fire to earn himself several medals, and the John Kerry who  was so disillusioned about what he saw in Vietnam that he came home and spoke about it even though it would have been a lot easier for him personally and poltically to have just shut up and basked in his war hero st ...


So, just because he followed the law, he is a wonderful human.
Bullchit.
OH, BTW, none of us were there for the lies. We were there to save American lives if possible. We fought for the GI next to us, not some political bull. Too bad you missed it.
I'll stick with my concept since I was there, here and have watched the prick behave badly for his entire life.
Lying to Congress(not that they would know the diff), manufacturing evidence, and aww, fark it.
 
2013-08-27 12:21:24 PM  

someonelse: snocone: John Kerry?
Oh, you mean,,,"
That was not the last time John Kerry was to be of use to our enemies either. During John Kerry's 1971 Senate testimony, he recounted stories from the "The Winter Soldier Investigation". That event was organized, in part, by Vietnam Veterans against the War, and it featured large amounts of fraudulent testimony from  "fake witnesses who had appropriated the names of real Vietnam Veterans". Kerry repeated their lies in front of the world and accused our troops of torture, rape, and acting like the hordes of Genghis Kahn among other things. Kerry's speech caught the ear of the Vietcong, who actually played his testimony to our soldiers in POW camps in an effort to break their will. Then there was the time Kerry joined  traitorous anti-war protestor Jane Fonda in theback of a pick-up truck in order to speak out against the war, Kerry's medals, which hepretended to throw away, and the atrocities that Kerry admitted he committed in Vietnam (which makes you wonder if Lyndie England could run for President in 30 years). Understandably, John Kerry doesn't spend a lot of time talking about this period of his life on the campaign trail, but he should be deeply ashamed of his actions.
Later in life, John Kerry became a big man in Massachusetts politics."

Yea, that one.
What a farking joke on ya'll to bring that prick into the light.
And you people let him speak in public, claim to be a caring human and generally go about all that gooberment chit.
WOW! just WOW!

Srsly, you just copypasta'd this guy?

[752x944 from http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/43/John_Hawkins_(columnist) .jpg image 752x944]


Why not, facts is facts.
Derp is derp.
Try to sort them out, plz.
 
2013-08-27 12:21:34 PM  

Hiro-ACiD: Kerry? You mean the "liberal" married to the Ketchup fortune? He must have been shocked, shocked I tell you, to find out all this immoral activity is taking place..

Also, lighten up on the Khan, dude could skateboard like a mofo.


Kerry became for the War when he found out that Assad uses Hunt's.
 
2013-08-27 12:21:40 PM  

sign_of_Zeta: ninotchka: Because after 10 years of this crap it is only getting worse. The more we get involved from Carter until Obama we just get into a bigger mess. Until we clone Genghis Khan to straighten things out we are wasting money and our own men's lives.

My husband served in Afghanistan and Iraq. He survived both. (Came close to losing him in Iraq) Time to either fight a real war or just leave it alone.

Again sorry I am so bitter.

You have a right to feel that way.  Your family made sacrifices I can't even imagine.  At the same time, seeing children struggling to breathe after a chemical attack and knowing countless more died is something that we, as not just Americans, but citizens of the world, cannot let occur if we want to live in a just world.  If we are fine talking about Human Rights while completely ignoring others basic right to live, we may as well just give up.

And you're correct, we have screwed up so many times.  Getting involved in places we never should have while ignoring places we shouldn't have.  I am sure we will continue to fail in many situations.  However, we can't stop trying.


No. No more mulligans. No do overs. Stop killing people because you don't like the worlds shape.
 
2013-08-27 12:28:22 PM  

snocone: Why not, facts is facts.
Derp is derp.
Try to sort them out, plz.


I suggest you apply that to your Winter Soldier rant. Because that there thing you posted was full of derp.
 
2013-08-27 12:28:34 PM  
"The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation." -Senator Barack Obama, 2007

Tell me again how this is working out for you.
 
2013-08-27 12:28:52 PM  

sign_of_Zeta: You have a right to feel that way. Your family made sacrifices I can't even imagine. At the same time, seeing children struggling to breathe after a chemical attack and knowing countless more died is something that we, as not just Americans, but citizens of the world, cannot let occur if we want to live in a just world. If we are fine talking about Human Rights while completely ignoring others basic right to live, we may as well just give up.

And you're correct, we have screwed up so many times. Getting involved in places we never should have while ignoring places we shouldn't have. I am sure we will continue to fail in many situations. However, we can't stop trying.


Yes but who exactly is your enemy and what are the conditions for winning? It would be extremely easy if our enemies were isolated.
 
2013-08-27 12:29:59 PM  

The Bruce Dickinson: Bontesla:
I don't think it's possible to end the violence but there are things that can be done to limit it.
...Why not just implement a Berlin like wall?


And specifically how is a proverbial wall a bad idea?
 
2013-08-27 12:30:13 PM  
This will totally be different this time because Obama is president!
 
2013-08-27 12:30:32 PM  

Lost Thought 00: The Stealth Hippopotamus: Nadie_AZ: So suggesting we pay for the war and have a draft to fight it are now equal to going Starship Troopers?

Just as likely. When have we ever had a tax just to pay for one individual thing? I guess you could say Social Security and Medicare but those go directly into the general fund.

Remember War Bonds were voluntary

Spanish-American War telephone tax


I learned something today. Thank you.

Still it went into the general fund and was not set aside to pay for the war. But it was a tax created to fund a war. So I'll allow it!!

I stand corrected
 
2013-08-27 12:30:46 PM  

fireclown: So, the use of chemical weapons in plain sight is to go unpunished?  I'm for staying out of this gorram mess too, but we should discuss the outcome of that action.



It seems clear that chemical weapons were used - the question is by who?

AssadCo?
He knew damn well what the consequences of the use of CW's would be - and UN inspectors had just landed in Damascus to investigate previous allegations, so unless you think Assad WANTED hell to be rained on him from the US and it's band of performing monkeys, it is highly unlikely that he is the culprit.

The opposition? They were also keenly aware of the consequences of such an attack - and that ANY such attack would immediately be blamed on ASSAD, as he is known to possess such weapons. A false-flag attack would therefor work VERY MUCH in the interests of Assad's enemies.

Impossible, you say? Where would they GET such weapons, you ask?

Where do they get the conventional arms that they use to fight Assad?

It seems undeniable that this was a staged, false-flag attack - and that the US (and others) are well aware of this fact, but are more than happy to use it a an excuse to jump into the fray.

So, who should be "punished"? The actual perpetrators?


/Kicks the dog
 
2013-08-27 12:31:08 PM  

Ned Stark: sign_of_Zeta: ninotchka: Because after 10 years of this crap it is only getting worse. The more we get involved from Carter until Obama we just get into a bigger mess. Until we clone Genghis Khan to straighten things out we are wasting money and our own men's lives.

My husband served in Afghanistan and Iraq. He survived both. (Came close to losing him in Iraq) Time to either fight a real war or just leave it alone.

Again sorry I am so bitter.

You have a right to feel that way.  Your family made sacrifices I can't even imagine.  At the same time, seeing children struggling to breathe after a chemical attack and knowing countless more died is something that we, as not just Americans, but citizens of the world, cannot let occur if we want to live in a just world.  If we are fine talking about Human Rights while completely ignoring others basic right to live, we may as well just give up.

And you're correct, we have screwed up so many times.  Getting involved in places we never should have while ignoring places we shouldn't have.  I am sure we will continue to fail in many situations.  However, we can't stop trying.

No. No more mulligans. No do overs. Stop killing people because you don't like the worlds shape.


Yes, because that's the reason I believe we should go in.  Not because of the actual comments I have made.  Or because of what is actually going on.

We have tried to be an isolationist country before.  It has proven to be much as much of a disaster if not more so than taking no action at all.   I have no illusions that if we get involved we will be doing it for purely moral reasons.  I know better than that.  However, failing to do anything is much worse.

If America is smart about this, we will let other countries take the lead and be as little in the forefront as possible.  Unfortunately, in the real world, we have no good answer on this.
 
2013-08-27 12:31:42 PM  

UrukHaiGuyz: Bontesla: Not historically. Say we do topple Assad, what then? There's no way we don't have a hand in forcing the creation of a new, Western-friendly government. To do that, we need influence on the ground, which means long term intervention, which means more casualties and continued guerilla fighting. It won't end well, or quickly.

Assad is a symptom of a larger problem. Why topple him? We aren't obligated to pick the winners.

Yes we are. That's the lesson we learned from Afghanistan decades ago, when we left the locals to pick up the pieces and they ended up oppressed by warlords and theocrats in a lawless haven for anti-Western terrorists. How'd that work out for us?


Not everyone has to like us. The issue wasn't that other countries didn't like us. It's that we intentionally did awful things because it provided us with the advantage.
 
2013-08-27 12:32:56 PM  
"The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation." ~Constitutional scholar, time traveler, Barack Obama

i.imgur.com
 
2013-08-27 12:35:04 PM  

Amos Quito: It seems undeniable that this was a staged, false-flag attack - and that the US (and others) are well aware of this fact, but are more than happy to use it a an excuse to jump into the fray.


You know, if false flag attacks happened every time someone said there was a false flag attack, then anytime anything bad happened it would be the secret plan of an New World Ord... oh yeah, sometimes I forget people actually believe that...

You know, there is a chance it wasn't Assad.  If the evidence says it wasn't, then of course we shouldn't act. However, I wouldn't really listen to people like Alex Jones and take their word for Gospel... people do have their own agendas you know, not just the government.
 
Displayed 50 of 293 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is 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