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.

(Gawker)   US intel agents intercepted phone calls FALSE FLAG from the Syrian Ministry of Defense FALSE FLAG asking their chemical weapons unit who in the fark told them FALSE FLAG to launch a chemical attack on a suburb full of civilians   (gawker.com ) divider line
    More: Obvious, chemical warfares, Syrians, Syrian Ministry, syrian ministry of defense, special agents, chemical weapons unit, Secretary of State John Kerry, phone calls  
•       •       •

10881 clicks; posted to Main » on 28 Aug 2013 at 8:03 AM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread
 
2013-08-28 03:22:14 AM  
I have yet to read an article that tells us how the neighborhood that was attacked was of such strategic importance to Assad that it warranted a chemical gas attack that would assure an ass-kicking by the US and our allies.
 
2013-08-28 03:29:14 AM  
I'm not understanding this whole mess.
 
2013-08-28 03:48:34 AM  
Right... Are we blaming Israel yet or are we blaming this "false flag" operation on ourselves?

If you don't want us to take part in their conflict then you can say it. I'll respect your opinion, I'm luke warm on the idea myself. But this headline is silly.
 
2013-08-28 03:55:14 AM  

violentsalvation: Right... Are we blaming Israel yet or are we blaming this "false flag" operation on ourselves?

If you don't want us to take part in their conflict then you can say it. I'll respect your opinion, I'm luke warm on the idea myself. But this headline is silly.


No such things as "False Flags"?  Or just that this wasnt a false flag?

Not Subby, but the headline isnt silly -it's a reasonable scrutiny atm.
 
2013-08-28 04:08:37 AM  

Frederick: violentsalvation: Right... Are we blaming Israel yet or are we blaming this "false flag" operation on ourselves?

If you don't want us to take part in their conflict then you can say it. I'll respect your opinion, I'm luke warm on the idea myself. But this headline is silly.

No such things as "False Flags"?  Or just that this wasnt a false flag?

Not Subby, but the headline isnt silly -it's a reasonable scrutiny atm.


It looks to me and most everyone else that chemical weapons were used. I assume by the Assad regime, but I wouldn't put it past the rebels... they have some real shiat heads in their ranks. But to assume a leak of "yeah hey we picked this phone call up" as a greater false flag operation is stupid. We have at least one spy agency spying on our calls domestically, to assume we aren't actively snooping around and intercepting calls in the war-torn Middle East is pretty silly. To call it a false flag is a total diversion meant to take focus away from the true belligerents in this civil war.
 
2013-08-28 04:11:43 AM  
It's amazing how we all still, collectively, have not forgotten the lies that led to and the damage caused by the previous wars. People say the public are fickle and forget everything when X-Factor comes on but I'm seeing very little support for the war, and lots of questioning official versions.

For the record I believe chemical weapons have been used against rebels, and we should still stay out, because whichever side we help will be brutal towards their own people. Also politicians are useless and will botch the whole thing because of election cycles.

I was very much for intervention at the beginning, before I knew anything about the rebels, but I always was impulsive, I'm glad the governments are not, even if at the end of this 2 year period they're still making the wrong decision, you can hardly accuse them of rushing into it.
 
2013-08-28 04:22:54 AM  

violentsalvation: Frederick: violentsalvation: Right... Are we blaming Israel yet or are we blaming this "false flag" operation on ourselves?

If you don't want us to take part in their conflict then you can say it. I'll respect your opinion, I'm luke warm on the idea myself. But this headline is silly.

No such things as "False Flags"?  Or just that this wasnt a false flag?

Not Subby, but the headline isnt silly -it's a reasonable scrutiny atm.

It looks to me and most everyone else that chemical weapons were used. I assume by the Assad regime, but I wouldn't put it past the rebels... they have some real shiat heads in their ranks. But to assume a leak of "yeah hey we picked this phone call up" as a greater false flag operation is stupid. We have at least one spy agency spying on our calls domestically, to assume we aren't actively snooping around and intercepting calls in the war-torn Middle East is pretty silly. To call it a false flag is a total diversion meant to take focus away from the true belligerents in this civil war.


I may be wrong but my interpretation of the headline and the half-assed charge is that chemical weapons were indeed used but maybe not by those who it is claimed.

Me, personally, I dont even know who the belligerents are in this conflict, but I do know a lot of resources are invested in espionage by the US and other countries, therefore I think it wise to consider the possibility of false flag operations in every situation.

Since I dont know a lot about this situation I'd first ask "what was gained by a chemical attack?"
 
2013-08-28 04:33:44 AM  

shower_in_my_socks: I have yet to read an article that tells us how the neighborhood that was attacked was of such strategic importance to Assad that it warranted a chemical gas attack that would assure an ass-kicking by the US and our allies.


Frederick: Since I dont know a lot about this situation I'd first ask "what was gained by a chemical attack?"


It's a reasonable question, and all I can surmise is that if the Assad regime did use chemical weapons they might have thought either that in the west we're all bluster with no appetite for war, or have been assured by Russia that they can do what they want and they will keep the west at bay.

It does seem suicidal to use chemical weapons which would most likely invoke the wrath of the west, perhaps they're just not smart? Or thought they could keep it secret?

I don't think the west wants to go to war, I think we have no stomach for it, so I don't see them manufacturing a casus belli. Although writing that made me consider the possibility that because we have no appetite for a war is precisely why they'd need to manufacture such an event, to get the people riled up and in support of the war.

I still lean toward it being genuine, it's not like the Iraq war claim of 45 minutes, and tenuous stories about yellowcake, and GWB making the claim that Iraq sponsors tourism.
 
2013-08-28 05:01:26 AM  

shower_in_my_socks: I have yet to read an article that tells us how the neighborhood that was attacked was of such strategic importance to Assad that it warranted a chemical gas attack that would assure an ass-kicking by the US and our allies.


assure?

He's had free reign to do what ever he wants to. why would he think that would change now?
 
2013-08-28 05:02:10 AM  
someone posted this yesterday or the day before. I found it pretty enlightening.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/syria-behind-the-lines/
 
2013-08-28 05:07:50 AM  

log_jammin: someone posted this yesterday or the day before. I found it pretty enlightening.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/syria-behind-the-lines/


I am a fan of Frontline, but alas, I cannot watch videos at work.  I'll try to remember to watch it at home.  Thanks.
 
2013-08-28 05:15:32 AM  
Well, good, somebody found the fig leaf to cover America's exit from the pending invasion. And no, subby, the "US Intelligence agents" would never lie to us. We're Americans.
 
2013-08-28 05:18:26 AM  

This About That: pending invasion


never happen.
 
2013-08-28 05:20:18 AM  
As an American expat working in Israel, I do not want to see a US  strike.  I'm prepaired to be disappointed.

 .
 
2013-08-28 05:36:36 AM  

log_jammin: This About That: pending invasion

never happen.


Let's hope not. The stock market thinks otherwise.
 
2013-08-28 05:38:21 AM  

bayoubruce: As an American expat working in Israel, I do not want to see a US  strike.  I'm prepaired to be disappointed.


Are you familiar enough with your colleagues to get a consensus on their feelings regarding a US strike?  I'm curious....
 
2013-08-28 05:47:00 AM  
My National friends say "kill them all".    I didn't press for an intelligent answer.
 
2013-08-28 05:49:56 AM  

This About That: Let's hope not. The stock market thinks otherwise.


The stock market thinks current levels of CEO pay is sustainable and that the housing market could never ever lose value.
 
2013-08-28 05:57:18 AM  
Not our problem! We should mot be the police of the world. As it really only causes regional instability, regional countries should intervene if need be. Besides it is another damned if you do, damned if you don't situations.
 
2013-08-28 05:57:36 AM  
Ah, the Middle East - where everyone is wrong, and everyone is armed.
 
2013-08-28 08:07:50 AM  
There was no real evidence to go to war with Iraq and we made some up to justify it. Why can't we ignore real evidence of war crimes in Syria and make up evidence to not go to war?
 
2013-08-28 08:08:42 AM  
Just for old times sake, let's get Colin Powell up in front of the UN to make the case that Syria can deploy those weapons in 45... no 25 minutes and they have mobile labs and that's why we don't know where they are but remember Knight Rider? He had that garage in the back of a trailer truck.
 
2013-08-28 08:09:49 AM  

paulseta: Ah, the Middle East - where everyone is wrong, and everyone is armed.


An armed society is a polite society!
 
2013-08-28 08:11:05 AM  
It's all about getting British and American planes in the air over the region so the AMERICAN SAMs spirited through Bengazi by AMERICANS can be used to shoot down AMERICAN planes to foster enough outrage to start the "big one" for economic purposes. War will get the world out of debt by killing all the people that everyone owes money to.
 
2013-08-28 08:11:41 AM  

Frederick: Since I dont know a lot about this situation I'd first ask "what was gained by a chemical attack?"



Dead enemies and fearful survivors. The same in every kind of attack.
 
2013-08-28 08:12:12 AM  

paulseta: Ah, the Middle East - where everyone is wrong, and everyone is armed.


and the points don't matter
 
2013-08-28 08:14:22 AM  

SockMonkeyHolocaust: Just for old times sake, let's get Colin Powell up in front of the UN to make the case that Syria can deploy those weapons in 45... no 25 minutes and they have mobile labs and that's why we don't know where they are but remember Knight Rider? He had that garage in the back of a trailer truck.


Perhaps you'd care to ask him what he thinks about Syria?
 
2013-08-28 08:15:25 AM  
Still think that the UN should be the one handling this with the US taking only a support role i.e. no new troops from the US and only the assets allocated to the UN should be given.
 
2013-08-28 08:16:19 AM  

tkwasny: It's all about getting British and American planes in the air over the region so the AMERICAN SAMs spirited through Bengazi by AMERICANS can be used to shoot down AMERICAN planes to foster enough outrage to start the "big one" for economic purposes. War will get the world out of debt by killing all the people that everyone owes money to.


Wow you're blowing the lid off of this thing.
 
2013-08-28 08:17:21 AM  
I would guess it was the infiltrated Al Quaeda operative. Obviously not an order from the top. Let's bomb them.
 
2013-08-28 08:17:35 AM  
So in these phone calls, where the Syrian army isn't expecting anyone to listen to and presumably speaking candidly, show that they never authorized any chemical attacks, didn't expect their chemical weapons division to carry any out without said authorization, and were told by the chem division that they actually didn't carry out any such attacks.

This sort of thing makes it seem more like the rebels are carrying out chem attacks on themselves to manipulate the world into defending them, not less. Unless it's some sort of double bluff carried out in anticipation that US intel would tap that phone call, which, even after the whole NSA scandal, really isn't that likely when people are fighting for their lives.

/of course, the "civilized world" would condemn Assad just for having a division that manufactures chem weapons
//pretty much the same way they condemn the USA for manufacturing guns, inventing nukes, etc.
///gotta love those unintended consequences of fanatical pacifism
 
2013-08-28 08:17:48 AM  

tkwasny: It's all about getting British and American planes in the air over the region so the AMERICAN SAMs spirited through Bengazi by AMERICANS can be used to shoot down AMERICAN planes to foster enough outrage to start the "big one" for economic purposes. War will get the world out of debt by killing all the people that everyone owes money to.


You had me at debt.

LET'S DO THIS!
 
2013-08-28 08:17:52 AM  
So did Assad kill Obama's grandma or something because he seems to be the reincarnate of Bush on the lead up to the invasion of Iraq.
 
2013-08-28 08:18:01 AM  
FTFA: "We don't know exactly why it happened," the intelligence official added. "We just know it was pretty farking stupid."

The "intelligence official" was later heard to say that the use of CW in Syria is "a big farking deal."
 
2013-08-28 08:18:41 AM  

TenJed_77: Not our problem! We should mot be the police of the world. As it really only causes regional instability, regional countries should intervene if need be. Besides it is another damned if you do, damned if you don't situations.


I'd like to try a damned if we don't.
 
2013-08-28 08:18:45 AM  
Also:  I hope that this information didn't come by way of the Italian intelligence community...
 
2013-08-28 08:18:47 AM  

MorrisBird: I'm not understanding this whole mess.


nor me. I doubt definitive facts that would clear it all up will be forthcoming anytime soon as well. it turns out the powers that be keep quite a lot secret
 
2013-08-28 08:19:16 AM  

Carth: paulseta: Ah, the Middle East - where everyone is wrong, and everyone is armed.

An armed society is a polite society!


Heinlein never considered a society where people are willing to die for what they believe in. There are stronger motivations than self preservation and fear.
 
2013-08-28 08:21:22 AM  

This About That: log_jammin: This About That: pending invasion

never happen.

Let's hope not. The stock market thinks otherwise.


Its inevitable.
Once you make "red line" statements, you base your credibility on making a response when the line is crossed.  A response that now means doing something about Assad's chemical weapons, which we've just admitted exist and are at risk of falling into worse hands than his.
Blowing a chemical weapon stash up means spreading the mess, so that's not an option. I doubt this guys turning stuff over willingly. That means someone's got to go there and dispose of those shells in person.

Who gets the Job, the Syrian rebels and Al Queda?
I'd suggest the UN, but that's a joke when they can't even drive across a city.
Maybe the French or Brit... No, probably not. Russia sure as hell isn't interested either.


Who's left?

/A winner is U.S.!
 
2013-08-28 08:21:43 AM  

foo monkey: TenJed_77: Not our problem! We should mot be the police of the world. As it really only causes regional instability, regional countries should intervene if need be. Besides it is another damned if you do, damned if you don't situations.

I'd like to try a damned if we don't.


Seems to me that lately, every time we intervene in the Middle East, we fark it up*.  So, despite the fact that I really REALLY REALLY feel that Assad needs to pay for his crimes, we should just stay out of it.

*one exception would be Libya.  I don't count Benghazi as part of that exception, as it is its own intelligence and logistical farkup.
 
2013-08-28 08:22:01 AM  
WI say we should invade immediately; the oppressed people will greet us as liberators!
 
2013-08-28 08:22:18 AM  

give me doughnuts: SockMonkeyHolocaust: Just for old times sake, let's get Colin Powell up in front of the UN to make the case that Syria can deploy those weapons in 45... no 25 minutes and they have mobile labs and that's why we don't know where they are but remember Knight Rider? He had that garage in the back of a trailer truck.

Perhaps you'd care to ask him what he thinks about Syria?


Remind me, why should anyone care what that lying shiat-heel's says ever again?

"I have no affection for Mr. Assad. I've dealt with him. I know him. And he is a pathological liar, with respect to my interaction with him," Powell said.

Oh right, comedy.
 
2013-08-28 08:22:31 AM  
The "intervention" is a done deal, Mr. Putin is already backing away from Assad.
 
2013-08-28 08:22:57 AM  
Hello. Welcome to the Syrian Army Headquarters. Your call is important to us. If you would like to speak to someone in authority, please press 1 now. If you would like to order a replacement AK-47, please press 2 now. To initiate an attack on a Syrian neighborhood, please press 3. Se hablbo Espanol, pulse zero.
(Beep)
You have selected "Initiate attack on Syrian Neighborhood". If you want conventional weapons, press 1. For non conventional weapon, wink, wink, press 2.
(beep)
You have selected "Non conventional weapons" United Nations protocols require you leave your Syrian Identification Number as proof of ordering such an attack. Please enter it and press pound when you are done.
(beep, beep, beep, beep, beep, beep, beep, beep, beep, beep, beep, beep, beep, beep, beep, beep, beep, beep, beep, beep, beep, beep, beep, beep, beep, beep, beep, beep, beep, beep, pound)
You have entered "zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero." If this is correct, press pound.
(pound)
Thank you. A non conventional weapon attack has been initiated as requested by you. Please stay on the line. We would like you to complete a short survey to gauge your customer satisfaction...
 
2013-08-28 08:23:23 AM  
hey  Subby, can you do us all a favor and just link to the damned Foreign Policy story rather than Gawker?  I'd prefer to give the clicks to the actual journalists.

http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/08/27/exclusive_us_spies _ say_intercepted_calls_prove_syrias_army_used_nerve_gas
 
2013-08-28 08:23:24 AM  
Would the Taliban/AlQaeda/Islamo-psychos gas their own people to bait the US into expanding the conflict?

I think yes.
 
2013-08-28 08:24:22 AM  
The American people have zero control over the government.
 
2013-08-28 08:26:02 AM  

LandOfChocolate: paulseta: Ah, the Middle East - where everyone is wrong, and everyone is armed.

and the points don't matter


Now here's Netanyahu and Assad doing "Scenes from a Hat."
 
2013-08-28 08:27:13 AM  

Tyrone Slothrop: Heinlein never considered a society where people are willing to die for what they believe in. There are stronger motivations than self preservation and fear.


Go back and re-read Starship Troopers. Hell, even just see the movie. We're talking about survival of the species here.

/Do ya wanna live forever?/
 
2013-08-28 08:27:51 AM  

Tyrone Slothrop: Heinlein never considered a society where people are willing to die for what they believe in.


Of course he didn't, even though he had plenty of examples. That would have forced him to reflect on his rugged individualism philosophy, and it is quite evident from his latter works and letters that the man was simply unwilling to do that. I enjoy the books without celebrating the man as some sort of messiah.
 
2013-08-28 08:27:59 AM  

illegal.tender: The American people have zero control over the government.


I would agree with that sentiment.
 
2013-08-28 08:28:02 AM  

Tyrone Slothrop: Carth: paulseta: Ah, the Middle East - where everyone is wrong, and everyone is armed.

An armed society is a polite society!

Heinlein never considered a society where people are willing to die for what they believe in. There are stronger motivations than self preservation and fear.


Better idea - egg Israel on until they attack with enough force that Syria responds, using chemical weapons on Israel (with Assad being destroyed in the retaliation). Sit back and just eat popcorn while your problems solve each other.

Afterwords, give some aid to the survivors and take credit at the UN.
 
2013-08-28 08:28:25 AM  

Slaxl: I still lean toward it being genuine, it's not like the Iraq war claim of 45 minutes, and tenuous stories about yellowcake, and GWB making the claim that Iraq sponsors tourism.


I laughed way too hard at this mistake. I'm imagining Saddam Hussein- the bedraggled one we pulled from the spider hole- exhorting people to come see beautiful Iraq- the historic and lovely river banks of Mesopotamia, the blue mosque, the shelling of innocent Kurds... You know, tourism!
 
2013-08-28 08:30:01 AM  

pxlboy: illegal.tender: The American people have zero control over the government.

I would agree with that sentiment.


Our control over the government is called voting.
 
2013-08-28 08:30:16 AM  

give me doughnuts: SockMonkeyHolocaust: Just for old times sake, let's get Colin Powell up in front of the UN to make the case that Syria can deploy those weapons in 45... no 25 minutes and they have mobile labs and that's why we don't know where they are but remember Knight Rider? He had that garage in the back of a trailer truck.

Perhaps you'd care to ask him what he thinks about Syria?


Oh sure. Now he develops a conscience or maybe he sold his shares of Halliburton.
 
2013-08-28 08:30:20 AM  

jshine: Tyrone Slothrop: Carth: paulseta: Ah, the Middle East - where everyone is wrong, and everyone is armed.

An armed society is a polite society!

Heinlein never considered a society where people are willing to die for what they believe in. There are stronger motivations than self preservation and fear.

Better idea - egg Israel on until they attack with enough force that Syria responds, using chemical weapons on Israel (with Assad being destroyed in the retaliation). Sit back and just eat popcorn while your problems solve each other.

Afterwords, give some aid to the survivors and take credit at the UN.


I got a chuckle out of that, but we know that Israel's involvement would suck us in.

Not saying I agree with it, but Israel is chomping at the bit and wants to take us with them.
 
2013-08-28 08:30:25 AM  

bayoubruce: My National friends say "kill them all".    I didn't press for an intelligent answer.


From my visits over there, in most of our "deeply political" (drunk) discussions with locals, they seemed to hate Syrians more than pretty much everyone else in the neighborhood. They seemed to blame Assad for most of the trouble with Lebanon, and a lot of the Palestinian issues.
 
2013-08-28 08:30:39 AM  

xanadian: foo monkey: TenJed_77: Not our problem! We should mot be the police of the world. As it really only causes regional instability, regional countries should intervene if need be. Besides it is another damned if you do, damned if you don't situations.

I'd like to try a damned if we don't.

Seems to me that lately, every time we intervene in the Middle East, we fark it up*.  So, despite the fact that I really REALLY REALLY feel that Assad needs to pay for his crimes, we should just stay out of it.

*one exception would be Libya.  I don't count Benghazi as part of that exception, as it is its own intelligence and logistical farkup.


What "crimes"? Granted, I'm still trying to wrap my head around the fact that Obama (and our Money) is supporting frickin Al'KayDuh - but what 'crimes' did Assad commit, that the Russians are now complicit in as they are 'protecting' him?

Seeing as how the US has lost ALL credibility in pretty much any accusation it makes (because of the lies, and past history of false flags - show me something from at the very least a 'neutral' source (i.e. UN, etc...)
 
2013-08-28 08:31:01 AM  

violentsalvation: It looks to me and most everyone else that chemical weapons were used. I assume by the Assad regime, but I wouldn't put it past the rebels... they have some real shiat heads in their ranks.


A third option I've seen put forward on Al Jazeera America is the possibility that some rogue/semi-independent elements within the regime are trying to force Assad to stick to a hard line course, sabotaging possible peace talks but betting any reaction by the international community will be relatively minor - coming well short of regime toppling.

Seems a bit retarded, but it's not like we haven't seen rogue elements go nuts in that part of the world before.
 
2013-08-28 08:31:06 AM  

badhatharry: pxlboy: illegal.tender: The American people have zero control over the government.

I would agree with that sentiment.

Our control over the government is called voting.


LOL
 
2013-08-28 08:31:41 AM  

Frederick: violentsalvation: Right... Are we blaming Israel yet or are we blaming this "false flag" operation on ourselves?

If you don't want us to take part in their conflict then you can say it. I'll respect your opinion, I'm luke warm on the idea myself. But this headline is silly.

No such things as "False Flags"?  Or just that this wasnt a false flag?

Not Subby, but the headline isnt silly -it's a reasonable scrutiny atm.


Reasonable scrutiny isn't claiming "false flag".

Of course when dealing with a guy who "has a lot of questions" about the holocaust, that is perfectly normal.
 
2013-08-28 08:32:50 AM  
I think we ought to strike the chemical weapons depots/manufacturing facilities then back away.  I know we can't stop it all, but we can put a HUGE dent in that arsenal.  We can do that with missiles from miles away though.  No need for boots on the ground above and beyond the CIA folks who I'm sure are already/always there.
 
2013-08-28 08:32:54 AM  

paulseta: Ah, the Middle East - where everyone is wrong, and everyone is armed.


This same sentence applies to Texas and Florida
 
2013-08-28 08:33:21 AM  
So basically the government has broken down and whoever controls these chemical weapons could use them or even possibly lose control of them at any moment?

Tell me why again we haven't turned any chemical installations we are aware of into ash again?
 
2013-08-28 08:33:43 AM  

CheatCommando: Tyrone Slothrop: Heinlein never considered a society where people are willing to die for what they believe in.

Of course he didn't, even though he had plenty of examples. That would have forced him to reflect on his rugged individualism philosophy, and it is quite evident from his latter works and letters that the man was simply unwilling to do that. I enjoy the books without celebrating the man as some sort of messiah.


Yes, he did, but in the context of alien opponents, like the bugs of Klendathu.
 
2013-08-28 08:33:48 AM  

shower_in_my_socks: I have yet to read an article that tells us how the neighborhood that was attacked was of such strategic importance to Assad that it warranted a chemical gas attack that would assure an ass-kicking by the US and our allies.


News out of the situation is spotty, but one of the common things mentioned is how towns and neighborhoods all over the place are, if not actively taking part by disrupting local government, indirectly supporting by providing food and beds to rebels, and openly supporting them (the first video that came out of Siria was of an entire town literally partying in the streets after Assad's forces were kicked out).

Which, unfortunately, doesn't just make them targets for retaliation, but also targets of example, to demonstrate the cost of providing aid and comfort to the enemy. The use of chemical weapons for this might be new, but the practice itself is not exactly something new in Siria.
 
2013-08-28 08:33:54 AM  
Hundreds of thousands have already died in this conflict and the world does nothing.   Gas a few hundred and now these deaths have more importance and outrage.  Death by bullets, bombs, starvation, and torture still ok though.

/Stuff your sorries in a sack.   Humans beings don't deserve this planet.
 
2013-08-28 08:34:30 AM  

Tatterdemalian: This sort of thing makes it seem more like the rebels are carrying out chem attacks on themselves to manipulate the world into defending them, not less. Unless it's some sort of double bluff carried out in anticipation that US intel would tap that phone call, which, even after the whole NSA scandal, really isn't that likely when people are fighting for their lives.


I didn't think the military, at least the higher ups are afraid for their lives.
 
2013-08-28 08:35:20 AM  

pxlboy: badhatharry: pxlboy: illegal.tender: The American people have zero control over the government.

I would agree with that sentiment.

Our control over the government is called voting.

LOL


Yeah, it doesn't have much power when a 2nd term President doesn't get congressional approval to do this kind of thing.
 
2013-08-28 08:36:06 AM  

ltdanman44: Hundreds of thousands have already died in this conflict and the world does nothing.   Gas a few hundred and now these deaths have more importance and outrage.  Death by bullets, bombs, starvation, and torture still ok though.

/Stuff your sorries in a sack.   Humans beings don't deserve this planet.


Welp... sounds like the Syrians are eliminating them as fast as they can.
 
2013-08-28 08:36:45 AM  

xanadian: Seems to me that lately, every time we intervene in the Middle East, we fark it up.


And for geographically challenged farkers, here's a helpful map of the Middle East:

www.nationsonline.org

No, wait, here it is:

www.nationsonline.org

No, damn it. Middle East, Middle East...

cg043.k12.sd.us

There we go.
 
2013-08-28 08:37:09 AM  

Falstaff: I think we ought to strike the chemical weapons depots/manufacturing facilities then back away.  I know we can't stop it all, but we can put a HUGE dent in that arsenal.  We can do that with missiles from miles away though.No need for boots on the ground above and beyond the CIA folks who I'm sure are already/always there.


We can shoot where we think they are.

We don't know where they are.

Trying to take them out is a big risk.  I am glad my job isnt to guess if it is a bigger risk than doing nothing militarily, adn peopel who think that is an easy question are kidding themselves.
 
2013-08-28 08:38:55 AM  
There was no benefit for Assad using chemical weapons.  That is why this whole thing stinks to high heavens.

Assad can crush the rebels with conventional means and keep the international community on the outside of the issue, but instead he kills civilians with chemical weapons for no strategic or tactical gain.


Plus even if he did do it, it still doesn't mean we should provide support to the rebels, who very likely will be just as bad, if not worse that Assad morally and as a ally in the region.
 
2013-08-28 08:39:19 AM  
Saudis offer Russia secret oil deal if it drops Syria

Saudi Arabia has secretly offered Russia a sweeping deal to control the global oil market and safeguard Russia's gas contracts, if the Kremlin backs away from the Assad regime in Syria.
The revelations come amid high tension in the Middle East, with US, British, and French warships poised for missile strikes against Syria, and Iran threatening to retaliate. The strategic jitters pushed Brent crude prices to a five-month high of $US112 a barrel.

The Putin-Bandar meeting took place three weeks ago. Mr Putin was unmoved by the Saudi offer.


Or maybe not, looks like Putin wont be bribed.
 
2013-08-28 08:39:32 AM  
For the love of God, stay the fark out of Syria.

"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," Obama in 2008.

lol.
 
2013-08-28 08:41:10 AM  

illegal.tender: The American people have zero control over the government.


It's only because we believe that statement and act as if we don't, that we don't.
 
2013-08-28 08:41:33 AM  
OK, I RTFA.

Before passing judgement, I'd like to see the translated transcript.  From that, I'll have a good idea if it's legit or not.

I do have to say, though that this would be pretty damned convenient for the administration:

In the intercepted phone calls, one official at the Syrian Ministry of Defense reportedly demands answers from the chemical weapons unit's leader for the alleged chemical weapons attack that killed over 1,300 people last week.

That kind of lets the administration off the hook somewhat for their "red line" statements, because it was the work of a local commander, and not something ordered from on high and possibly done against standing orders from the Syria MoD.

The administration could then just do a very limited, symbolic strike, and not have to actually do anything serious, but they did paint themselves into a bit of a corner.

On the plus side, it might have the end effect of Syria tightening up their controls on the use of chemical weapons.  If this was a rogue local commander, it would be in Syria's best interests internationally to publicly arrest and punish the commander responsible.  Domestically, it might help also, but probably not.
 
2013-08-28 08:41:45 AM  
Alex jones says we are toolin up feh war wid dem ruskies...we are through the looking glass ladies and gentlemen!!! Buy all my fear mongering stuff, 5million salary last year for my wife wasnt enough/p>
 
2013-08-28 08:43:13 AM  

macadamnut: xanadian: Seems to me that lately, every time we intervene in the Middle East, we fark it up.

And for geographically challenged farkers, here's a helpful map of the Middle East:

[562x432 from http://www.nationsonline.org/maps/central_america_map_855.jpg image 562x432]

No, wait, here it is:

[562x357 from http://www.nationsonline.org/maps/south_east_asia_map.jpg image 562x357]

No, damn it. Middle East, Middle East...

[562x360 from http://cg043.k12.sd.us/regions%20of%20the%20US%20webquest/southe1.gif image 562x360]

There we go.


The SEC has chemical weapons!
 
2013-08-28 08:43:47 AM  

macadamnut: No, damn it. Middle East, Middle East...

There we go.


Heh, we even farked up the Reconstruction, didn't we?  And we're still hearing the echoes from that one (even though they get dimmer with time).
 
2013-08-28 08:45:20 AM  

DirtyDeadGhostofEbenezerCooke: The SEC has chemical weapons!


Technically, so does anyone who owns a pool, or who has a bunch of cleaning supplies.
 
2013-08-28 08:45:20 AM  

macadamnut: There we go.


Point made.

*golf clap*
 
2013-08-28 08:45:22 AM  

MugzyBrown: There was no benefit for Assad using chemical weapons.  That is why this whole thing stinks to high heavens.

Assad can crush the rebels with conventional means and keep the international community on the outside of the issue, but instead he kills civilians with chemical weapons for no strategic or tactical gain.


Plus even if he did do it, it still doesn't mean we should provide support to the rebels, who very likely will be just as bad, if not worse that Assad morally and as a ally in the region.


Doesn't look like it so far.

Assad has shown he is fien with using "fear" to keep civilians from uspporting rebels.  Chemical weapons fits with that pattern.  The question is if you think he is worried enough about the "redline" that he would not use them.
 
2013-08-28 08:45:55 AM  

FC Exile: SockMonkeyHolocaust: Just for old times sake, let's get Colin Powell up in front of the UN to make the case that Syria can deploy those weapons in 45... no 25 minutes and they have mobile labs and that's why we don't know where they are but remember Knight Rider? He had that garage in the back of a trailer truck.

Hey now. Where do you think these chemical weapons came from?


I made the mistake of making a joke about French, Russian and American arms dealers using shell companies and I realized that while it's probably true I should shut up because I sound like a conspiracy theorist.

ltdanman44: Hundreds of thousands have already died in this conflict and the world does nothing.   Gas a few hundred and now these deaths have more importance and outrage.  Death by bullets, bombs, starvation, and torture still ok though.

/Stuff your sorries in a sack.   Humans beings don't deserve this planet.


From a geopolitical standpoint, the question is if they let Syria get away with using chemical weapons how much leverage and confidence will Iran get to make nuclear weapons. So yeah, a country can have a civil war and both sides can sell arms or insert "advisors" but once it expands outside the borders it becomes a problem.
 
2013-08-28 08:47:09 AM  

jshine: WI say we should invade immediately; the oppressed people will greet us as liberators!


Wisconsin wants to help the Al Qaeda rebels?
 
2013-08-28 08:47:31 AM  
What I find amazing is our "outrage" of the use of chemical weapons (which are generally produced by the U.S. and are basically ineffective at scale). So we'll use cruise missiles, drones and cluster bombs which are far more "humane" to intervene in a civil war at the behest of Israel that will effective further inflame the region.

\fark that
 
2013-08-28 08:47:44 AM  

dittybopper: DirtyDeadGhostofEbenezerCooke: The SEC has chemical weapons!

Technically, so does anyone who owns a pool, or who has a bunch of cleaning supplies.


Water is a chemical so water guns are chemical weapons.

/?
 
2013-08-28 08:47:47 AM  
I love how people are pre-emptively so pissed at the war Obama's gotten us into. Soon. Will have gotten us into. Definitely. This is the same as Iraq. Or will have been.
 
2013-08-28 08:48:54 AM  

liam76: We can shoot where we think they are.

We don't know where they are.

Trying to take them out is a big risk. I am glad my job isnt to guess if it is a bigger risk than doing nothing militarily, adn peopel who think that is an easy question are kidding themselves.


Also one thing to note is that technically many chemical weapons are not even weapons. They are often chemicals that are used in standardized industrial processes so how do you separate the two?
 
2013-08-28 08:49:13 AM  
While the phone calls, if true, would prove that the Syrian government was responsible for the attacks,

No, it would NOT. The Russian ambassador submitted an 80-page report to the U.N. back in July, stating that the sarin used in the recent attacks had not been chemically stabilized. That means that the sarin was recently manufactured and unsuitable for long-term storage. Also, the weapons used to deliver the sarin were primitive compared to the weapons the Syrian government is known to have.

He said the analysis showed that the unguided Basha'ir-3 rocket that hit Khan al-Assal was not a military-standard chemical weapon. Churkin said the results indicate it "was not industrially manufactured and was filled with sarin." He said the samples indicated the sarin and the projectile were produced in makeshift "cottage industry" conditions, and the projectile "is not a standard one for chemical use."

Sarin production does not require sophisticated equipment. Figuring out whether or not the sarin is chemically stabilized is an easily-verifiable fact. There are samples of it all over the goddamn place, so I'd like that see our government answer that one simple question before we belly-flop into another quagmire with our tails ablazin'.
 
2013-08-28 08:49:49 AM  
The Carney barker has been shoved out to answer questions and says that this attack on Syria 'won't be about regime change'.  Well ain't that the sh*t?

Then why did Obama say that Assad 'has to go'?  Isn't that 'about regime change'?

Obama is arming and training the rebels, including Al Qaeda (which Obama calls a 'phony scandal') for the purpose of overthrowing the government.  Isn't that 'about regime change'?


Now that our precious little king has ceased two years of dithering and is pointing the royal scepter at Syria, he still seeks 'permission' from the UN, our supposed allies and a phalanx of lawyers before acting.  Why?  If he's finally decided to 'do something', then what's he waiting for?  Did Israel need 'permission' for the airstrikes it's already carried out in Syria?

Is there a Fark LiberalTM out there who has one damned clue as to WTF is going on here?
 
2013-08-28 08:50:32 AM  
The cry of 'false flag' is generally done by those whom have already determined the reality of things and generally disregard evidence that disputes their pre-determined conclusion as to what reality is.

Conspiracy theorists are the worst when it comes to these sorts of declarations, but many partisans of all flavors are fond of using 'false flag' to disregard things that don't fit into the narratives in their heads.
 
2013-08-28 08:50:55 AM  
So we're going to war AGAIN! Where are the anti war protestors? Where's the code pink nuts? I guess biden and almost all the other demahippocrates are ok with this fight. Most democrats won't speak out against barry or his policies because they fear the almighty jackboot of liberal scorn, political suicide, death threats cold shoulders at dem gatherings etc. Does anyone on the left have the intestinal fortitude to question anything at all that this guy does?

barry is a known narcissist. Are you sure he's not doing this because he's tired of being laughed at by the other world leaders for being soft, wishy washy and not understanding how the rest of the world works? Is it possible that in his circle of advisors, hollywood friends, news outlets, can't do so I teach educators and other obamorons, that he believes he solved the worlds hatred of America with some really hip speeches? He's about to provide some very heavy ordnance to rebel fighters. Some of these same rebels are terrorists. Has he forgotten what happened a little over a decade ago to America? barry doesn't fit the Bush cowboy mo. He's more of the guy in charge of the Apple Dumpling gang, but do you really want him invading another country just because his feelings are constantly hurt at world leader meetings or so he can support his rebel (hint, they really hate Americans) friends? It wouldn't surprise me if the whole reason for this invasion is because Syria had lots of sunlight and its windy. No Blood For Green Energy!
 
2013-08-28 08:51:13 AM  

shower_in_my_socks: I have yet to read an article that tells us how the neighborhood that was attacked was of such strategic importance to Assad that it warranted a chemical gas attack that would assure an ass-kicking by the US and our allies.


Chances are the neighborhood wasn't *THAT* important in the grand scheme of things, however the rebels have been pretty by the book with disturbing Assad's ability to nail them down. They hit an area, they occupy it, they force Assad to send resources to reoccupy it, then they retreat. Do this fifty times in a short time span and it keeps the other guys off kilter, the tactic is called a "Counter-Blitz". 

Its baseless speculation on my part but I wouldn't be shocked if Assad was just overwhelmed and ordered the area to be gassed.
 
2013-08-28 08:51:55 AM  

IdBeCrazyIf: So basically the government has broken down and whoever controls these chemical weapons could use them or even possibly lose control of them at any moment?

Tell me why again we haven't turned any chemical installations we are aware of into ash again?


Because it's REALLY hard to "safely" incinerate these weapons (there are HUGE plants in Utah and MD to do it to US stockpiles), and it'd be pretty bad to just unleash our own cloud of poison gas on locals...

The odds you could level and incinerate an entire factory/stockpile are really low.
 
2013-08-28 08:51:59 AM  

LasersHurt: I love how people are pre-emptively so pissed at the war Obama's gotten us into. Soon. Will have gotten us into. Definitely. This is the same as Iraq. Or will have been.


It's not that they're pissed about the potential for war, it's that he's not a man of his word.
 
2013-08-28 08:52:47 AM  
When it comes to Syria...there is one thing that is for sure.

...we can't trust a farkin' thing John Kerry says.
 
2013-08-28 08:52:49 AM  

Launch Code: So we're going to war AGAIN! Where are the anti war protestors? Where's the code pink nuts? I guess biden and almost all the other demahippocrates are ok with this fight. Most democrats won't speak out against barry or his policies because they fear the almighty jackboot of liberal scorn, political suicide, death threats cold shoulders at dem gatherings etc. Does anyone on the left have the intestinal fortitude to question anything at all that this guy does?

barry is a known narcissist. Are you sure he's not doing this because he's tired of being laughed at by the other world leaders for being soft, wishy washy and not understanding how the rest of the world works? Is it possible that in his circle of advisors, hollywood friends, news outlets, can't do so I teach educators and other obamorons, that he believes he solved the worlds hatred of America with some really hip speeches? He's about to provide some very heavy ordnance to rebel fighters. Some of these same rebels are terrorists. Has he forgotten what happened a little over a decade ago to America? barry doesn't fit the Bush cowboy mo. He's more of the guy in charge of the Apple Dumpling gang, but do you really want him invading another country just because his feelings are constantly hurt at world leader meetings or so he can support his rebel (hint, they really hate Americans) friends? It wouldn't surprise me if the whole reason for this invasion is because Syria had lots of sunlight and its windy. No Blood For Green Energy!


3/10
 
2013-08-28 08:53:32 AM  

DubtodaIll: LasersHurt: I love how people are pre-emptively so pissed at the war Obama's gotten us into. Soon. Will have gotten us into. Definitely. This is the same as Iraq. Or will have been.

It's not that they're pissed about the potential for war, it's that he's not a man of his word.


You mean he willn't have been a man of his word? Theoretically? Which word is that?
 
2013-08-28 08:54:24 AM  

Launch Code: So we're going to war AGAIN! Where are the anti war protestors? Where's the code pink nuts? I guess biden and almost all the other demahippocrates are ok with this fight. Most democrats won't speak out against barry or his policies because they fear the almighty jackboot of liberal scorn, political suicide, death threats cold shoulders at dem gatherings etc. Does anyone on the left have the intestinal fortitude to question anything at all that this guy does?

barry is a known narcissist. Are you sure he's not doing this because he's tired of being laughed at by the other world leaders for being soft, wishy washy and not understanding how the rest of the world works? Is it possible that in his circle of advisors, hollywood friends, news outlets, can't do so I teach educators and other obamorons, that he believes he solved the worlds hatred of America with some really hip speeches? He's about to provide some very heavy ordnance to rebel fighters. Some of these same rebels are terrorists. Has he forgotten what happened a little over a decade ago to America? barry doesn't fit the Bush cowboy mo. He's more of the guy in charge of the Apple Dumpling gang, but do you really want him invading another country just because his feelings are constantly hurt at world leader meetings or so he can support his rebel (hint, they really hate Americans) friends? It wouldn't surprise me if the whole reason for this invasion is because Syria had lots of sunlight and its windy. No Blood For Green Energy!


I enjoyed this immensely. 6/10
 
2013-08-28 08:54:49 AM  
Yeah, let's just stand back and let all the evil shiatheads of the world gas people.  We have public school teachers who need raises.
 
2013-08-28 08:55:03 AM  

FullMetalPanda: So did Assad kill Obama's grandma or something because he seems to be the reincarnate of Bush on the lead up to the invasion of Iraq.


This.
 
2013-08-28 08:55:31 AM  

LasersHurt: DubtodaIll: LasersHurt: I love how people are pre-emptively so pissed at the war Obama's gotten us into. Soon. Will have gotten us into. Definitely. This is the same as Iraq. Or will have been.

It's not that they're pissed about the potential for war, it's that he's not a man of his word.

You mean he willn't have been a man of his word? Theoretically? Which word is that?


Most of them, it's not just this situation, but this situation is another example of how he makes a great speech and then does something else entirely.
 
2013-08-28 08:55:55 AM  

dittybopper: CheatCommando: Tyrone Slothrop: Heinlein never considered a society where people are willing to die for what they believe in.

Of course he didn't, even though he had plenty of examples. That would have forced him to reflect on his rugged individualism philosophy, and it is quite evident from his latter works and letters that the man was simply unwilling to do that. I enjoy the books without celebrating the man as some sort of messiah.

Yes, he did, but in the context of alien opponents, like the bugs of Klendathu.


That's still his early period - most of Heinlein's unreflected individualism comes out much later in his career. Particularly after Friday and The Cat Who Walks Through Walls. I think his brief foray into politics over the Test Ban Treaty, which Starship Troopers was a part of, seemed to harden his views and make him far more intolerant of alternatives.
 
2013-08-28 08:56:30 AM  

socoloco: What I find amazing is our "outrage" of the use of chemical weapons (which are generally produced by the U.S. and are basically ineffective at scale). So we'll use cruise missiles, drones and cluster bombs which are far more "humane" to intervene in a civil war at the behest of Israel that will effective further inflame the region.

\fark that


Let's not forget napalm, Agent Orange, depleted uranium, anthrax, and whatever stuff we've been testing out over there for the last ten years that we don't even know about yet.
 
2013-08-28 08:56:35 AM  

DubtodaIll: LasersHurt: DubtodaIll: LasersHurt: I love how people are pre-emptively so pissed at the war Obama's gotten us into. Soon. Will have gotten us into. Definitely. This is the same as Iraq. Or will have been.

It's not that they're pissed about the potential for war, it's that he's not a man of his word.

You mean he willn't have been a man of his word? Theoretically? Which word is that?

Most of them, it's not just this situation, but this situation is another example of how he makes a great speech and then does something else entirely.


So, what would you do in his place?  And be specific.
 
2013-08-28 08:58:44 AM  

pnome: Yeah, let's just stand back and let all the evil shiatheads of the world gas people.  We have public school teachers who need raises.


Pretty much. The world is a pretty big place, and I fail to see why we have a vested interest in stopping the two sides of this conflict - both of which are filled with evil shiatheads - from offing each other.

Stand down the military, give the teachers a raise. Sounds like a plan to me.
 
2013-08-28 08:58:55 AM  

You'd turn it off when I was halfway across: give me doughnuts: SockMonkeyHolocaust: Just for old times sake, let's get Colin Powell up in front of the UN to make the case that Syria can deploy those weapons in 45... no 25 minutes and they have mobile labs and that's why we don't know where they are but remember Knight Rider? He had that garage in the back of a trailer truck.

Perhaps you'd care to ask him what he thinks about Syria?

Remind me, why should anyone care what that lying shiat-heel's says ever again?

"I have no affection for Mr. Assad. I've dealt with him. I know him. And he is a pathological liar, with respect to my interaction with him," Powell said.

Oh right, comedy.


I'm actually willing to cut Powell a bit of slack on that whole fiasco...I think he was criminally mis-led, rather than deliberately, personally mendacious.  You're right, though, he still has a HUGE credibility gap...someone operating at that level shouldn't be hoodwinked by two-biatchickenhawks.
 
2013-08-28 08:59:23 AM  

Infernalist: DubtodaIll: LasersHurt: DubtodaIll: LasersHurt: I love how people are pre-emptively so pissed at the war Obama's gotten us into. Soon. Will have gotten us into. Definitely. This is the same as Iraq. Or will have been.

It's not that they're pissed about the potential for war, it's that he's not a man of his word.

You mean he willn't have been a man of his word? Theoretically? Which word is that?

Most of them, it's not just this situation, but this situation is another example of how he makes a great speech and then does something else entirely.

So, what would you do in his place?  And be specific.


I'd make an effort to lead.  I wouldn't make statements about 2nd tier states over whether or not we're going to use our military if they do something we don't agree with.  If they do something that warrants our involvement, then we get involved. I wouldn't need to make threats or ultimatums as the President of the United States of America.   Why do you think he IS a man of his word? And be specific.
 
2013-08-28 08:59:52 AM  

DubtodaIll: but this situation is another example of how he makes a great speech and then does something else


What speech are you talking about and what do you want hiom to do?

I think the "redline" was stupid, but he hasn't "done something else".  You can't make that claim unless you are certain assad launched the chemical weapons.
 
2013-08-28 09:00:07 AM  

CheatCommando: Tyrone Slothrop: Heinlein never considered a society where people are willing to die for what they believe in.

Of course he didn't, even though he had plenty of examples. That would have forced him to reflect on his rugged individualism philosophy, and it is quite evident from his latter works and letters that the man was simply unwilling to do that. I enjoy the books without celebrating the man as some sort of messiah.


This.  He's a bit like Ayn Rand...raises some good points, but don't base your whole life on the philosophy...
 
2013-08-28 09:00:11 AM  

PunGent: You'd turn it off when I was halfway across: give me doughnuts: SockMonkeyHolocaust: Just for old times sake, let's get Colin Powell up in front of the UN to make the case that Syria can deploy those weapons in 45... no 25 minutes and they have mobile labs and that's why we don't know where they are but remember Knight Rider? He had that garage in the back of a trailer truck.

Perhaps you'd care to ask him what he thinks about Syria?

Remind me, why should anyone care what that lying shiat-heel's says ever again?

"I have no affection for Mr. Assad. I've dealt with him. I know him. And he is a pathological liar, with respect to my interaction with him," Powell said.

Oh right, comedy.

I'm actually willing to cut Powell a bit of slack on that whole fiasco...I think he was criminally mis-led, rather than deliberately, personally mendacious.  You're right, though, he still has a HUGE credibility gap...someone operating at that level shouldn't be hoodwinked by two-biatchickenhawks.


Amusing filterpwn
 
2013-08-28 09:01:02 AM  
May we wipe ourselves off this planet, but leave nature intact.
 
2013-08-28 09:02:03 AM  

BostonEMT: xanadian: foo monkey: TenJed_77: Not our problem! We should mot be the police of the world. As it really only causes regional instability, regional countries should intervene if need be. Besides it is another damned if you do, damned if you don't situations.

I'd like to try a damned if we don't.

Seems to me that lately, every time we intervene in the Middle East, we fark it up*.  So, despite the fact that I really REALLY REALLY feel that Assad needs to pay for his crimes, we should just stay out of it.

*one exception would be Libya.  I don't count Benghazi as part of that exception, as it is its own intelligence and logistical farkup.

What "crimes"? Granted, I'm still trying to wrap my head around the fact that Obama (and our Money) is supporting frickin Al'KayDuh - but what 'crimes' did Assad commit, that the Russians are now complicit in as they are 'protecting' him?


Heh...remember the "American Taliban" case?  looks like HIS crime was...bad timing :)
 
2013-08-28 09:02:40 AM  

lordjupiter: Launch Code: So we're going to war AGAIN! Where are the anti war protestors? Where's the code pink nuts? I guess biden and almost all the other demahippocrates are ok with this fight. Most democrats won't speak out against barry or his policies because they fear the almighty jackboot of liberal scorn, political suicide, death threats cold shoulders at dem gatherings etc. Does anyone on the left have the intestinal fortitude to question anything at all that this guy does?

barry is a known narcissist. Are you sure he's not doing this because he's tired of being laughed at by the other world leaders for being soft, wishy washy and not understanding how the rest of the world works? Is it possible that in his circle of advisors, hollywood friends, news outlets, can't do so I teach educators and other obamorons, that he believes he solved the worlds hatred of America with some really hip speeches? He's about to provide some very heavy ordnance to rebel fighters. Some of these same rebels are terrorists. Has he forgotten what happened a little over a decade ago to America? barry doesn't fit the Bush cowboy mo. He's more of the guy in charge of the Apple Dumpling gang, but do you really want him invading another country just because his feelings are constantly hurt at world leader meetings or so he can support his rebel (hint, they really hate Americans) friends? It wouldn't surprise me if the whole reason for this invasion is because Syria had lots of sunlight and its windy. No Blood For Green Energy!

3/10


I thought that was a pretty good piece of satire. You weren't quite sure where Mr. Code was going with the rant until the last line.
 
2013-08-28 09:02:42 AM  

macadamnut: xanadian: Seems to me that lately, every time we intervene in the Middle East, we fark it up.

And for geographically challenged farkers, here's a helpful map of the Middle East:

[562x432 from http://www.nationsonline.org/maps/central_america_map_855.jpg image 562x432]

No, wait, here it is:

[562x357 from http://www.nationsonline.org/maps/south_east_asia_map.jpg image 562x357]

No, damn it. Middle East, Middle East...

[562x360 from http://cg043.k12.sd.us/regions%20of%20the%20US%20webquest/southe1.gif image 562x360]

There we go.


imgs.xkcd.com
 
2013-08-28 09:03:18 AM  

ltdanman44: Hundreds of thousands have already died in this conflict and the world does nothing.   Gas a few hundred and now these deaths have more importance and outrage.  Death by bullets, bombs, starvation, and torture still ok though.

/Stuff your sorries in a sack.   Humans beings don't deserve this planet.


Be ironic if we get out into the universe, and discover it's even MORE poorly-run by other species...
 
2013-08-28 09:03:25 AM  

liam76: DubtodaIll: but this situation is another example of how he makes a great speech and then does something else

What speech are you talking about and what do you want hiom to do?

I think the "redline" was stupid, but he hasn't "done something else".  You can't make that claim unless you are certain assad launched the chemical weapons.


I'd take the time to find a quote about him having the most transparent administration ever from his inauguration or something but it's too early in the morning.  Also drones, also NSA, also raising my taxes even though I'm lower middle class, also etc. etc. etc.
 
2013-08-28 09:04:16 AM  
FullMetalPanda
2013-08-28 08:17:52 AM


So did Assad kill Obama's grandma or something because he seems to be the reincarnate of Bush on the lead up to the invasion of Iraq.

Moving TSA from denying water bottles to all out groping of innocents

Expansion of Patriot act.

Expansion of Homeland defense.

Support of gitmo.

Troops still in Afg. and Iraq

Increasing the Bush policy of spying on americans

Drone strikes on civilians

Drones over US airspace

Other than 50% of his race, how exactly is he different than bush?
 
2013-08-28 09:04:26 AM  

socoloco: What I find amazing is our "outrage" of the use of chemical weapons (which are generally produced by the U.S. and are basically ineffective at scale). So we'll use cruise missiles, drones and cluster bombs which are far more "humane" to intervene in a civil war at the behest of Israel that will effective further inflame the region.

\fark that


Gas is an evil way to fight. It kills lots of innocent people. Carpet bombing cities has been against the rules for awhile too. This ain't 'Nam, there are rules!
 
2013-08-28 09:05:14 AM  

DubtodaIll: Infernalist: DubtodaIll: LasersHurt: DubtodaIll: LasersHurt: I love how people are pre-emptively so pissed at the war Obama's gotten us into. Soon. Will have gotten us into. Definitely. This is the same as Iraq. Or will have been.

It's not that they're pissed about the potential for war, it's that he's not a man of his word.

You mean he willn't have been a man of his word? Theoretically? Which word is that?

Most of them, it's not just this situation, but this situation is another example of how he makes a great speech and then does something else entirely.

So, what would you do in his place?  And be specific.

I'd make an effort to lead.  I wouldn't make statements about 2nd tier states over whether or not we're going to use our military if they do something we don't agree with.  If they do something that warrants our involvement, then we get involved. I wouldn't need to make threats or ultimatums as the President of the United States of America.   Why do you think he IS a man of his word? And be specific.


Actually, I have a different expectation of whomever ends up as President, but let's deal with your complete nonanswer first.  You would 'lead', which means nothing, especially nothing 'specific' to the situation at hand.  You would 'not' do what he did, but you haven't said what you 'would' do, other than set yourself up to be a goober.

Secondly, I never said he was a man of his word.

Lastly, I want a President that's smart enough to not get us into a mess in the ME and if that means going back on his word, then hoo-farking-rah.

Personally, and this is just my own personal opinion here, you're just biatching to have something to biatch about.  I mean, we're looking at a situation where people have been gassed, no one's yet sure who did it, we're getting close to laying the smack down on 'someone', and your big concern is that the President isn't 'a man of his word.'

So, if you're serious, all I can suggest is turn off Fark and GBTW.
 
2013-08-28 09:05:25 AM  
This isn't conspiracy, it's just incompetence.

A single Syrian unit farked up, farked up pretty badly, but that's human nature.

The conspiracy theorists will tell us that logically, there was no reason for Assad to use NBC's. In that, they're right. There was no logical upside for Assad to use NBC's in the way he did, but logic often isn't the driving force during wartime. In this case, logic probably never entered the equation. It looks like a fark up, an awful fark up, but a fark up.

Really, this has none of the hallmarks of a false flag. Purposefully designed false flags attempt to demonize the opposition. This evidence just makes Assad look like he's losing control of his most important assets. Here's another reason it's not a false flag. This very evidence would probably exonerate Assad if he were ever to face a war crimes tribunal.
/A lot of bad shiat happens during a war, it doesn't always make sense.
 
2013-08-28 09:06:05 AM  

Slaxl: It's amazing how we all still, collectively, have not forgotten the lies that led to and the damage caused by the previous wars. People say the public are fickle and forget everything when X-Factor comes on but I'm seeing very little support for the war, and lots of questioning official versions.

For the record I believe chemical weapons have been used against rebels, and we should still stay out, because whichever side we help will be brutal towards their own people. Also politicians are useless and will botch the whole thing because of election cycles.

I was very much for intervention at the beginning, before I knew anything about the rebels, but I always was impulsive, I'm glad the governments are not, even if at the end of this 2 year period they're still making the wrong decision, you can hardly accuse them of rushing into it.


Had we jumped in with both feet and helped the FSA things mght have been different. However, the second Al Queda came streaming in from Iraq things took a turn for the worse in the make up of the rebel forces and muddied the waters when it comes to who is worse in this fight.
 
2013-08-28 09:06:22 AM  

NutWrench: While the phone calls, if true, would prove that the Syrian government was responsible for the attacks,

No, it would NOT. The Russian ambassador submitted an 80-page report to the U.N. back in July, stating that the sarin used in the recent attacks had not been chemically stabilized. That means that the sarin was recently manufactured and unsuitable for long-term storage. Also, the weapons used to deliver the sarin were primitive compared to the weapons the Syrian government is known to have.

He said the analysis showed that the unguided Basha'ir-3 rocket that hit Khan al-Assal was not a military-standard chemical weapon. Churkin said the results indicate it "was not industrially manufactured and was filled with sarin." He said the samples indicated the sarin and the projectile were produced in makeshift "cottage industry" conditions, and the projectile "is not a standard one for chemical use."

Sarin production does not require sophisticated equipment. Figuring out whether or not the sarin is chemically stabilized is an easily-verifiable fact. There are samples of it all over the goddamn place, so I'd like that see our government answer that one simple question before we belly-flop into another quagmire with our tails ablazin'.


Wasn't that the stuff that cult used in the Tokyo subway attack?
 
2013-08-28 09:06:24 AM  

DubtodaIll: liam76: DubtodaIll: but this situation is another example of how he makes a great speech and then does something else

What speech are you talking about and what do you want hiom to do?

I think the "redline" was stupid, but he hasn't "done something else".  You can't make that claim unless you are certain assad launched the chemical weapons.

I'd take the time to find a quote about him having the most transparent administration ever from his inauguration or something but it's too early in the morning.  Also drones, also NSA, also raising my taxes even though I'm lower middle class, also etc. etc. etc.


The drones and NSA I agree are wrong, however he didn't really have all the info when he was giving his innaguration speech.

You can't complain about the taxes with a straight face, or if you can you may want to take a look at how tax codes are created in the US.
 
2013-08-28 09:06:27 AM  

Infernalist: DubtodaIll: Infernalist: DubtodaIll: LasersHurt: DubtodaIll: LasersHurt: I love how people are pre-emptively so pissed at the war Obama's gotten us into. Soon. Will have gotten us into. Definitely. This is the same as Iraq. Or will have been.

It's not that they're pissed about the potential for war, it's that he's not a man of his word.

You mean he willn't have been a man of his word? Theoretically? Which word is that?

Most of them, it's not just this situation, but this situation is another example of how he makes a great speech and then does something else entirely.

So, what would you do in his place?  And be specific.

I'd make an effort to lead.  I wouldn't make statements about 2nd tier states over whether or not we're going to use our military if they do something we don't agree with.  If they do something that warrants our involvement, then we get involved. I wouldn't need to make threats or ultimatums as the President of the United States of America.   Why do you think he IS a man of his word? And be specific.

Actually, I have a different expectation of whomever ends up as President, but let's deal with your complete nonanswer first.  You would 'lead', which means nothing, especially nothing 'specific' to the situation at hand.  You would 'not' do what he did, but you haven't said what you 'would' do, other than set yourself up to be a goober.

Secondly, I never said he was a man of his word.

Lastly, I want a President that's smart enough to not get us into a mess in the ME and if that means going back on his word, then hoo-farking-rah.

Personally, and this is just my own personal opinion here, you're just biatching to have something to biatch about.  I mean, we're looking at a situation where people have been gassed, no one's yet sure who did it, we're getting close to laying the smack down on 'someone', and your big concern is that the President isn't 'a man of his word.'

So, if you're serious, all I can suggest is turn off Fark and GBTW.


All you ever do is argue.  You never say anything of value.
 
2013-08-28 09:06:29 AM  

violentsalvation: Right... Are we blaming Israel yet or are we blaming this "false flag" operation on ourselves?

If you don't want us to take part in their conflict then you can say it. I'll respect your opinion, I'm luke warm on the idea myself. But this headline is silly.


I'd have thought the Rebels would be the most likely folks to do a false flag attack - nobody outside of Syria really wants to get involved or has anything to gain from a false flag operation.
 
2013-08-28 09:07:28 AM  

pnome: Yeah, let's just stand back and let all the evil shiatheads of the world gas people.  We have public school teachers who need raises.


Or we could cut out the middleman and gas the public schools. It'll be worth it just to see the NRA's reaction.
 
2013-08-28 09:07:42 AM  

Esroc: May we wipe ourselves off this planet, but leave nature intact.


You first.

PunGent: Be ironic if we get out into the universe, and discover it's even MORE poorly-run by other species...


Just as long as they don't write poetry...
 
2013-08-28 09:08:08 AM  

liam76: DubtodaIll: liam76: DubtodaIll: but this situation is another example of how he makes a great speech and then does something else

What speech are you talking about and what do you want hiom to do?

I think the "redline" was stupid, but he hasn't "done something else".  You can't make that claim unless you are certain assad launched the chemical weapons.

I'd take the time to find a quote about him having the most transparent administration ever from his inauguration or something but it's too early in the morning.  Also drones, also NSA, also raising my taxes even though I'm lower middle class, also etc. etc. etc.

The drones and NSA I agree are wrong, however he didn't really have all the info when he was giving his innaguration speech.

You can't complain about the taxes with a straight face, or if you can you may want to take a look at how tax codes are created in the US.


I heard him say over and over again "if you're lower or middle classes, your taxes will not go up" and bam, 2012 comes around and my taxes go up.
 
2013-08-28 09:09:39 AM  
just curious - if this is a "false flag" operation, what does obama have to gain by it? military intervention in syria is less popular than congress right now. plus it will be expensive. plus it will divert attention from the implementation of obamacare, which really needs to go as smoothly as possible for obama to secure his legacy.

i just don't see any up side. if there were, obama would have engaged in syria long ago.
 
2013-08-28 09:09:42 AM  

RandomRandom: This isn't conspiracy, it's just incompetence.

A single Syrian unit farked up, farked up pretty badly, but that's human nature.

The conspiracy theorists will tell us that logically, there was no reason for Assad to use NBC's. In that, they're right. There was no logical upside for Assad to use NBC's in the way he did, but logic often isn't the driving force during wartime. In this case, logic probably never entered the equation. It looks like a fark up, an awful fark up, but a fark up.

Really, this has none of the hallmarks of a false flag. Purposefully designed false flags attempt to demonize the opposition. This evidence just makes Assad look like he's losing control of his most important assets. Here's another reason it's not a false flag. This very evidence would probably exonerate Assad if he were ever to face a war crimes tribunal.
/A lot of bad shiat happens during a war, it doesn't always make sense.


This is relevant.  All this proves is that Assad is losing control of his military and they're acting without orders.  Granted, war crimes are being committed as a result, so that points to some hard conversations being made within the Assad government.
 
2013-08-28 09:10:07 AM  

OnlyM3: FullMetalPanda
2013-08-28 08:17:52 AM


So did Assad kill Obama's grandma or something because he seems to be the reincarnate of Bush on the lead up to the invasion of Iraq.
Moving TSA from denying water bottles to all out groping of innocents

Expansion of Patriot act.

Expansion of Homeland defense.

Support of gitmo.

Troops still in Afg. and Iraq

Increasing the Bush policy of spying on americans

Drone strikes on civilians

Drones over US airspace

Other than 50% of his race, how exactly is he different than bush?


The letter after his name and the healthcare insurance stimulus known as Obamacare
 
2013-08-28 09:10:30 AM  
All right, *now* I'm confused.

Is this a case of:

a)  A Syrian army officer, outwardly an Assad loyalist but secretly sympathetic to the rebels, who ordered his troops to use chemical weapons in an attempt to discredit the government and possibly provoke a US intervention?

or

b) The Syrian Ministry of defense, surmising that the CIA/NSA was listening in on the line, trying to present this whole episode as a command screwup, rather than as an act ordered from the top, in an attempt to evade responsibility for the chemical attack and possibly prevent a US intervention?

or

c) Something else?
 
2013-08-28 09:11:04 AM  

DubtodaIll: Infernalist: DubtodaIll: Infernalist: DubtodaIll: LasersHurt: DubtodaIll: LasersHurt: I love how people are pre-emptively so pissed at the war Obama's gotten us into. Soon. Will have gotten us into. Definitely. This is the same as Iraq. Or will have been.

It's not that they're pissed about the potential for war, it's that he's not a man of his word.

You mean he willn't have been a man of his word? Theoretically? Which word is that?

Most of them, it's not just this situation, but this situation is another example of how he makes a great speech and then does something else entirely.

So, what would you do in his place?  And be specific.

I'd make an effort to lead.  I wouldn't make statements about 2nd tier states over whether or not we're going to use our military if they do something we don't agree with.  If they do something that warrants our involvement, then we get involved. I wouldn't need to make threats or ultimatums as the President of the United States of America.   Why do you think he IS a man of his word? And be specific.

Actually, I have a different expectation of whomever ends up as President, but let's deal with your complete nonanswer first.  You would 'lead', which means nothing, especially nothing 'specific' to the situation at hand.  You would 'not' do what he did, but you haven't said what you 'would' do, other than set yourself up to be a goober.

Secondly, I never said he was a man of his word.

Lastly, I want a President that's smart enough to not get us into a mess in the ME and if that means going back on his word, then hoo-farking-rah.

Personally, and this is just my own personal opinion here, you're just biatching to have something to biatch about.  I mean, we're looking at a situation where people have been gassed, no one's yet sure who did it, we're getting close to laying the smack down on 'someone', and your big concern is that the President isn't 'a man of his word.'

So, if you're serious, all I can suggest is turn off Fark and GB ...


That may well be true.
 
2013-08-28 09:11:31 AM  

neversubmit: dittybopper: DirtyDeadGhostofEbenezerCooke: The SEC has chemical weapons!

Technically, so does anyone who owns a pool, or who has a bunch of cleaning supplies.

Water is a chemical so water guns are chemical weapons.

/?


Chlorine.  It was the first widely used lethal chemical weapon.
 
2013-08-28 09:11:50 AM  

Neighborhood Watch: The Carney barker has been shoved out to answer questions and says that this attack on Syria 'won't be about regime change'.  Well ain't that the sh*t?

Then why did Obama say that Assad 'has to go'?  Isn't that 'about regime change'?

Obama is arming and training the rebels, including Al Qaeda (which Obama calls a 'phony scandal') for the purpose of overthrowing the government.  Isn't that 'about regime change'?


Now that our precious little king has ceased two years of dithering and is pointing the royal scepter at Syria, he still seeks 'permission' from the UN, our supposed allies and a phalanx of lawyers before acting.  Why?  If he's finally decided to 'do something', then what's he waiting for?  Did Israel need 'permission' for the airstrikes it's already carried out in Syria?

Is there a Fark LiberalTM out there who has one damned clue as to WTF is going on here?


My take?  Obama screwed up with his earlier "redline" comment...now he's stuck with it.  It's his first really serious foreign policy blunder, imho.  Which way he wriggles is...kinda important.  He could swallow some pride and back down, or do a limited strike, or get us bogged down in another Bush-style quagmire in that region.

My money's on option 2, but none of them are really "good" at this point.

This current "evidence"?  who knows...I could easily see some local commander launching on his own, or getting a screwed-up order from higher up, just as easily as the rebels doing it themselves.  Not like some of THEM are unwilling to sacrifice the innocent.  Fog of war, etc, etc.
 
2013-08-28 09:12:40 AM  

tirob: All right, *now* I'm confused.

Is this a case of:

a)  A Syrian army officer, outwardly an Assad loyalist but secretly sympathetic to the rebels, who ordered his troops to use chemical weapons in an attempt to discredit the government and possibly provoke a US intervention?

or

b) The Syrian Ministry of defense, surmising that the CIA/NSA was listening in on the line, trying to present this whole episode as a command screwup, rather than as an act ordered from the top, in an attempt to evade responsibility for the chemical attack and possibly prevent a US intervention?

or

c) Something else?


If I had to guess, I'd say:

c) Some lower ranking field officer made the horrible mistake of using CWs on his own volition.
 
2013-08-28 09:12:43 AM  
My favorite thing about these threads is all the same people comparing Syria to Iraq were comparing Libya to Iraq a couple years ago. And they're saying it without a single sense of irony.
 
2013-08-28 09:13:17 AM  

FlashHarry: just curious - if this is a "false flag" operation, what does obama have to gain by it? military intervention in syria is less popular than congress right now. plus it will be expensive. plus it will divert attention from the implementation of obamacare, which really needs to go as smoothly as possible for obama to secure his legacy.

i just don't see any up side. if there were, obama would have engaged in syria long ago.


Follow the money. It's always about money.
 
2013-08-28 09:13:22 AM  
There's something rotten in Damascus
 
2013-08-28 09:13:28 AM  

PunGent: My take?  Obama screwed up with his earlier "redline" comment...now he's stuck with it.  It's his first really serious foreign policy blunder, imho.


What, precisely, did he say with his "redline" comment? Please go read it, and then explain why it was a blunder.
 
2013-08-28 09:13:51 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: My favorite thing about these threads is all the same people comparing Syria to Iraq were comparing Libya to Iraq a couple years ago. And they're saying it without a single sense of irony.


a lot of people are absolutely determined for Obama to have his own version of Iraq.  And Katrina.  And 911.
 
2013-08-28 09:13:57 AM  

DubtodaIll: I'd make an effort to lead.


This is how you know you can ignore someone.
 
2013-08-28 09:14:39 AM  

Launch Code: So we're going to war AGAIN! Where are the anti war protestors? Where's the code pink nuts? I guess biden and almost all the other demahippocrates are ok with this fight. Most democrats won't speak out against barry or his policies because they fear the almighty jackboot of liberal scorn, political suicide, death threats cold shoulders at dem gatherings etc. Does anyone on the left have the intestinal fortitude to question anything at all that this guy does?

barry is a known narcissist.


As opposed to every other president in the television era?  or ever?

The self-effacing rarely seek high office.
 
2013-08-28 09:15:19 AM  

Headso: There's something rotten in Damascus


I don't like the sound of these Rosencrantz and Guildenstern characters, sounds Israeli...
 
2013-08-28 09:15:26 AM  

PunGent: Launch Code: So we're going to war AGAIN! Where are the anti war protestors? Where's the code pink nuts? I guess biden and almost all the other demahippocrates are ok with this fight. Most democrats won't speak out against barry or his policies because they fear the almighty jackboot of liberal scorn, political suicide, death threats cold shoulders at dem gatherings etc. Does anyone on the left have the intestinal fortitude to question anything at all that this guy does?

barry is a known narcissist.

As opposed to every other president in the television era?  or ever?

The self-effacing rarely seek high office.


Read his whole post.
 
2013-08-28 09:15:28 AM  

Infernalist: a lot of people are absolutely determined for Obama to have his own version of Iraq.  And Katrina.  And 911.



He's doing a pretty good job on his own.
 
2013-08-28 09:15:45 AM  

DubtodaIll: I heard him say over and over again "if you're lower or middle classes, your taxes will not go up" and bam, 2012 comes around and my taxes go up


How much do youthink they would have gone up if he allowed the Bush tax cuts to expire completely (his only ohter option)?

Much more.

tirob: c) Something else


Some guy from the Syrian army farking up possibly.
 
2013-08-28 09:15:51 AM  

pnome: Yeah, let's just stand back and let all the evil shiatheads of the world gas people.  We have public school teachers who need raises.


How about if the people getting gassed are ALSO evil shiatheads?
 
2013-08-28 09:16:17 AM  

PunGent: two-biatchickenhawks


Righteous filter-pwn. I.m saving that one.
 
2013-08-28 09:16:33 AM  

Greek: Slaxl: I still lean toward it being genuine, it's not like the Iraq war claim of 45 minutes, and tenuous stories about yellowcake, and GWB making the claim that Iraq sponsors tourism.

I laughed way too hard at this mistake. I'm imagining Saddam Hussein- the bedraggled one we pulled from the spider hole- exhorting people to come see beautiful Iraq- the historic and lovely river banks of Mesopotamia, the blue mosque, the shelling of innocent Kurds... You know, tourism!


Actually what you didn't get was the real reason we invaded was truly tourism.  See, the UAE was in the process of building Ferrari World at Yaz Island.  Saddam was in talks to construct Lambo Universe near their part of the Gulf as well.  The problem is that some say Yaz had contracted Disney to help build it all out, and well, just study out it out from there..
 
2013-08-28 09:16:35 AM  

pxlboy: PunGent: You'd turn it off when I was halfway across: give me doughnuts: SockMonkeyHolocaust: Just for old times sake, let's get Colin Powell up in front of the UN to make the case that Syria can deploy those weapons in 45... no 25 minutes and they have mobile labs and that's why we don't know where they are but remember Knight Rider? He had that garage in the back of a trailer truck.

Perhaps you'd care to ask him what he thinks about Syria?

Remind me, why should anyone care what that lying shiat-heel's says ever again?

"I have no affection for Mr. Assad. I've dealt with him. I know him. And he is a pathological liar, with respect to my interaction with him," Powell said.

Oh right, comedy.

I'm actually willing to cut Powell a bit of slack on that whole fiasco...I think he was criminally mis-led, rather than deliberately, personally mendacious.  You're right, though, he still has a HUGE credibility gap...someone operating at that level shouldn't be hoodwinked by two-biatchickenhawks.

Amusing filterpwn


Heh...I didn't see THAT coming...
 
2013-08-28 09:17:04 AM  

PunGent: As opposed to every other president in the television era?  or ever?

The self-effacing rarely seek high office.


So very much this.  It's the people who are positive that they know what is better for you that seek positions of power.

Think about that.
 
2013-08-28 09:17:24 AM  

FullMetalPanda: So did Assad kill Obama's grandma or something because he seems to be the reincarnate of Bush on the lead up to the invasion of Iraq.


No this is even more incompetent and less by the books.
 
2013-08-28 09:17:44 AM  

FlashHarry: just curious - if this is a "false flag" operation, what does obama have to gain by it? military intervention in syria is less popular than congress right now. plus it will be expensive. plus it will divert attention from the implementation of obamacare, which really needs to go as smoothly as possible for obama to secure his legacy.



If it was a false flag operation it was probably conducted by the rebels and not the US or any other foreign power. The rebels are losing according to the accounts I've seen so goading someone into attacking the Assad government might be something they would attempt.
 
2013-08-28 09:17:49 AM  

Esroc: FlashHarry: just curious - if this is a "false flag" operation, what does obama have to gain by it? military intervention in syria is less popular than congress right now. plus it will be expensive. plus it will divert attention from the implementation of obamacare, which really needs to go as smoothly as possible for obama to secure his legacy.

i just don't see any up side. if there were, obama would have engaged in syria long ago.

Follow the money. It's always about money.


Also, study it out.
 
2013-08-28 09:18:26 AM  

Neighborhood Watch: Infernalist: a lot of people are absolutely determined for Obama to have his own version of Iraq.  And Katrina.  And 911.


He's doing a pretty good job on his own.


Yeah look at him, eating crackers like he owns the place.
 
2013-08-28 09:18:30 AM  

violentsalvation: Right... Are we blaming Israel yet or are we blaming this "false flag" operation on ourselves?

If you don't want us to take part in their conflict then you can say it. I'll respect your opinion, I'm luke warm on the idea myself. But this headline is silly.


Without direct American or Israeli involvement, it's also plausible that any number of nations or organizations paid Syrian officers to do this for any number of reasons.

Likewise, it's plausible that the calls were placed in order to build a cover story.

What is implausible is that we know everything that's going on.

/ They feed the pilots carrots to improve their eyesight. We should all eat carrots to improve our eyesight.
 
2013-08-28 09:18:54 AM  

IdBeCrazyIf: So basically the government has broken down and whoever controls these chemical weapons could use them or even possibly lose control of them at any moment?

Tell me why again we haven't turned any chemical installations we are aware of into ash again?


What do bombs cost these days? Like five bucks a pop?
 
2013-08-28 09:19:05 AM  

generallyso: Esroc: May we wipe ourselves off this planet, but leave nature intact.

You first.

PunGent: Be ironic if we get out into the universe, and discover it's even MORE poorly-run by other species...

Just as long as they don't write poetry...


I'd like to share with you an ode I wrote to a lump of putty I found in my armpit this morning...
 
2013-08-28 09:19:21 AM  

USP .45: FullMetalPanda: So did Assad kill Obama's grandma or something because he seems to be the reincarnate of Bush on the lead up to the invasion of Iraq.

No this is even more incompetent and less by the books.


Sounds like it. Definitely sounds like the Syrian army has some incompetent people, if this story is correct.

/or is that not what you meant?
 
2013-08-28 09:21:33 AM  

USP .45: FullMetalPanda: So did Assad kill Obama's grandma or something because he seems to be the reincarnate of Bush on the lead up to the invasion of Iraq.

No this is even more incompetent and less by the books.


it's retarded but the magnitude of retardation is no where near the level where you have 100K+ troops on the ground. They are going to shoot some missiles into syria which pretty much will do nothing except probably kill some either innocent people or people involved but at a low level.
 
2013-08-28 09:21:35 AM  

DubtodaIll: liam76: DubtodaIll: liam76: DubtodaIll: but this situation is another example of how he makes a great speech and then does something else

What speech are you talking about and what do you want hiom to do?

I think the "redline" was stupid, but he hasn't "done something else".  You can't make that claim unless you are certain assad launched the chemical weapons.

I'd take the time to find a quote about him having the most transparent administration ever from his inauguration or something but it's too early in the morning.  Also drones, also NSA, also raising my taxes even though I'm lower middle class, also etc. etc. etc.

The drones and NSA I agree are wrong, however he didn't really have all the info when he was giving his innaguration speech.

You can't complain about the taxes with a straight face, or if you can you may want to take a look at how tax codes are created in the US.

I heard him say over and over again "if you're lower or middle classes, your taxes will not go up" and bam, 2012 comes around and my taxes go up.


The President sets the tax rates?  And, did your TAX go up, or did your RATE go up?  Because...two different things.
Making more money than you did last year, and therefore paying more taxes?  Oh, the humanity...
 
2013-08-28 09:21:46 AM  

neversubmit: Saudis offer Russia secret oil deal if it drops Syria

Saudi Arabia has secretly offered Russia a sweeping deal to control the global oil market and safeguard Russia's gas contracts, if the Kremlin backs away from the Assad regime in Syria.
The revelations come amid high tension in the Middle East, with US, British, and French warships poised for missile strikes against Syria, and Iran threatening to retaliate. The strategic jitters pushed Brent crude prices to a five-month high of $US112 a barrel.

The Putin-Bandar meeting took place three weeks ago. Mr Putin was unmoved by the Saudi offer.

Or maybe not, looks like Putin wont be bribed.



China and Russia hate the USA more than they love money.  They can get money anywhere.
 
2013-08-28 09:22:34 AM  

Headso: USP .45: FullMetalPanda: So did Assad kill Obama's grandma or something because he seems to be the reincarnate of Bush on the lead up to the invasion of Iraq.

No this is even more incompetent and less by the books.

it's retarded but the magnitude of retardation is no where near the level where you have 100K+ troops on the ground. They are going to shoot some missiles into syria which pretty much will do nothing except probably kill some either innocent people or people involved but at a low level.


I honestly cannot believe anyone is even trying to say that the rhetoric/discussion now is the same as or worse then the actual ground invasion of Iraq.
 
2013-08-28 09:23:28 AM  

Tyrone Slothrop: Carth: paulseta: Ah, the Middle East - where everyone is wrong, and everyone is armed.

An armed society is a polite society!

Heinlein never considered a society where people are willing to die for what they believe in. There are stronger motivations than self preservation and fear.



I can see by that statement that you've never read any Heinlein. Not even "Beyound This Horizon."
 
2013-08-28 09:23:53 AM  

liam76: DubtodaIll: I heard him say over and over again "if you're lower or middle classes, your taxes will not go up" and bam, 2012 comes around and my taxes go up

How much do youthink they would have gone up if he allowed the Bush tax cuts to expire completely (his only ohter option)?

Much more.



If you think leading is just choosing too bad options well then they've got you in their pocket.  A good leader is able to come up with his own ideas and gets them done.  Clinton, for example, was a great leader.  He was able to execute his policies, was able to reach beneficial compromises for both sides of the aisle and the nation thrived because of his ability to lead.  Anyway, I don't think either of us is going to change either's mind about whether or not Obama has been a good POTUS or not.
 
2013-08-28 09:24:06 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: IdBeCrazyIf: So basically the government has broken down and whoever controls these chemical weapons could use them or even possibly lose control of them at any moment?

Tell me why again we haven't turned any chemical installations we are aware of into ash again?

What do bombs cost these days? Like five bucks a pop?


Bombing those weapons would just create toxic clouds that would kill indiscriminately depends on how the wind is blowing.

Destroying CWs safely requires a specific procedure with specific equipment that basically revolves around incinerating them in a factory where they have no chance of releasing their toxins into the environment.
 
2013-08-28 09:24:13 AM  

ZzeusS: China and Russia hate the USA more than they love money.  They can get money anywhere.


Except that the US market is much larger than any other single market in the world. If they hated the US so much they wouldn't sell everything to us.
 
2013-08-28 09:25:07 AM  
"Hello, um Alan be praised!" *muffled whispers arguing*

"Allah be praised!"

"Say bro ... ther, we are going use those chemical weapons. Specially, [technical terms for chemical agents]."

"Yes, we are."
 
2013-08-28 09:25:13 AM  
So this morning on NPR they were talking about why the US needs to do something, the summary seemed to be "We need to do something because we said we'd do something and if we don't we'll lose credibility in the Middle East".

Think about that for a minute.

We might end up invading another country which presents no direct threat to the US, at the cost the lives of US servicemen, long term disability of US servicemen, billions/trillions of dollars and who knows how many civilian casualties, just so people know to take our threats seriously.
 
2013-08-28 09:25:32 AM  

PunGent: DubtodaIll: liam76: DubtodaIll: liam76: DubtodaIll: but this situation is another example of how he makes a great speech and then does something else

What speech are you talking about and what do you want hiom to do?

I think the "redline" was stupid, but he hasn't "done something else".  You can't make that claim unless you are certain assad launched the chemical weapons.

I'd take the time to find a quote about him having the most transparent administration ever from his inauguration or something but it's too early in the morning.  Also drones, also NSA, also raising my taxes even though I'm lower middle class, also etc. etc. etc.

The drones and NSA I agree are wrong, however he didn't really have all the info when he was giving his innaguration speech.

You can't complain about the taxes with a straight face, or if you can you may want to take a look at how tax codes are created in the US.

I heard him say over and over again "if you're lower or middle classes, your taxes will not go up" and bam, 2012 comes around and my taxes go up.

The President sets the tax rates?  And, did your TAX go up, or did your RATE go up?  Because...two different things.
Making more money than you did last year, and therefore paying more taxes?  Oh, the humanity...


No I'm hardly making any more money than I have been.  I haven't changed tax brackets, but the taxes coming out of my paycheck went up about 180 bucks on the same pay rate.
 
2013-08-28 09:27:14 AM  
Assad's commanders believe it was their own attack, but people here know better.
 
2013-08-28 09:27:24 AM  

This About That: log_jammin: This About That: pending invasion

never happen.

Let's hope not. The stock market thinks otherwise.


they're just pulling their money out of other things, they'll re-invest it in military contractors today. look for Raytheon and McDonnell-Douglas to get a bump
 
2013-08-28 09:27:50 AM  

DubtodaIll: PunGent: DubtodaIll: liam76: DubtodaIll: liam76: DubtodaIll: but this situation is another example of how he makes a great speech and then does something else

What speech are you talking about and what do you want hiom to do?

I think the "redline" was stupid, but he hasn't "done something else".  You can't make that claim unless you are certain assad launched the chemical weapons.

I'd take the time to find a quote about him having the most transparent administration ever from his inauguration or something but it's too early in the morning.  Also drones, also NSA, also raising my taxes even though I'm lower middle class, also etc. etc. etc.

The drones and NSA I agree are wrong, however he didn't really have all the info when he was giving his innaguration speech.

You can't complain about the taxes with a straight face, or if you can you may want to take a look at how tax codes are created in the US.

I heard him say over and over again "if you're lower or middle classes, your taxes will not go up" and bam, 2012 comes around and my taxes go up.

The President sets the tax rates?  And, did your TAX go up, or did your RATE go up?  Because...two different things.
Making more money than you did last year, and therefore paying more taxes?  Oh, the humanity...

No I'm hardly making any more money than I have been.  I haven't changed tax brackets, but the taxes coming out of my paycheck went up about 180 bucks on the same pay rate.


State...or federal?
 
2013-08-28 09:28:15 AM  

PunGent: DubtodaIll: PunGent: DubtodaIll: liam76: DubtodaIll: liam76: DubtodaIll: but this situation is another example of how he makes a great speech and then does something else

What speech are you talking about and what do you want hiom to do?

I think the "redline" was stupid, but he hasn't "done something else".  You can't make that claim unless you are certain assad launched the chemical weapons.

I'd take the time to find a quote about him having the most transparent administration ever from his inauguration or something but it's too early in the morning.  Also drones, also NSA, also raising my taxes even though I'm lower middle class, also etc. etc. etc.

The drones and NSA I agree are wrong, however he didn't really have all the info when he was giving his innaguration speech.

You can't complain about the taxes with a straight face, or if you can you may want to take a look at how tax codes are created in the US.

I heard him say over and over again "if you're lower or middle classes, your taxes will not go up" and bam, 2012 comes around and my taxes go up.

The President sets the tax rates?  And, did your TAX go up, or did your RATE go up?  Because...two different things.
Making more money than you did last year, and therefore paying more taxes?  Oh, the humanity...

No I'm hardly making any more money than I have been.  I haven't changed tax brackets, but the taxes coming out of my paycheck went up about 180 bucks on the same pay rate.

State...or federal?


federal
 
2013-08-28 09:28:17 AM  

Target Builder: So this morning on NPR they were talking about why the US needs to do something, the summary seemed to be "We need to do something because we said we'd do something and if we don't we'll lose credibility in the Middle East".

Think about that for a minute.

We might end up invading another country which presents no direct threat to the US, at the cost the lives of US servicemen, long term disability of US servicemen, billions/trillions of dollars and who knows how many civilian casualties, just so people know to take our threats seriously.


Invasion isn't the only "something" on the list, and the last time we did this it ended up with NATO airstrikes and nothing else.
 
2013-08-28 09:28:31 AM  
DubtodaIll:

No I'm hardly making any more money than I have been.  I haven't changed tax brackets, but the taxes coming out of my paycheck went up about 180 bucks on the same pay rate.

Unless you're talking about the expiration of the very temporary Payroll Tax cut you should probably speak to your accountant about that.
 
2013-08-28 09:29:30 AM  

DubtodaIll: liam76: DubtodaIll: I heard him say over and over again "if you're lower or middle classes, your taxes will not go up" and bam, 2012 comes around and my taxes go up

How much do youthink they would have gone up if he allowed the Bush tax cuts to expire completely (his only ohter option)?

Much more.


If you think leading is just choosing too bad options well then they've got you in their pocket.  A good leader is able to come up with his own ideas and gets them done.  Clinton, for example, was a great leader.  He was able to execute his policies, was able to reach beneficial compromises for both sides of the aisle and the nation thrived because of his ability to lead.  Anyway, I don't think either of us is going to change either's mind about whether or not Obama has been a good POTUS or not.


Well, to be honest, if Obama came out in favor of breathing, some people would suffocate themselves as a result.

Compromise requires both sides to be willing to work together and you can't honestly say that the GOP is willing to compromise with the WH on anything.  They change their stances depending on what the President says or does.  There's an amusing youtube video out there that has Newt Gingrich demanding that the President do something to support those Freedom-loving Libyan rebels...and then, less than a day later, Gingrich is lambasting the President for supporting those AQ-linked Libyan rebels.

The President 'tried' to compromise for nearly the entirety of his first term and it got him nothing.  Now, he's working around the GOP and good on him for it.  They've done nothing with their time in office, other than make stupid symbolic gestures and basically shiat the bed.
 
2013-08-28 09:29:56 AM  

Target Builder: DubtodaIll:

No I'm hardly making any more money than I have been.  I haven't changed tax brackets, but the taxes coming out of my paycheck went up about 180 bucks on the same pay rate.

Unless you're talking about the expiration of the very temporary Payroll Tax cut you should probably speak to your accountant about that.


I can't afford an accountant.  And it was the Medicare/Medicade mostly and some from the payroll.
 
2013-08-28 09:30:08 AM  

Target Builder: So this morning on NPR they were talking about why the US needs to do something, the summary seemed to be "We need to do something because we said we'd do something and if we don't we'll lose credibility in the Middle East".

Think about that for a minute.

We might end up invading another country which presents no direct threat to the US, at the cost the lives of US servicemen, long term disability of US servicemen, billions/trillions of dollars and who knows how many civilian casualties, just so people know to take our threats seriously.


this

well... hopefully not. but yeah, it does sound like there are some people who would rather action was taken against syria even if it's the wrong thing to do, because that's better than admitting, 'my bad, shouldn't have said the red line thing'.

is saving face more important than doing the right thing?
 
2013-08-28 09:30:10 AM  

DubtodaIll: I heard him say over and over again "if you're lower or middle classes, your taxes will not go up" and bam, 2012 comes around and my taxes go up.


what? there was no income tax hike in 2012.  that's a lie.
 
2013-08-28 09:30:10 AM  
I am not claiming "false flag" and I am about as libby libtard Obama voter as you can find, but I am supporting military intervention in Syria. What has made me extra wary is the stuff I hear comming from the administration about justifying an attack. It sounds way too familiar. Even though I trust the Obama Administration way more than I trusted the GW Bush administration, I do not trust the Obama administration enough to give them a pass to attack on the reasoning they have produced thus far.

If Assad gassed his own people and you have the evidence, then bring up charges and try him at the ICC. Then you would have leverage on Russia and China as far as their security council veto power because then they would be protecting a convicted war criminal rather than a legitimate world leader.
 
2013-08-28 09:30:48 AM  

Infernalist: tirob: All right, *now* I'm confused.

Is this a case of:

a)  A Syrian army officer, outwardly an Assad loyalist but secretly sympathetic to the rebels, who ordered his troops to use chemical weapons in an attempt to discredit the government and possibly provoke a US intervention?

or

b) The Syrian Ministry of defense, surmising that the CIA/NSA was listening in on the line, trying to present this whole episode as a command screwup, rather than as an act ordered from the top, in an attempt to evade responsibility for the chemical attack and possibly prevent a US intervention?

or

c) Something else?

If I had to guess, I'd say:

c) Some lower ranking field officer made the horrible mistake of using CWs on his own volition.


That's highly unlikely. Or the Assad regime is packed full of morons.
 
2013-08-28 09:31:25 AM  

DubtodaIll: Target Builder: DubtodaIll:

No I'm hardly making any more money than I have been.  I haven't changed tax brackets, but the taxes coming out of my paycheck went up about 180 bucks on the same pay rate.

Unless you're talking about the expiration of the very temporary Payroll Tax cut you should probably speak to your accountant about that.

I can't afford an accountant.  And it was the Medicare/Medicade mostly and some from the payroll.


You might want to check with your payroll people then. Unless $180 equals about 2.5% of your income.
 
2013-08-28 09:32:24 AM  

Infernalist: DubtodaIll: liam76: DubtodaIll: I heard him say over and over again "if you're lower or middle classes, your taxes will not go up" and bam, 2012 comes around and my taxes go up

How much do youthink they would have gone up if he allowed the Bush tax cuts to expire completely (his only ohter option)?

Much more.


If you think leading is just choosing too bad options well then they've got you in their pocket.  A good leader is able to come up with his own ideas and gets them done.  Clinton, for example, was a great leader.  He was able to execute his policies, was able to reach beneficial compromises for both sides of the aisle and the nation thrived because of his ability to lead.  Anyway, I don't think either of us is going to change either's mind about whether or not Obama has been a good POTUS or not.

Well, to be honest, if Obama came out in favor of breathing, some people would suffocate themselves as a result.

Compromise requires both sides to be willing to work together and you can't honestly say that the GOP is willing to compromise with the WH on anything.  They change their stances depending on what the President says or does.  There's an amusing youtube video out there that has Newt Gingrich demanding that the President do something to support those Freedom-loving Libyan rebels...and then, less than a day later, Gingrich is lambasting the President for supporting those AQ-linked Libyan rebels.

The President 'tried' to compromise for nearly the entirety of his first term and it got him nothing.  Now, he's working around the GOP and good on him for it.  They've done nothing with their time in office, other than make stupid symbolic gestures and basically shiat the bed.


Right, Newt Gingrinch was a super easy guy to get along with but somehow Slick Willy was able to get things done.
 
2013-08-28 09:32:54 AM  

vygramul: Assad's commanders believe it was their own attack, but people here know better.


Caveat emptor
 
2013-08-28 09:32:55 AM  

heavymetal: If Assad gassed his own people and you have the evidence, then bring up charges and try him at the ICC.


the US isn't even a state member of the ICC.
 
2013-08-28 09:34:29 AM  

DubtodaIll: Target Builder: DubtodaIll:

No I'm hardly making any more money than I have been.  I haven't changed tax brackets, but the taxes coming out of my paycheck went up about 180 bucks on the same pay rate.

Unless you're talking about the expiration of the very temporary Payroll Tax cut you should probably speak to your accountant about that.

I can't afford an accountant.  And it was the Medicare/Medicade mostly and some from the payroll.


The extra income tax could only have been due to the additional tax on the small pay rise you mention. The medicare/medicaid is due to the expiration of the temporary payroll tax break that started in 2011 and ended in 2012 and the small amount of extra income you mention.

No other federal income taxes have changed for you.
 
2013-08-28 09:35:03 AM  

vygramul: Infernalist: tirob: All right, *now* I'm confused.

Is this a case of:

a)  A Syrian army officer, outwardly an Assad loyalist but secretly sympathetic to the rebels, who ordered his troops to use chemical weapons in an attempt to discredit the government and possibly provoke a US intervention?

or

b) The Syrian Ministry of defense, surmising that the CIA/NSA was listening in on the line, trying to present this whole episode as a command screwup, rather than as an act ordered from the top, in an attempt to evade responsibility for the chemical attack and possibly prevent a US intervention?

or

c) Something else?

If I had to guess, I'd say:

c) Some lower ranking field officer made the horrible mistake of using CWs on his own volition.

That's highly unlikely. Or the Assad regime is packed full of morons.


You say that as if that's an unlikely prospect.
 
2013-08-28 09:35:23 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: Invasion isn't the only "something" on the list, and the last time we did this it ended up with NATO airstrikes and nothing else.


The way it sounded they were not even talking about a sustained thing like serbia it's going to be a limited strike with cruise missiles and they have been talking about it for days now so everyone knows it is coming. It's like military theater a meaningless show because they know they have to "do something", there's something morally reprehensible about it and it will kill people for no reason but not Americans.
 
2013-08-28 09:35:37 AM  

neversubmit: vygramul: Assad's commanders believe it was their own attack, but people here know better.

Caveat emptor


That applies even more to people who buy the false-flag narrative pushed by people with a financial interest in getting page clicks from those who find conspiracies entertaining.
 
2013-08-28 09:35:53 AM  

Hobodeluxe: DubtodaIll: I heard him say over and over again "if you're lower or middle classes, your taxes will not go up" and bam, 2012 comes around and my taxes go up.

what? there was no income tax hike in 2012.  that's a lie.


Maybe his income was increased due to his record level of bootstrap sales and he owed more taxes.
 
2013-08-28 09:36:00 AM  

DubtodaIll: Infernalist: DubtodaIll: liam76: DubtodaIll: I heard him say over and over again "if you're lower or middle classes, your taxes will not go up" and bam, 2012 comes around and my taxes go up

How much do youthink they would have gone up if he allowed the Bush tax cuts to expire completely (his only ohter option)?

Much more.


If you think leading is just choosing too bad options well then they've got you in their pocket.  A good leader is able to come up with his own ideas and gets them done.  Clinton, for example, was a great leader.  He was able to execute his policies, was able to reach beneficial compromises for both sides of the aisle and the nation thrived because of his ability to lead.  Anyway, I don't think either of us is going to change either's mind about whether or not Obama has been a good POTUS or not.

Well, to be honest, if Obama came out in favor of breathing, some people would suffocate themselves as a result.

Compromise requires both sides to be willing to work together and you can't honestly say that the GOP is willing to compromise with the WH on anything.  They change their stances depending on what the President says or does.  There's an amusing youtube video out there that has Newt Gingrich demanding that the President do something to support those Freedom-loving Libyan rebels...and then, less than a day later, Gingrich is lambasting the President for supporting those AQ-linked Libyan rebels.

The President 'tried' to compromise for nearly the entirety of his first term and it got him nothing.  Now, he's working around the GOP and good on him for it.  They've done nothing with their time in office, other than make stupid symbolic gestures and basically shiat the bed.

Right, Newt Gingrinch was a super easy guy to get along with but somehow Slick Willy was able to get things done.


I can't even decipher what you said there.  Try again.
 
2013-08-28 09:36:29 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: What do bombs cost these days? Like five bucks a pop?


I'd even be willing to pay an extra 5 cents on my paycheck to replace the couple hundred or so cruise missiles it might take to turn any of these sites into something that resembles a Martian landscape.

Infernalist: Bombing those weapons would just create toxic clouds that would kill indiscriminately depends on how the wind is blowing.

Destroying CWs safely requires a specific procedure with specific equipment that basically revolves around incinerating them in a factory where they have no chance of releasing their toxins into the environment.


I'm pretty sure a cruise missile with the correct warhead could do it just fine. It does require specialized equipment to disperse the stuff anyway. Remember that sarin attack in Japan, it ended up basically pooling and was easily cleaned up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJi2K8mKTRM

Yeah, pretty sure that would do it
 
2013-08-28 09:37:13 AM  

Target Builder: DubtodaIll: Target Builder: DubtodaIll:

No I'm hardly making any more money than I have been.  I haven't changed tax brackets, but the taxes coming out of my paycheck went up about 180 bucks on the same pay rate.

Unless you're talking about the expiration of the very temporary Payroll Tax cut you should probably speak to your accountant about that.

I can't afford an accountant.  And it was the Medicare/Medicade mostly and some from the payroll.

The extra income tax could only have been due to the additional tax on the small pay rise you mention. The medicare/medicaid is due to the expiration of the temporary payroll tax break that started in 2011 and ended in 2012 and the small amount of extra income you mention.

No other federal income taxes have changed for you.


Right, and I was told by my President that none of them would go up.  It's not like I'm surprised, but I don't see why you're trying to convince me the President is a man of his word when even his rhetoric turns out to be bull.
 
2013-08-28 09:37:17 AM  

Infernalist: vygramul: Infernalist: tirob: All right, *now* I'm confused.

Is this a case of:

a)  A Syrian army officer, outwardly an Assad loyalist but secretly sympathetic to the rebels, who ordered his troops to use chemical weapons in an attempt to discredit the government and possibly provoke a US intervention?

or

b) The Syrian Ministry of defense, surmising that the CIA/NSA was listening in on the line, trying to present this whole episode as a command screwup, rather than as an act ordered from the top, in an attempt to evade responsibility for the chemical attack and possibly prevent a US intervention?

or

c) Something else?

If I had to guess, I'd say:

c) Some lower ranking field officer made the horrible mistake of using CWs on his own volition.

That's highly unlikely. Or the Assad regime is packed full of morons.

You say that as if that's an unlikely prospect.


Long-term dictators don't tend to make the fundamental mistake of putting the authority of using regime-changing WMDs in the hands of lower-level field officers.
 
2013-08-28 09:37:41 AM  

Tatterdemalian: So in these phone calls, where the Syrian army isn't expecting anyone to listen to and presumably speaking candidly, show that they never authorized any chemical attacks, didn't expect their chemical weapons division to carry any out without said authorization, and were told by the chem division that they actually didn't carry out any such attacks.

This sort of thing makes it seem more like the rebels are carrying out chem attacks on themselves to manipulate the world into defending them, not less. Unless it's some sort of double bluff carried out in anticipation that US intel would tap that phone call, which, even after the whole NSA scandal, really isn't that likely when people are fighting for their lives.


This.

When the leadership's reaction is "wtf is going on" I don't call that "proof" that they were behind it.
 
2013-08-28 09:37:50 AM  

vygramul: That's highly unlikely. Or the Assad regime is packed full of morons.


Given the actions up to this point, I figured this was a given
 
2013-08-28 09:38:53 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: DubtodaIll: Target Builder: DubtodaIll:

No I'm hardly making any more money than I have been.  I haven't changed tax brackets, but the taxes coming out of my paycheck went up about 180 bucks on the same pay rate.

Unless you're talking about the expiration of the very temporary Payroll Tax cut you should probably speak to your accountant about that.

I can't afford an accountant.  And it was the Medicare/Medicade mostly and some from the payroll.

You might want to check with your payroll people then. Unless $180 equals about 2.5% of your income.


Someone may also want to mention the tax withholding is NOT the same was the taxes you will pay at the end of the year.  Review your W4, it is entirely possible you payroll depart screwed up, is staffed by idiots, or both.
 
2013-08-28 09:39:06 AM  

Infernalist: Bombing those weapons would just create toxic clouds that would kill indiscriminately depends on how the wind is blowing.

Destroying CWs safely requires a specific procedure with specific equipment that basically revolves around incinerating them in a factory where they have no chance of releasing their toxins into the environment.


Which means a full invasion
 
2013-08-28 09:39:16 AM  

Infernalist: DubtodaIll: Infernalist: DubtodaIll: liam76: DubtodaIll: I heard him say over and over again "if you're lower or middle classes, your taxes will not go up" and bam, 2012 comes around and my taxes go up

How much do youthink they would have gone up if he allowed the Bush tax cuts to expire completely (his only ohter option)?

Much more.


If you think leading is just choosing too bad options well then they've got you in their pocket.  A good leader is able to come up with his own ideas and gets them done.  Clinton, for example, was a great leader.  He was able to execute his policies, was able to reach beneficial compromises for both sides of the aisle and the nation thrived because of his ability to lead.  Anyway, I don't think either of us is going to change either's mind about whether or not Obama has been a good POTUS or not.

Well, to be honest, if Obama came out in favor of breathing, some people would suffocate themselves as a result.

Compromise requires both sides to be willing to work together and you can't honestly say that the GOP is willing to compromise with the WH on anything.  They change their stances depending on what the President says or does.  There's an amusing youtube video out there that has Newt Gingrich demanding that the President do something to support those Freedom-loving Libyan rebels...and then, less than a day later, Gingrich is lambasting the President for supporting those AQ-linked Libyan rebels.

The President 'tried' to compromise for nearly the entirety of his first term and it got him nothing.  Now, he's working around the GOP and good on him for it.  They've done nothing with their time in office, other than make stupid symbolic gestures and basically shiat the bed.

Right, Newt Gingrinch was a super easy guy to get along with but somehow Slick Willy was able to get things done.

I can't even decipher what you said there.  Try again.


You may want to look up who was the Speaker of the House during Clinton's Administration.  Obama only has Boehner to deal with and he still can't beat him.
 
2013-08-28 09:39:25 AM  
cameroncrazy1984:

Invasion isn't the only "something" on the list, and the last time we did this it ended up with NATO airstrikes and nothing else.

True, and at present the discussion is to just do some symbolic and purposefully ineffective bombing of a country that presents no direct threat to the US, mainly to make sure people take threats seriously. Which even aside from the potential to lead into an escalating spiral of events is still a stupid idea.
 
2013-08-28 09:39:49 AM  

Zeb Hesselgresser: Would the Taliban/AlQaeda/Islamo-psychos gas their own people to bait the US into expanding the conflict?

I think yes.


It's play #6 in the AQ playbook. Study it out.
 
2013-08-28 09:39:54 AM  

DubtodaIll: Target Builder: DubtodaIll: Target Builder: DubtodaIll:

No I'm hardly making any more money than I have been.  I haven't changed tax brackets, but the taxes coming out of my paycheck went up about 180 bucks on the same pay rate.

Unless you're talking about the expiration of the very temporary Payroll Tax cut you should probably speak to your accountant about that.

I can't afford an accountant.  And it was the Medicare/Medicade mostly and some from the payroll.

The extra income tax could only have been due to the additional tax on the small pay rise you mention. The medicare/medicaid is due to the expiration of the temporary payroll tax break that started in 2011 and ended in 2012 and the small amount of extra income you mention.

No other federal income taxes have changed for you.

Right, and I was told by my President that none of them would go up.  It's not like I'm surprised, but I don't see why you're trying to convince me the President is a man of his word when even his rhetoric turns out to be bull.


Wait - he briefly lowered them, and that counts as raising them?
 
2013-08-28 09:40:15 AM  

Headso: cameroncrazy1984: Invasion isn't the only "something" on the list, and the last time we did this it ended up with NATO airstrikes and nothing else.

The way it sounded they were not even talking about a sustained thing like serbia it's going to be a limited strike with cruise missiles and they have been talking about it for days now so everyone knows it is coming. It's like military theater a meaningless show because they know they have to "do something", there's something morally reprehensible about it and it will kill people for no reason but not Americans.


"For no reason"? If they're targeted strikes then we're going after some of their military facilities that were involved in the attack (if it's proven that this was military). How is that without reason?
 
2013-08-28 09:40:15 AM  

Headso: cameroncrazy1984: Invasion isn't the only "something" on the list, and the last time we did this it ended up with NATO airstrikes and nothing else.

The way it sounded they were not even talking about a sustained thing like serbia it's going to be a limited strike with cruise missiles and they have been talking about it for days now so everyone knows it is coming. It's like military theater a meaningless show because they know they have to "do something", there's something morally reprehensible about it and it will kill people for no reason but not Americans.


....and hopefully no Russians or Chinese... of course, the Iranians will launch against Israel before the fires are out in Syria. All because no one knows for sure what actually happened, but SOMETHING has to be done. and that SOMETHING is OBVIOUSLY bombing and shooting... I hope none of you Farkers got kids in the draft age range...

Tell me again how the whole Peace Prize thing works again?
 
2013-08-28 09:40:50 AM  

vygramul: Infernalist: vygramul: Infernalist: tirob: All right, *now* I'm confused.

Is this a case of:

a)  A Syrian army officer, outwardly an Assad loyalist but secretly sympathetic to the rebels, who ordered his troops to use chemical weapons in an attempt to discredit the government and possibly provoke a US intervention?

or

b) The Syrian Ministry of defense, surmising that the CIA/NSA was listening in on the line, trying to present this whole episode as a command screwup, rather than as an act ordered from the top, in an attempt to evade responsibility for the chemical attack and possibly prevent a US intervention?

or

c) Something else?

If I had to guess, I'd say:

c) Some lower ranking field officer made the horrible mistake of using CWs on his own volition.

That's highly unlikely. Or the Assad regime is packed full of morons.

You say that as if that's an unlikely prospect.

Long-term dictators don't tend to make the fundamental mistake of putting the authority of using regime-changing WMDs in the hands of lower-level field officers.


The calls indicate otherwise.  As has been noted in the past, the US has straight up LOST nuclear weapons in past.  And that was without the pressure of a violent civilian insurrection to stress things up.

The possibility of CWs being used by mistake by some lower level flunkies is entirely possible and even probable, as it would allow both sides to right at the same time.
 
2013-08-28 09:41:01 AM  

DubtodaIll: Right, and I was told by my President that none of them would go up.  It's not like I'm surprised, but I don't see why you're trying to convince me the President is a man of his word when even his rhetoric turns out to be bull.


A) Your FICA tax didn't go up and B) He never said they wouldn't go up if you made more money, you dumbass.
 
2013-08-28 09:41:09 AM  

Elegy: pnome: Yeah, let's just stand back and let all the evil shiatheads of the world gas people.  We have public school teachers who need raises.

Pretty much. The world is a pretty big place, and I fail to see why we have a vested interest in stopping the two sides of this conflict - both of which are filled with evil shiatheads - from offing each other.

Stand down the military, give the teachers a raise. Sounds like a plan to me.


Your plan sounds wonderful, if it was only the evil shaitheads offing each other.  Somehow I don't think all those kids in body bags we saw last week were evil.  Nerve gas doesn't discriminate.
 
2013-08-28 09:41:22 AM  

heavymetal: Even though I trust the Obama Administration way more than I trusted the GW Bush administration


You really really shouldn't. Like Bush press secretary Ari Fleischer said, "Obama is carrying out Bush's fourth term."
 
2013-08-28 09:41:48 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: DubtodaIll: Right, and I was told by my President that none of them would go up.  It's not like I'm surprised, but I don't see why you're trying to convince me the President is a man of his word when even his rhetoric turns out to be bull.

A) Your FICA tax didn't go up and B) He never said they wouldn't go up if you made more money, you dumbass.


I'm not making more money...I'm taking home less.
 
2013-08-28 09:42:02 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: Infernalist: Bombing those weapons would just create toxic clouds that would kill indiscriminately depends on how the wind is blowing.

Destroying CWs safely requires a specific procedure with specific equipment that basically revolves around incinerating them in a factory where they have no chance of releasing their toxins into the environment.

Which means a full invasion


By whom?  Not us.  Let the Arab League supply the troops.  Or Turkey.  Or Russia.
 
2013-08-28 09:42:22 AM  

Target Builder: True, and at present the discussion is to just do some symbolic and purposefully ineffective


[citation needed]

Or did you think the Libya bombings were ineffective as well?
 
2013-08-28 09:42:53 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: Infernalist: Bombing those weapons would just create toxic clouds that would kill indiscriminately depends on how the wind is blowing.

Destroying CWs safely requires a specific procedure with specific equipment that basically revolves around incinerating them in a factory where they have no chance of releasing their toxins into the environment.

Which means a full invasion


It'd be nice if we could have people put money where their mouths are. Where's intrade when you need it? It was nice to have a place where bullshiat walked.
 
2013-08-28 09:43:07 AM  

DubtodaIll: Infernalist: DubtodaIll: Infernalist: DubtodaIll: liam76: DubtodaIll: I heard him say over and over again "if you're lower or middle classes, your taxes will not go up" and bam, 2012 comes around and my taxes go up

How much do youthink they would have gone up if he allowed the Bush tax cuts to expire completely (his only ohter option)?

Much more.


If you think leading is just choosing too bad options well then they've got you in their pocket.  A good leader is able to come up with his own ideas and gets them done.  Clinton, for example, was a great leader.  He was able to execute his policies, was able to reach beneficial compromises for both sides of the aisle and the nation thrived because of his ability to lead.  Anyway, I don't think either of us is going to change either's mind about whether or not Obama has been a good POTUS or not.

Well, to be honest, if Obama came out in favor of breathing, some people would suffocate themselves as a result.

Compromise requires both sides to be willing to work together and you can't honestly say that the GOP is willing to compromise with the WH on anything.  They change their stances depending on what the President says or does.  There's an amusing youtube video out there that has Newt Gingrich demanding that the President do something to support those Freedom-loving Libyan rebels...and then, less than a day later, Gingrich is lambasting the President for supporting those AQ-linked Libyan rebels.

The President 'tried' to compromise for nearly the entirety of his first term and it got him nothing.  Now, he's working around the GOP and good on him for it.  They've done nothing with their time in office, other than make stupid symbolic gestures and basically shiat the bed.

Right, Newt Gingrinch was a super easy guy to get along with but somehow Slick Willy was able to get things done.

I can't even decipher what you said there.  Try again.

You may want to look up who was the Speaker of the House during Clinton's Adminis ...


There's no 'beating' Boehner, no matter how much you might want to see Obama beating him.  Compromise requires both sides to work together.  Since the GOP won't do it, I'm happy to see the WH working around them and without them.
 
2013-08-28 09:43:10 AM  

DubtodaIll: cameroncrazy1984: DubtodaIll: Right, and I was told by my President that none of them would go up.  It's not like I'm surprised, but I don't see why you're trying to convince me the President is a man of his word when even his rhetoric turns out to be bull.

A) Your FICA tax didn't go up and B) He never said they wouldn't go up if you made more money, you dumbass.

I'm not making more money...I'm taking home less.


Then check on your W4, because unless you're making $400k a year, your taxes didn't go up.
 
2013-08-28 09:43:17 AM  

DubtodaIll: liam76: DubtodaIll: I heard him say over and over again "if you're lower or middle classes, your taxes will not go up" and bam, 2012 comes around and my taxes go up

How much do youthink they would have gone up if he allowed the Bush tax cuts to expire completely (his only ohter option)?

Much more.


If you think leading is just choosing too bad options well then they've got you in their pocket.  A good leader is able to come up with his own ideas and gets them done.  Clinton, for example, was a great leader.  He was able to execute his policies, was able to reach beneficial compromises for both sides of the aisle and the nation thrived because of his ability to lead.  Anyway, I don't think either of us is going to change either's mind about whether or not Obama has been a good POTUS or not.


Clinton's compromise was what largely led to the financial breakdown we are getting out of.

Clinton was also not dealing teatards who have painted him as the antichrist.

For you to think the two situations are close show incredable ignorance of the climate in congress.
 
2013-08-28 09:43:46 AM  

vygramul: Tat'dGreaser: Infernalist: Bombing those weapons would just create toxic clouds that would kill indiscriminately depends on how the wind is blowing.

Destroying CWs safely requires a specific procedure with specific equipment that basically revolves around incinerating them in a factory where they have no chance of releasing their toxins into the environment.

Which means a full invasion

It'd be nice if we could have people put money where their mouths are. Where's intrade when you need it? It was nice to have a place where bullshiat walked.


This would be a good prop bet. I'd take the opposite.
 
2013-08-28 09:44:17 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: DubtodaIll: cameroncrazy1984: DubtodaIll: Right, and I was told by my President that none of them would go up.  It's not like I'm surprised, but I don't see why you're trying to convince me the President is a man of his word when even his rhetoric turns out to be bull.

A) Your FICA tax didn't go up and B) He never said they wouldn't go up if you made more money, you dumbass.

I'm not making more money...I'm taking home less.

Then check on your W4, because unless you're making $400k a year, your taxes didn't go up.


Why are you so sure of that?  and Duck Fuke.
 
2013-08-28 09:44:18 AM  

BostonEMT: Headso: cameroncrazy1984: Invasion isn't the only "something" on the list, and the last time we did this it ended up with NATO airstrikes and nothing else.

The way it sounded they were not even talking about a sustained thing like serbia it's going to be a limited strike with cruise missiles and they have been talking about it for days now so everyone knows it is coming. It's like military theater a meaningless show because they know they have to "do something", there's something morally reprehensible about it and it will kill people for no reason but not Americans.

....and hopefully no Russians or Chinese... of course, the Iranians will launch against Israel before the fires are out in Syria. All because no one knows for sure what actually happened, but SOMETHING has to be done. and that SOMETHING is OBVIOUSLY bombing and shooting... I hope none of you Farkers got kids in the draft age range...

Tell me again how the whole Peace Prize thing works again?


Apparently, the Peace Prize requires allowing chemical weapons attacks.
 
2013-08-28 09:45:16 AM  

vygramul: neversubmit: vygramul: Assad's commanders believe it was their own attack, but people here know better.

Caveat emptor

That applies even more to people who buy the false-flag narrative pushed by people with a financial interest in getting page clicks from those who find conspiracies entertaining.


As apposed to people with a financial interest in making war?

Like the New York Times that put the launch area inside rebel controlled land.
 
2013-08-28 09:45:34 AM  

DubtodaIll: cameroncrazy1984: DubtodaIll: cameroncrazy1984: DubtodaIll: Right, and I was told by my President that none of them would go up.  It's not like I'm surprised, but I don't see why you're trying to convince me the President is a man of his word when even his rhetoric turns out to be bull.

A) Your FICA tax didn't go up and B) He never said they wouldn't go up if you made more money, you dumbass.

I'm not making more money...I'm taking home less.

Then check on your W4, because unless you're making $400k a year, your taxes didn't go up.

Why are you so sure of that?  and Duck Fuke.


Because I understand the US tax code and I have an entire family full of IRS enrolled agents.
 
2013-08-28 09:45:45 AM  

generallyso: heavymetal: Even though I trust the Obama Administration way more than I trusted the GW Bush administration

You really really shouldn't. Like Bush press secretary Ari Fleischer said, "Obama is carrying out Bush's fourth term."


If Ari Fleischer told me the sky was blue, I'd have to go outside and check.  The man was Bush's PR guy forever and a day and a consummate sociopathic liar.
 
2013-08-28 09:45:49 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: Headso: cameroncrazy1984: Invasion isn't the only "something" on the list, and the last time we did this it ended up with NATO airstrikes and nothing else.

The way it sounded they were not even talking about a sustained thing like serbia it's going to be a limited strike with cruise missiles and they have been talking about it for days now so everyone knows it is coming. It's like military theater a meaningless show because they know they have to "do something", there's something morally reprehensible about it and it will kill people for no reason but not Americans.

"For no reason"? If they're targeted strikes then we're going after some of their military facilities that were involved in the attack (if it's proven that this was military). How is that without reason?


they've been talking about it for days now, why would anyone be at those facilities that matters and collateral damage is a thing, one of those missiles could easily kill civilians. The fakeness of the whole thing is why it is so morally wrong, this is nothing but theater but one where people will be killed.
 
2013-08-28 09:46:07 AM  

Infernalist: There's no 'beating' Boehner, no matter how much you might want to see Obama beating him. Compromise requires both sides to work together. Since the GOP won't do it, I'm happy to see the WH working around them and without them


This.

A fair amoun of Boehner's side wnats to boot him out for talking to Obama.

For fark's sake the healthcare plan that we have no has roots in Newt's is some of Newt's plans.  To pretend there is the same kind of right wing crazy in the House now is bananas.
 
2013-08-28 09:46:07 AM  

Infernalist: Well, to be honest, if Obama came out in favor of breathing, some people would suffocate themselves as a result.


Which is why conservatives sounds like a bunch of terrorists today when they spin Clinton's attack on chemical weapons facilities as bombing a baby milk factory.

I find all this to be another example of why we should have a draft: too many people casually committing to the horror of war who know nothing of it or its cost.

And finally, how we gonna pay for it?
 
2013-08-28 09:46:52 AM  

DubtodaIll: Target Builder: DubtodaIll: Target Builder: DubtodaIll:

No I'm hardly making any more money than I have been.  I haven't changed tax brackets, but the taxes coming out of my paycheck went up about 180 bucks on the same pay rate.

Unless you're talking about the expiration of the very temporary Payroll Tax cut you should probably speak to your accountant about that.

I can't afford an accountant.  And it was the Medicare/Medicade mostly and some from the payroll.

The extra income tax could only have been due to the additional tax on the small pay rise you mention. The medicare/medicaid is due to the expiration of the temporary payroll tax break that started in 2011 and ended in 2012 and the small amount of extra income you mention.

No other federal income taxes have changed for you.

Right, and I was told by my President that none of them would go up.  It's not like I'm surprised, but I don't see why you're trying to convince me the President is a man of his word when even his rhetoric turns out to be bull.


Tax withholding from your pay check is not the same as what you owe at the end of the year.  Do you usually get a refund from giving the Federal Government a free loan for the year?  Is so, change your farking W4 so you are withholding so much.  Of course if you can't budget and pay your taxes come April 15, then you may want to keep the extra coming out so you get a that fun check from the Feds when you file.

Now if you want to be taken seriously, tell us the number of dependents you file with and your approximate income from the last year and what you expect for this year.  It is farking dead simple to look up the tax rates for each to see where you fall and if you taxes did really go up $4,860 ($180*26-- assuming biweekly).
 
2013-08-28 09:47:24 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: "For no reason"? If they're targeted strikes then we're going after some of their military facilities that were involved in the attack (if it's proven that this was military). How is that without reason?


The 'reason' we'd be making the strikes is because we said we would. The sites that launched the strikes are probably going to be targeted because, hey, the bombs have to land somewhere. The discussion I've seen has also suggested that they are going to try to target the strikes in a way that won't really tip the balance of the civil war - so it's not really even to contribute to ousting Assad, it's just to slap him around the face a bit.
 
2013-08-28 09:47:24 AM  

Infernalist: By whom?  Not us.  Let the Arab League supply the troops.  Or Turkey.  Or Russia.


That's my point, we shouldn't even spend money on bombs for this bullsh*t.

The only way to fully stop chemical attacks is a full on invasion. Either sh*t or get off the pot that doesn't even want us there
 
2013-08-28 09:47:29 AM  

Headso: they've been talking about it for days now, why would anyone be at those facilities that matters and collateral damage is a thing, one of those missiles could easily kill civilians.


"Could easily" and "would"

I think you're just making up things to be mad about at this point.
 
2013-08-28 09:48:12 AM  

Target Builder: The 'reason' we'd be making the strikes is because we said we would because Syria used chemical weapons on their own people.


Just so we're clear on the reason we said we would.
 
2013-08-28 09:48:21 AM  

wingnut396: DubtodaIll: Target Builder: DubtodaIll: Target Builder: DubtodaIll:

No I'm hardly making any more money than I have been.  I haven't changed tax brackets, but the taxes coming out of my paycheck went up about 180 bucks on the same pay rate.

Unless you're talking about the expiration of the very temporary Payroll Tax cut you should probably speak to your accountant about that.

I can't afford an accountant.  And it was the Medicare/Medicade mostly and some from the payroll.

The extra income tax could only have been due to the additional tax on the small pay rise you mention. The medicare/medicaid is due to the expiration of the temporary payroll tax break that started in 2011 and ended in 2012 and the small amount of extra income you mention.

No other federal income taxes have changed for you.

Right, and I was told by my President that none of them would go up.  It's not like I'm surprised, but I don't see why you're trying to convince me the President is a man of his word when even his rhetoric turns out to be bull.

Tax withholding from your pay check is not the same as what you owe at the end of the year.  Do you usually get a refund from giving the Federal Government a free loan for the year?  Is so, change your farking W4 so you are withholding so much.  Of course if you can't budget and pay your taxes come April 15, then you may want to keep the extra coming out so you get a that fun check from the Feds when you file.

Now if you want to be taken seriously, tell us the number of dependents you file with and your approximate income from the last year and what you expect for this year.  It is farking dead simple to look up the tax rates for each to see where you fall and if you taxes did really go up $4,860 ($180*26-- assuming biweekly).


You people are arguing with a paid shill.   I hope you all realize that.
 
2013-08-28 09:48:28 AM  
Manufactured Syrian war scare pushed NSA off the front page.

So that happen, which is nice for them.
 
2013-08-28 09:48:33 AM  

LasersHurt: I love how people are pre-emptively so pissed at the war Obama's gotten us into. Soon. Will have gotten us into. Definitely. This is the same as Iraq. Or will have been.


Infernalist: cameroncrazy1984: My favorite thing about these threads is all the same people comparing Syria to Iraq were comparing Libya to Iraq a couple years ago. And they're saying it without a single sense of irony.

a lot of people are absolutely determined for Obama to have his own version of Iraq.  And Katrina.  And 911.


Obama is the REAL victim in all of this.
 
2013-08-28 09:50:13 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: Infernalist: By whom?  Not us.  Let the Arab League supply the troops.  Or Turkey.  Or Russia.

That's my point, we shouldn't even spend money on bombs for this bullsh*t.

The only way to fully stop chemical attacks is a full on invasion. Either sh*t or get off the pot that doesn't even want us there


I'd be in favor of an air campaign IF we had a nation willing to supply the occupation troops to back up the rebels and ensure that a non-insane government takes control after Assad's departure.

The Libyan rebels didn't require occupation troops, officially, but they got lots of neighborly help from the Arab League nations.  The same thing is needed here.
 
2013-08-28 09:50:19 AM  

Infernalist:

The calls indicate otherwise.  As has been noted in the past, the US has straight up LOST nuclear weapons in past.  And that was without the pressure of a violent civilian insurrection to stress things up.


We're not a dictatorship and even our military's culture is one of civilian control. That makes a difference.

The possibility of CWs being used by mistake by some lower level flunkies is entirely possible and even probable, as it would allow both sides to right at the same time.

No, weapons like that simply do not get released to the flunkies without intending to use them.
 
2013-08-28 09:50:24 AM  
So the Syrian Defense Ministry is on tape basically asking who the fark authorized or who the fark launched those WMDs.......but the article doesn't say what the CW units response was....it could have been "I don't know".

The CW units response is the important part of the conversation......

It's almost like the Zimmerman threads....yes Zimmemran shot Martin, and people wanted to leave out the important part of the scenario, ie...that Martin was on top of Zimmerman bashing his head against the concrete when he was shot.
 
2013-08-28 09:50:50 AM  
Infernalist: You people are arguing with a paid shill.   I hope you all realize that.

And it's off topic if only this thread was moderated, if only...
 
2013-08-28 09:51:09 AM  

Infernalist: You people are arguing with a paid shill.   I hope you all realize tha


Well, we need somebody to pay the taxes so I can sit around all in my Section 8 housing with posting on Fark with my Obama phone and eating government cheese!
 
2013-08-28 09:51:16 AM  

Headso: cameroncrazy1984: Invasion isn't the only "something" on the list, and the last time we did this it ended up with NATO airstrikes and nothing else.

The way it sounded they were not even talking about a sustained thing like serbia it's going to be a limited strike with cruise missiles and they have been talking about it for days now so everyone knows it is coming. It's like military theater a meaningless show because they know they have to "do something", there's something morally reprehensible about it and it will kill people for no reason but not Americans.


Even worse:  Since it's been talked about endlessly, the Syrians know it's coming, and they will take extraordinary measures to try and mitigate the effects.  They will move their assets, perhaps even continuously.  There is a certain irreduceable amount of time from observing something, noting its location, transmitting that information to the platforms tasked with firing at them, and of course the flight time of the missiles in question from launch to impact.

If it takes 2 hours for that entire loop (which seems awfully fast to me for a decision that must be made in the Pentagon), you could mitigate that by moving your chemical weapon assets on a rotating schedule every few hours.

Also, since it's largely a given that the attack will take place at night, both to prevent spotters from seeing the missiles and reporting them and to minimize civilian casualties, moving the assets at dusk every day will provide a large amount of protection.

The other thing to consider is that a large number of the CW assets the Assad regime are indistinguishable from the air, and they are very resistant to attack.   An artillery shell loaded with sarin looks the same as one loaded with high explosives from any possible surveillance asset we might have.
 
2013-08-28 09:51:24 AM  

muck4doo: LasersHurt: I love how people are pre-emptively so pissed at the war Obama's gotten us into. Soon. Will have gotten us into. Definitely. This is the same as Iraq. Or will have been.

Infernalist: cameroncrazy1984: My favorite thing about these threads is all the same people comparing Syria to Iraq were comparing Libya to Iraq a couple years ago. And they're saying it without a single sense of irony.

a lot of people are absolutely determined for Obama to have his own version of Iraq.  And Katrina.  And 911.

Obama is the REAL victim in all of this.


Because god forbid we wait a minute and see what he does before we tell him he did it wrong.
 
2013-08-28 09:51:35 AM  

Infernalist: I'd be in favor of an air campaign IF we had a nation willing to supply the occupation troops to back up the rebels and ensure that a non-insane government takes control after Assad's departure.

The Libyan rebels didn't require occupation troops, officially, but they got lots of neighborly help from the Arab League nations.  The same thing is needed here.


Why!?!?! We shouldn't have even been in Libya. WHO THE F*CK IS PAYING FOR THIS???
 
2013-08-28 09:51:40 AM  

DubtodaIll: Right, and I was told by my President that none of them would go up. It's not like I'm surprised, but I don't see why you're trying to convince me the President is a man of his word when even his rhetoric turns out to be bull.


Dude. A temporary 2% cut on payroll tax expired. He didn't raise the income tax at all.  What part of that are you having trouble understanding?
 
2013-08-28 09:52:01 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: Headso: they've been talking about it for days now, why would anyone be at those facilities that matters and collateral damage is a thing, one of those missiles could easily kill civilians.

"Could easily" and "would"

I think you're just making up things to be mad about at this point.


you honestly believe this is going to be a meaningful military strike?
 
2013-08-28 09:52:26 AM  

liam76: DubtodaIll: liam76: DubtodaIll: I heard him say over and over again "if you're lower or middle classes, your taxes will not go up" and bam, 2012 comes around and my taxes go up

How much do youthink they would have gone up if he allowed the Bush tax cuts to expire completely (his only ohter option)?

Much more.


If you think leading is just choosing too bad options well then they've got you in their pocket.  A good leader is able to come up with his own ideas and gets them done.  Clinton, for example, was a great leader.  He was able to execute his policies, was able to reach beneficial compromises for both sides of the aisle and the nation thrived because of his ability to lead.  Anyway, I don't think either of us is going to change either's mind about whether or not Obama has been a good POTUS or not.

Clinton's compromise was what largely led to the financial breakdown we are getting out of.

Clinton was also not dealing teatards who have painted him as the antichrist.

For you to think the two situations are close show incredable ignorance of the climate in congress.


You're right in that's it's incredibly hard to deal with a party whose primary role is to stop all new taxes.  That does put a damper on things if what you want to do requires you spend more money you don't have.  Perhaps you could take a different tact, like rooting out corruption and waste that would save billions, which coincidentally is part of the platform he ran on to get elected with him being a "Washington Outsider" and all.
 
2013-08-28 09:52:51 AM  

FLMountainMan: For the love of God, stay the fark out of Syria.

"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," Obama in 2008.

lol.


Joe Biden stated he'd impeach Bush if he attacked Iran without Congressional approval.  But, yeah, its okay when my team does it.
 
2013-08-28 09:52:51 AM  

neversubmit: Manufactured Syrian war scare pushed NSA off the front page.

So that happen, which is nice for them.


IT'S A CONSPIRACYYYYY
 
2013-08-28 09:53:17 AM  

edmo: And finally, how we gonna pay for it?


We gonna be out of office by then, living in very secure gated communities. Deal with it, peasant.
 
2013-08-28 09:53:47 AM  

Headso: cameroncrazy1984: Headso: they've been talking about it for days now, why would anyone be at those facilities that matters and collateral damage is a thing, one of those missiles could easily kill civilians.

"Could easily" and "would"

I think you're just making up things to be mad about at this point.

you honestly believe this is going to be a meaningful military strike?


I think you've watched too much West Wing.
 
2013-08-28 09:53:56 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: Infernalist: I'd be in favor of an air campaign IF we had a nation willing to supply the occupation troops to back up the rebels and ensure that a non-insane government takes control after Assad's departure.

The Libyan rebels didn't require occupation troops, officially, but they got lots of neighborly help from the Arab League nations.  The same thing is needed here.

Why!?!?! We shouldn't have even been in Libya. WHO THE F*CK IS PAYING FOR THIS???


just think of it as corporate welfare for the job creators over at McDonnell- Douglass and Raytheon. Something the GOP loves and supports.
 
2013-08-28 09:54:28 AM  

Infernalist: Tat'dGreaser: Infernalist: Bombing those weapons would just create toxic clouds that would kill indiscriminately depends on how the wind is blowing.

Destroying CWs safely requires a specific procedure with specific equipment that basically revolves around incinerating them in a factory where they have no chance of releasing their toxins into the environment.

Which means a full invasion

By whom?  Not us.  Let the Arab League supply the troops.  Or Turkey.  Or Russia.


Russia is already there, securing the CW stockpiles. If the Syrian Gov't DID do it, then the Russians are complicit in the crime.

Interesting site with Al'KayDuh vids. Seems to point to the "rebels" that launched it... At this point, its just as reliable and believable as anything from the US or Israel...
 
2013-08-28 09:55:02 AM  

neversubmit: vygramul: neversubmit: vygramul: Assad's commanders believe it was their own attack, but people here know better.

Caveat emptor

That applies even more to people who buy the false-flag narrative pushed by people with a financial interest in getting page clicks from those who find conspiracies entertaining.

As apposed to people with a financial interest in making war?

Like the New York Times that put the launch area inside rebel controlled land.


There's already a war and the media makes plenty of money hand-wringing over how we're not doing anything about it. And the media can't be expected to label countries properly. Is it a surprise they can't find what is where? (Assuming they got it wrong, of course.)
 
2013-08-28 09:55:15 AM  
It's never a good thing to wake up to Alex Jones' wet dream.
 
2013-08-28 09:55:42 AM  

neversubmit: Manufactured Syrian war scare pushed NSA off the front page.

So that happen, which is nice for them.


MIley Cyrus acting like a skank pushed the NSA off the front page. News articles about what happened on in Syria came as a welcome relief.
 
2013-08-28 09:56:09 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: Headso: cameroncrazy1984: Headso: they've been talking about it for days now, why would anyone be at those facilities that matters and collateral damage is a thing, one of those missiles could easily kill civilians.

"Could easily" and "would"

I think you're just making up things to be mad about at this point.

you honestly believe this is going to be a meaningful military strike?

I think you've watched too much West Wing.


ok whatever that means, but do you believe this is going to be a meaningful action is it worth doing?
 
2013-08-28 09:56:16 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: neversubmit: Manufactured Syrian war scare pushed NSA off the front page.

So that happen, which is nice for them.

IT'S A CONSPIRACYYYYY


the same way 9/11 pushed Bush's economic woes off the front page.

I'm beginning to see a pattern here.

:)
 
2013-08-28 09:57:23 AM  

Hobodeluxe: Tat'dGreaser: Infernalist: I'd be in favor of an air campaign IF we had a nation willing to supply the occupation troops to back up the rebels and ensure that a non-insane government takes control after Assad's departure.

The Libyan rebels didn't require occupation troops, officially, but they got lots of neighborly help from the Arab League nations.  The same thing is needed here.

Why!?!?! We shouldn't have even been in Libya. WHO THE F*CK IS PAYING FOR THIS???

just think of it as corporate welfare for the job creators over at McDonnell- Douglass and Raytheon. Something the GOP loves and supports.


So do the democrats on Fark who were complaining about the sequester affecting their government defense contracts.
 
2013-08-28 09:57:36 AM  

Headso: cameroncrazy1984: Headso: cameroncrazy1984: Headso: they've been talking about it for days now, why would anyone be at those facilities that matters and collateral damage is a thing, one of those missiles could easily kill civilians.

"Could easily" and "would"

I think you're just making up things to be mad about at this point.

you honestly believe this is going to be a meaningful military strike?

I think you've watched too much West Wing.

ok whatever that means, but do you believe this is going to be a meaningful action is it worth doing?


It means that you have a TV-fantasy view of the way the US government works. And yes, I also believe in proper punctuation.
 
2013-08-28 09:57:44 AM  

LasersHurt: muck4doo: LasersHurt: I love how people are pre-emptively so pissed at the war Obama's gotten us into. Soon. Will have gotten us into. Definitely. This is the same as Iraq. Or will have been.

Infernalist: cameroncrazy1984: My favorite thing about these threads is all the same people comparing Syria to Iraq were comparing Libya to Iraq a couple years ago. And they're saying it without a single sense of irony.

a lot of people are absolutely determined for Obama to have his own version of Iraq.  And Katrina.  And 911.

Obama is the REAL victim in all of this.

Because god forbid we wait a minute and see what he does before we tell him he did it wrong.


People are discussing what he's done so far, but your grave concern for his political reputation foremost in all of this is greatly appreciated by all involved.
 
2013-08-28 09:57:56 AM  

Infernalist: wingnut396: DubtodaIll: Target Builder: DubtodaIll: Target Builder: DubtodaIll:

No I'm hardly making any more money than I have been.  I haven't changed tax brackets, but the taxes coming out of my paycheck went up about 180 bucks on the same pay rate.

Unless you're talking about the expiration of the very temporary Payroll Tax cut you should probably speak to your accountant about that.

I can't afford an accountant.  And it was the Medicare/Medicade mostly and some from the payroll.

The extra income tax could only have been due to the additional tax on the small pay rise you mention. The medicare/medicaid is due to the expiration of the temporary payroll tax break that started in 2011 and ended in 2012 and the small amount of extra income you mention.

No other federal income taxes have changed for you.

Right, and I was told by my President that none of them would go up.  It's not like I'm surprised, but I don't see why you're trying to convince me the President is a man of his word when even his rhetoric turns out to be bull.

Tax withholding from your pay check is not the same as what you owe at the end of the year.  Do you usually get a refund from giving the Federal Government a free loan for the year?  Is so, change your farking W4 so you are withholding so much.  Of course if you can't budget and pay your taxes come April 15, then you may want to keep the extra coming out so you get a that fun check from the Feds when you file.

Now if you want to be taken seriously, tell us the number of dependents you file with and your approximate income from the last year and what you expect for this year.  It is farking dead simple to look up the tax rates for each to see where you fall and if you taxes did really go up $4,860 ($180*26-- assuming biweekly).

You people are arguing with a paid shill.   I hope you all realize that.


Not necessarily. I have an uncle who makes Teahadists look like Eugene Debs, and he complained in April 2009 how Obama made his taxes go up over his tax bill the previous April.
 
2013-08-28 09:58:02 AM  
repeat from similar threadarticle from asiantimes
http://atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MID-01-270813.html

.........The importance of this report cannot be overstated enough. It was initially leaked to Lebanon's Al-Safir newspaper. http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/politics/2013/08/saudi-russia-putin-ba ndar-meeting-syria-egypt.html">Here's Bandar's whole strategy, unveiled in his meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin, already reported by Asia Times Online. After trying - for four hours - to convince Putin to drop Syria, Bandar is adamant: ''There is no escape from the military option.''

it will be war, so set back and enjoy the enevitable
 
2013-08-28 09:58:21 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: Infernalist: I'd be in favor of an air campaign IF we had a nation willing to supply the occupation troops to back up the rebels and ensure that a non-insane government takes control after Assad's departure.

The Libyan rebels didn't require occupation troops, officially, but they got lots of neighborly help from the Arab League nations.  The same thing is needed here.

Why!?!?! We shouldn't have even been in Libya. WHO THE F*CK IS PAYING FOR THIS???


Son, you have to realize that when shiat goes bad, 'we' have to pay something.  It's inevitable.  It's just how the world works.

Our choices were very simple: Ignore the problem, let the global economy go to shiat because of Libya's oil market being shaky as fark 'and' simultaneously let Daffy slaughter the rebels at his own leisure....OR:

We could step in with regional support, rebel support, Arab League support, and UN support, allowing the French and other local powers use our military infrastructure and expertise to destroy Daffy's forces, allowing the rebels to win the day.

We chose the latter and it cost us next to nothing in relative terms.  It was the perfect example of how to wage a war in the modern age.
 
2013-08-28 09:58:59 AM  
How many days left until the democrats hand he GOP a slew of "But Obamas"?
 
2013-08-28 10:00:10 AM  

wingnut396: DubtodaIll: Target Builder: DubtodaIll: Target Builder: DubtodaIll:

No I'm hardly making any more money than I have been.  I haven't changed tax brackets, but the taxes coming out of my paycheck went up about 180 bucks on the same pay rate.

Unless you're talking about the expiration of the very temporary Payroll Tax cut you should probably speak to your accountant about that.

I can't afford an accountant.  And it was the Medicare/Medicade mostly and some from the payroll.

The extra income tax could only have been due to the additional tax on the small pay rise you mention. The medicare/medicaid is due to the expiration of the temporary payroll tax break that started in 2011 and ended in 2012 and the small amount of extra income you mention.

No other federal income taxes have changed for you.

Right, and I was told by my President that none of them would go up.  It's not like I'm surprised, but I don't see why you're trying to convince me the President is a man of his word when even his rhetoric turns out to be bull.

Tax withholding from your pay check is not the same as what you owe at the end of the year.  Do you usually get a refund from giving the Federal Government a free loan for the year?  Is so, change your farking W4 so you are withholding so much.  Of course if you can't budget and pay your taxes come April 15, then you may want to keep the extra coming out so you get a that fun check from the Feds when you file.

Now if you want to be taken seriously, tell us the number of dependents you file with and your approximate income from the last year and what you expect for this year.  It is farking dead simple to look up the tax rates for each to see where you fall and if you taxes did really go up $4,860 ($180*26-- assuming biweekly).


No I get paid monthly.  I know how do you my taxes.  Just because I'm Republican  doesn't mean I'm a moron.  (Insert laugh track).  You seem more surprised that my reality isn't the reality your party leads you to believe.  I'm not a big fan of the GOP's effort the past few years either and I can see that most of it is because they don't like Obama personally.  Personally, I've never met him and I fee like he's probably a good guy to know.  He takes polls and reacts to them, I haven't seen a fresh or good idea out of him his whole administration.  And if there's anything this country has needed the past decade is fresh ideas from the top.
 
2013-08-28 10:00:20 AM  

Infernalist: Tat'dGreaser: Infernalist: By whom?  Not us.  Let the Arab League supply the troops.  Or Turkey.  Or Russia.

That's my point, we shouldn't even spend money on bombs for this bullsh*t.

The only way to fully stop chemical attacks is a full on invasion. Either sh*t or get off the pot that doesn't even want us there

I'd be in favor of an air campaign IF we had a nation willing to supply the occupation troops to back up the rebels and ensure that a non-insane government takes control after Assad's departure.

The Libyan rebels didn't require occupation troops, officially, but they got lots of neighborly help from the Arab League nations.  The same thing is needed here.


Nation-building doesn't have a good track-record in nations that didn't get absolutely leveled beforehand.
 
2013-08-28 10:00:22 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: Headso: cameroncrazy1984: Headso: cameroncrazy1984: Headso: they've been talking about it for days now, why would anyone be at those facilities that matters and collateral damage is a thing, one of those missiles could easily kill civilians.

"Could easily" and "would"

I think you're just making up things to be mad about at this point.

you honestly believe this is going to be a meaningful military strike?

I think you've watched too much West Wing.

ok whatever that means, but do you believe this is going to be a meaningful action is it worth doing?

It means that you have a TV-fantasy view of the way the US government works. And yes, I also believe in proper punctuation.


ok, but you still don't seem to be able to give your opinion on the issue? what's up with that?
 
2013-08-28 10:00:50 AM  

muck4doo: LasersHurt: muck4doo: LasersHurt: I love how people are pre-emptively so pissed at the war Obama's gotten us into. Soon. Will have gotten us into. Definitely. This is the same as Iraq. Or will have been.

Infernalist: cameroncrazy1984: My favorite thing about these threads is all the same people comparing Syria to Iraq were comparing Libya to Iraq a couple years ago. And they're saying it without a single sense of irony.

a lot of people are absolutely determined for Obama to have his own version of Iraq.  And Katrina.  And 911.

Obama is the REAL victim in all of this.

Because god forbid we wait a minute and see what he does before we tell him he did it wrong.

People are discussing what he's done so far, but your grave concern for his political reputation foremost in all of this is greatly appreciated by all involved.


What has he done so far? So far he's said if Syria crosses a red line it changes his calculus." That's it. There are a whole lot of people who believe we've already fought a war in Syria with 100,000 troops on the ground.
 
2013-08-28 10:01:01 AM  

Giltric: How many days left until the democrats hand he GOP a slew of "But Obamas"?


FOUR MORE YEARS.  Bask in it, boyo.
 
2013-08-28 10:01:04 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: neversubmit: Manufactured Syrian war scare pushed NSA off the front page.

So that happen, which is nice for them.

IT'S A CONSPIRACYYYYY


Can you prove that? No? Then shut up!
 
2013-08-28 10:02:06 AM  

DubtodaIll: No I get paid monthly.  I know how do you my taxes.  Just because I'm Republican  doesn't mean I'm a moron.


Are you sure? Because you just said "I know how do you my taxes."

Maybe Obama raised only your taxes? That would explain why yours are the only ones that went up and mine and everyone else's in this thread didn't.
 
2013-08-28 10:02:09 AM  

muck4doo: People are discussing what he's done so far, but your grave concern for his political reputation foremost in all of this is greatly appreciated by all involved.


So you'd rather push some "wah wah unfair you're protecting Obama" shiat than honestly discuss something? I'm shocked, shocked.
 
2013-08-28 10:02:46 AM  

Headso: cameroncrazy1984: Headso: cameroncrazy1984: Headso: cameroncrazy1984: Headso: they've been talking about it for days now, why would anyone be at those facilities that matters and collateral damage is a thing, one of those missiles could easily kill civilians.

"Could easily" and "would"

I think you're just making up things to be mad about at this point.

you honestly believe this is going to be a meaningful military strike?

I think you've watched too much West Wing.

ok whatever that means, but do you believe this is going to be a meaningful action is it worth doing?

It means that you have a TV-fantasy view of the way the US government works. And yes, I also believe in proper punctuation.

ok, but you still don't seem to be able to give your opinion on the issue? what's up with that?


What part of "And yes" is so hard to understand?
 
2013-08-28 10:02:52 AM  

vygramul: Infernalist: Tat'dGreaser: Infernalist: By whom?  Not us.  Let the Arab League supply the troops.  Or Turkey.  Or Russia.

That's my point, we shouldn't even spend money on bombs for this bullsh*t.

The only way to fully stop chemical attacks is a full on invasion. Either sh*t or get off the pot that doesn't even want us there

I'd be in favor of an air campaign IF we had a nation willing to supply the occupation troops to back up the rebels and ensure that a non-insane government takes control after Assad's departure.

The Libyan rebels didn't require occupation troops, officially, but they got lots of neighborly help from the Arab League nations.  The same thing is needed here.

Nation-building doesn't have a good track-record in nations that didn't get absolutely leveled beforehand.


To be completely honest, the only thing that I'm truly wanting is for the CWs to be seized and contained and maybe the Syrian civilians to get a chance to live a somewhat stable and secure life, but if I had to choose only one of those, it'd still be the CWs being seized.  As much as I'd like to see the Syrians get a good government, it's really on them to make that happen.
 
2013-08-28 10:03:13 AM  

give me doughnuts: neversubmit: Manufactured Syrian war scare pushed NSA off the front page.

So that happen, which is nice for them.

MIley Cyrus acting like a skank pushed the NSA off the front page. News articles about what happened on in Syria came as a welcome relief.


She acted like a young person, that is all.
 
2013-08-28 10:04:45 AM  

LandOfChocolate: paulseta: Ah, the Middle East - where everyone is wrong, and everyone is armed.

and the points don't matter


Sounds a lot like Clear Spring, Maryland.
 
2013-08-28 10:05:20 AM  

Infernalist: vygramul: Infernalist: Tat'dGreaser: Infernalist: By whom?  Not us.  Let the Arab League supply the troops.  Or Turkey.  Or Russia.

That's my point, we shouldn't even spend money on bombs for this bullsh*t.

The only way to fully stop chemical attacks is a full on invasion. Either sh*t or get off the pot that doesn't even want us there

I'd be in favor of an air campaign IF we had a nation willing to supply the occupation troops to back up the rebels and ensure that a non-insane government takes control after Assad's departure.

The Libyan rebels didn't require occupation troops, officially, but they got lots of neighborly help from the Arab League nations.  The same thing is needed here.

Nation-building doesn't have a good track-record in nations that didn't get absolutely leveled beforehand.

To be completely honest, the only thing that I'm truly wanting is for the CWs to be seized and contained and maybe the Syrian civilians to get a chance to live a somewhat stable and secure life, but if I had to choose only one of those, it'd still be the CWs being seized.  As much as I'd like to see the Syrians get a good government, it's really on them to make that happen.


On that, we agree.
 
2013-08-28 10:05:34 AM  

Infernalist: Son, you have to realize that when shiat goes bad, 'we' have to pay something.  It's inevitable.  It's just how the world works.

Our choices were very simple: Ignore the problem, let the global economy go to shiat because of Libya's oil market being shaky as fark 'and' simultaneously let Daffy slaughter the rebels at his own leisure....OR:

We could step in with regional support, rebel support, Arab League support, and UN support, allowing the French and other local powers use our military infrastructure and expertise to destroy Daffy's forces, allowing the rebels to win the day.

We chose the latter and it cost us next to nothing in relative terms.  It was the perfect example of how to wage a war in the modern age.


The global economy was in no danger of "going to sh*t". It is in no danger of "going to sh*t". Apparently we went to Iraq because of oil and that was bad, but this is alright?

I tend to have a big problem spending billions of dollars we don't have to help Al Qaeda gain a stronghold in another country.
 
2013-08-28 10:06:41 AM  

vygramul: No, weapons like that simply do not get released to the flunkies without intending to use them


You are Assad.

You know people in the west are worreid abotu your chemical weapons.  Would you leav all of them in a "secure" bunker or get them spread out?

Also you may want to familirize yourself with hwo oftent he US has lost nuclear wpeaons or accidently flwon with them.  I doubt assad's military is nearly as professional, so to see a mistake like this happenig is completely plausible imho.
 
2013-08-28 10:07:01 AM  

Hobodeluxe: I'm beginning to see a pattern here.


No you aren't.

Apophenia is the experience of seeing meaningful patterns or connections in random or meaningless data.
 
2013-08-28 10:07:23 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: DubtodaIll: No I get paid monthly.  I know how do you my taxes.  Just because I'm Republican  doesn't mean I'm a moron.

Are you sure? Because you just said "I know how do you my taxes."

Maybe Obama raised only your taxes? That would explain why yours are the only ones that went up and mine and everyone else's in this thread didn't.


You can believe whatever you want about my life, and hey more power to you, whatever gets your rocks off.  I know I'm taking home less money than I was two years ago and Obama has done nothing to improve that and from what I've seen is making no efforts to improve the overall economy in a real way.
 
2013-08-28 10:07:23 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: I tend to have a big problem spending billions of dollars we don't have to help Al Qaeda gain a stronghold in another country.


Question: Do you know how much Libya cost? Did you know it was done entirely on-budget? Did you know that the deficit continued to shrink anyway?

Follow-up: How do you know for sure that Al Qaeda would gain "another" stronghold (whatever that means)?
 
2013-08-28 10:07:39 AM  

shower_in_my_socks: I have yet to read an article that tells us how the neighborhood that was attacked was of such strategic importance to Assad that it warranted a chemical gas attack that would assure an ass-kicking by the US and our allies.


Same here. Something seems fishy with all of this.
 
2013-08-28 10:08:07 AM  

DubtodaIll: cameroncrazy1984: DubtodaIll: No I get paid monthly.  I know how do you my taxes.  Just because I'm Republican  doesn't mean I'm a moron.

Are you sure? Because you just said "I know how do you my taxes."

Maybe Obama raised only your taxes? That would explain why yours are the only ones that went up and mine and everyone else's in this thread didn't.

You can believe whatever you want about my life, and hey more power to you, whatever gets your rocks off.  I know I'm taking home less money than I was two years ago and Obama has done nothing to improve that and from what I've seen is making no efforts to improve the overall economy in a real way.


Prove it. Because you appear to be the only American making less than $400,000 per year that is taking home less taxes without getting a pay raise.
 
2013-08-28 10:08:26 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: Headso: cameroncrazy1984: Headso: cameroncrazy1984: Headso: cameroncrazy1984: Headso: they've been talking about it for days now, why would anyone be at those facilities that matters and collateral damage is a thing, one of those missiles could easily kill civilians.

"Could easily" and "would"

I think you're just making up things to be mad about at this point.

you honestly believe this is going to be a meaningful military strike?

I think you've watched too much West Wing.

ok whatever that means, but do you believe this is going to be a meaningful action is it worth doing?

It means that you have a TV-fantasy view of the way the US government works. And yes, I also believe in proper punctuation.

ok, but you still don't seem to be able to give your opinion on the issue? what's up with that?

What part of "And yes" is so hard to understand?


Seems kinda naive, but hey, atleast you got up the courage to give an opinion.
 
2013-08-28 10:08:57 AM  

neversubmit: cameroncrazy1984: neversubmit: Manufactured Syrian war scare pushed NSA off the front page.

So that happen, which is nice for them.

IT'S A CONSPIRACYYYYY

Can you prove that? No? Then shut up!


SO - the idea that a known "liar" may or may not have lied about something else to the death and detriment of others did NOT lie because there is no (known physical) proof, yet we're not even allowed to talk about the the fact that a known "liar" has a history of lying and may have lied again? so according to YOU - the great and wonderfull FarkAss, we're not allowed to even ASK "cui bono"? and what branch of the government do you work for again?
 
2013-08-28 10:10:19 AM  

Headso: cameroncrazy1984: Headso: cameroncrazy1984: Headso: cameroncrazy1984: Headso: cameroncrazy1984: Headso: they've been talking about it for days now, why would anyone be at those facilities that matters and collateral damage is a thing, one of those missiles could easily kill civilians.

"Could easily" and "would"

I think you're just making up things to be mad about at this point.

you honestly believe this is going to be a meaningful military strike?

I think you've watched too much West Wing.

ok whatever that means, but do you believe this is going to be a meaningful action is it worth doing?

It means that you have a TV-fantasy view of the way the US government works. And yes, I also believe in proper punctuation.

ok, but you still don't seem to be able to give your opinion on the issue? what's up with that?

What part of "And yes" is so hard to understand?

Seems kinda naive, but hey, atleast you got up the courage to give an opinion.


No, naivete is believing that the government plans airstrikes that have no effect whatsoever, as if real life happens the way it does on The West Wing.
 
2013-08-28 10:11:02 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: Question: Do you know how much Libya cost? Did you know it was done entirely on-budget? Did you know that the deficit continued to shrink anyway?

Follow-up: How do you know for sure that Al Qaeda would gain "another" stronghold (whatever that means)?


Oh well gee sh*t, that makes it alright.

Are you nuts? You don't read the news? The news that has been verified that Al Qaeda has joined the rebel movement?
 
2013-08-28 10:12:06 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: cameroncrazy1984: Question: Do you know how much Libya cost? Did you know it was done entirely on-budget? Did you know that the deficit continued to shrink anyway?

Follow-up: How do you know for sure that Al Qaeda would gain "another" stronghold (whatever that means)?

Oh well gee sh*t, that makes it alright.

Are you nuts? You don't read the news? The news that has been verified that Al Qaeda has joined the rebel movement?


And? There were reports that they joined the rebel movement in Libya too, right? And it's funny that you suddenly dropped the "spend-billions-we-don't-have" argument right away.
 
2013-08-28 10:12:09 AM  

violentsalvation: Right... Are we blaming Israel yet or are we blaming this "false flag" operation on ourselves?

If you don't want us to take part in their conflict then you can say it. I'll respect your opinion, I'm luke warm on the idea myself. But this headline is silly.


I agree that an outright false flag seems a bit far, but something is hinky. Maybe we (or someone) goaded the Syrians in to attacking? Why did they attack this particular area?
 
2013-08-28 10:12:23 AM  

neversubmit: The "intervention" is a done deal, Mr. Putin is already backing away from Assad.


This. At a press conference a few days ago, a senior Russian official (don't have the details handy, sorry) said "US intervention would be 'catastrophic'...but no, we're not getting involved."

Catastrophic. Uh huh. That sounds like a green light to me.
 
2013-08-28 10:12:38 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: DubtodaIll: cameroncrazy1984: DubtodaIll: No I get paid monthly.  I know how do you my taxes.  Just because I'm Republican  doesn't mean I'm a moron.

Are you sure? Because you just said "I know how do you my taxes."

Maybe Obama raised only your taxes? That would explain why yours are the only ones that went up and mine and everyone else's in this thread didn't.

You can believe whatever you want about my life, and hey more power to you, whatever gets your rocks off.  I know I'm taking home less money than I was two years ago and Obama has done nothing to improve that and from what I've seen is making no efforts to improve the overall economy in a real way.

Prove it. Because you appear to be the only American making less than $400,000 per year that is taking home less taxes without getting a pay raise.


I don't take home any taxes.  And yes, after a decrease in taxes, when taxes go back up, that's called a tax increase.  If they're able to make it "temporarily" go down, then they can make it go down whenever they're able to put it on paper and sign it.
 
2013-08-28 10:12:46 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: muck4doo: LasersHurt: muck4doo: LasersHurt: I love how people are pre-emptively so pissed at the war Obama's gotten us into. Soon. Will have gotten us into. Definitely. This is the same as Iraq. Or will have been.

Infernalist: cameroncrazy1984: My favorite thing about these threads is all the same people comparing Syria to Iraq were comparing Libya to Iraq a couple years ago. And they're saying it without a single sense of irony.

a lot of people are absolutely determined for Obama to have his own version of Iraq.  And Katrina.  And 911.

Obama is the REAL victim in all of this.

Because god forbid we wait a minute and see what he does before we tell him he did it wrong.

People are discussing what he's done so far, but your grave concern for his political reputation foremost in all of this is greatly appreciated by all involved.

What has he done so far? So far he's said if Syria crosses a red line it changes his calculus." That's it. There are a whole lot of people who believe we've already fought a war in Syria with 100,000 troops on the ground.


Who's saying anything like that? Some are saying they don't want to see that, but I haven't seen anyone say what you are stating.

LasersHurt: So you'd rather push some "wah wah unfair you're protecting Obama" shiat than honestly discuss something? I'm shocked, shocked.


Try discussing something other than "wah wah this is unfair for Obama".
 
2013-08-28 10:13:08 AM  

BostonEMT: neversubmit: cameroncrazy1984: neversubmit: Manufactured Syrian war scare pushed NSA off the front page.

So that happen, which is nice for them.

IT'S A CONSPIRACYYYYY

Can you prove that? No? Then shut up!

SO - the idea that a known "liar" may or may not have lied about something else to the death and detriment of others did NOT lie because there is no (known physical) proof, yet we're not even allowed to talk about the the fact that a known "liar" has a history of lying and may have lied again? so according to YOU - the great and wonderfull FarkAss, we're not allowed to even ASK "cui bono"? and what branch of the government do you work for again?


I wasn't talking to you.
 
2013-08-28 10:13:52 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: Infernalist: Son, you have to realize that when shiat goes bad, 'we' have to pay something.  It's inevitable.  It's just how the world works.

Our choices were very simple: Ignore the problem, let the global economy go to shiat because of Libya's oil market being shaky as fark 'and' simultaneously let Daffy slaughter the rebels at his own leisure....OR:

We could step in with regional support, rebel support, Arab League support, and UN support, allowing the French and other local powers use our military infrastructure and expertise to destroy Daffy's forces, allowing the rebels to win the day.

We chose the latter and it cost us next to nothing in relative terms.  It was the perfect example of how to wage a war in the modern age.

The global economy was in no danger of "going to sh*t". It is in no danger of "going to sh*t". Apparently we went to Iraq because of oil and that was bad, but this is alright?

I tend to have a big problem spending billions of dollars we don't have to help Al Qaeda gain a stronghold in another country.


You're pretty uneducated on the circumstances leading up to the Libyan war.

The European economy was just coming out of a recession, recovering nicely at least until the rebels started shooting things up in Libya.  The instability in Libya freaked out the European oil market(most of Libya's oil goes to Europe) and the price of oil skyrocketed.  That, in turn, freaked out the European economy and their recovery started to falter.

The European powers had two choices: Support Daffy or support the rebels and they hemmed and they hawed and they talked and talked and Daffy continually pushed the rebels back and back and back until they reached the rebel capitol of Benghazi.  That's when the U.S. finally decided to throw their support behind the rebels.  US aerial forces and naval forces engaged Daffy's aircraft and air defenses, followed up by targeting his ground armor units.  French and other nations got their aircraft involved after the first waves of attacks and the US fell back into a secondary role of providing support and communications and advice.

By the time it was all said and done a couple of months later, we'd spent somewhere around 100 million dollars, most of that on ordinance and fuel for our aircraft and naval vessels.  It was cheap, it was morally respectable and it was the best thing for the region and Western Europe.  A rare trifecta.

As for spending billions....Do you honestly think that this President is going to do to Syria what the GOP did to Iraq?
 
2013-08-28 10:14:00 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: And? There were reports that they joined the rebel movement in Libya too, right? And it's funny that you suddenly dropped the "spend-billions-we-don't-have" argument right away.


You showed me no proof, why the f*ck would I continue to believe you?
 
2013-08-28 10:14:43 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: Headso: cameroncrazy1984: Headso: cameroncrazy1984: Headso: cameroncrazy1984: Headso: cameroncrazy1984: Headso: they've been talking about it for days now, why would anyone be at those facilities that matters and collateral damage is a thing, one of those missiles could easily kill civilians.

"Could easily" and "would"

I think you're just making up things to be mad about at this point.

you honestly believe this is going to be a meaningful military strike?

I think you've watched too much West Wing.

ok whatever that means, but do you believe this is going to be a meaningful action is it worth doing?

It means that you have a TV-fantasy view of the way the US government works. And yes, I also believe in proper punctuation.

ok, but you still don't seem to be able to give your opinion on the issue? what's up with that?

What part of "And yes" is so hard to understand?

Seems kinda naive, but hey, atleast you got up the courage to give an opinion.

No, naivete is believing that the government plans airstrikes that have no effect whatsoever, as if real life happens the way it does on The West Wing.


Because the government is never engaged in security/military theater, everything they do at the airports is all really about safety, W invading Iraq was really about terrorism, this is really about preventing more chemical weapons attacks.That's not naive at all.
 
2013-08-28 10:15:07 AM  

Fuggin Bizzy: neversubmit: The "intervention" is a done deal, Mr. Putin is already backing away from Assad.

This. At a press conference a few days ago, a senior Russian official (don't have the details handy, sorry) said "US intervention would be 'catastrophic'...but no, we're not getting involved."

Catastrophic. Uh huh. That sounds like a green light to me.


And a few post down from that one I corrected myself, still we are going ahead with or without Mr. Putin.
 
2013-08-28 10:15:29 AM  

Infernalist: You're pretty uneducated on the circumstances leading up to the Libyan war.


We spent over one dollar there, that's too much
 
2013-08-28 10:17:06 AM  

DubtodaIll: And yes, after a decrease in taxes, when taxes go back up, that's called a tax increase.  If they're able to make it "temporarily" go down, then they can make it go down whenever they're able to put it on paper and sign it.


Ah, so you believe that when a product goes on sale, once the sale ends, they increase the price of that product. Because you're a moron.
 
2013-08-28 10:17:39 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: Are you nuts? You don't read the news? The news that has been verified that Al Qaeda has joined the rebel movement?


There are actually about 100 different factions making up the rebel movement and yes some of the are Islamist. Islamist forces that hate America but what if...just what if... and hear me out here. We give them the support they need and step back and let Syrian people make their own decisions regarding their nation, who  knows they might just like us again.

Worked in Libya. Hell after the consulate attack the locals actually rounded up a posse to storm the compound of the people who attacked us. And its part of the reason why we were so hated in Afghanistan. We supported them against the Russians and then left when the soviets pulled out instead of continuing to support them like we are in Libya now.

So maybe, just maybe if we offer a helping hand, not boots on the ground but real true support....who knows?
 
2013-08-28 10:17:42 AM  

Headso: Because the government is never engaged in security/military theater, everything they do at the airports is all really about safety, W invading Iraq was really about terrorism, this is really about preventing more chemical weapons attacks.That's not naive at all


You're conflating the TSA and the USA PATRIOT Act with something completely different.
 
2013-08-28 10:17:59 AM  

liam76: vygramul: No, weapons like that simply do not get released to the flunkies without intending to use them

You are Assad.

You know people in the west are worreid abotu your chemical weapons.  Would you leav all of them in a "secure" bunker or get them spread out?

Also you may want to familirize yourself with hwo oftent he US has lost nuclear wpeaons or accidently flwon with them.  I doubt assad's military is nearly as professional, so to see a mistake like this happenig is completely plausible imho.


People only release weapons when they have made a decision to use them, and only long enough to use them. The U.S. isn't a dictatorship and has a strong civil-military relationship. Note that I said tyrannies exert more control.
 
2013-08-28 10:18:22 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: Infernalist: You're pretty uneducated on the circumstances leading up to the Libyan war.

We spent over one dollar there, that's too much


That's penny-wise, pound-foolish.

In this world, you invest into things to make them go your way in the long run.  If we'd ignored Libya, the mess would have been worse for us in the long run.  It would have cost us MORE than that 100 million cheap-o war that we used to topple Daffy and install a government that LIKES us.

Your way of thinking translates to not turning on the electricity at your house because it's too expensive....and then ordering take-out every night so that you can have hot food.

Penny-wise, pound-foolish.
 
2013-08-28 10:18:39 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: Headso: Because the government is never engaged in security/military theater, everything they do at the airports is all really about safety, W invading Iraq was really about terrorism, this is really about preventing more chemical weapons attacks.That's not naive at all

You're conflating the TSA and the USA PATRIOT Act with something completely different.


Name it!
 
2013-08-28 10:19:05 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: DubtodaIll: And yes, after a decrease in taxes, when taxes go back up, that's called a tax increase.  If they're able to make it "temporarily" go down, then they can make it go down whenever they're able to put it on paper and sign it.

Ah, so you believe that when a product goes on sale, once the sale ends, they increase the price of that product. Because you're a moron.


Is that all you've got to say "You're stupid"?  Just like a Dookie, thinking you're right.  You seem to be OK with the government running itself like a retail store though.
 
2013-08-28 10:19:46 AM  

Infernalist: The European powers had two choices: Support Daffy or support the rebels and they hemmed and they hawed and they talked and talked and Daffy continually pushed the rebels back and back and back until they reached the rebel capitol of Benghazi. That's when the U.S. finally decided to throw their support behind the rebels.


Ummm. No.

The US decided to throw it's support behind the rebels when Gaddafi threatened to throw American and European oil companies out of his nation and tear up their oil contracts.

It's right there in those State Department cables that dastardly Manning person leaked. How dare she expose our government's lies!

Conveniently, the "rebels" promised to honor those contracts.

Obama lied us into a war for oil by claiming "humanitarian reasons" just like Bush lied us into a war for oil claiming WMD's.
 
2013-08-28 10:20:52 AM  

IdBeCrazyIf: So maybe, just maybe if we offer a helping hand, not boots on the ground but real true support....who knows?


Alright, what do you suggest?
 
2013-08-28 10:20:52 AM  
My solution is simple and effective.  Knock out anything flying over Syria.  Fly over it night and day knocking out every site that is capable of launching CW, and every radar site that targets our jets.  No distinction on Assad or Rebels.  Everything that is capable of firing CW or shooting down a modern jet, or is flying over the country and doesn't know the words to The Devil Went Down to Georgia is blown up.
 
2013-08-28 10:22:01 AM  

BullBearMS: Infernalist: The European powers had two choices: Support Daffy or support the rebels and they hemmed and they hawed and they talked and talked and Daffy continually pushed the rebels back and back and back until they reached the rebel capitol of Benghazi. That's when the U.S. finally decided to throw their support behind the rebels.

Ummm. No.

The US decided to throw it's support behind the rebels when Gaddafi threatened to throw American and European oil companies out of his nation and tear up their oil contracts.

It's right there in those State Department cables that dastardly Manning person leaked. How dare she expose our government's lies!

Conveniently, the "rebels" promised to honor those contracts.

Obama lied us into a war for oil by claiming "humanitarian reasons" just like Bush lied us into a war for oil claiming WMD's.


Even if that was true, that alone would have thrown the European economy into a tailspin.  With the same results as I listed.

Personally, I don't give a single fark if someone lied to get us into Libya.  It turned out for the best for all involved except for the Russians, Daffy and his inner circle and the GOP.
 
2013-08-28 10:22:17 AM  

DubtodaIll: cameroncrazy1984: DubtodaIll: And yes, after a decrease in taxes, when taxes go back up, that's called a tax increase.  If they're able to make it "temporarily" go down, then they can make it go down whenever they're able to put it on paper and sign it.

Ah, so you believe that when a product goes on sale, once the sale ends, they increase the price of that product. Because you're a moron.

Is that all you've got to say "You're stupid"?  Just like a Dookie, thinking you're right.  You seem to be OK with the government running itself like a retail store though.


I love how after maybe 30 comments on this topic you finally admitted that it was due to the tax holiday expiring. Do you yell at the store clerk when he charges you full price on an item that went off sale yesterday? A tax holiday has a sunset. Allowing that sunset to occur isn't "raising taxes" anymore than charging the regular price for a movie ticket at night is raising the rates.
 
2013-08-28 10:22:29 AM  

DubtodaIll: cameroncrazy1984: DubtodaIll: And yes, after a decrease in taxes, when taxes go back up, that's called a tax increase.  If they're able to make it "temporarily" go down, then they can make it go down whenever they're able to put it on paper and sign it.

Ah, so you believe that when a product goes on sale, once the sale ends, they increase the price of that product. Because you're a moron.

Is that all you've got to say "You're stupid"?  Just like a Dookie, thinking you're right.  You seem to be OK with the government running itself like a retail store though.


How dare he think he's right just because he's right, what a lib, amirite
 
2013-08-28 10:22:45 AM  

I_C_Weener: My solution is simple and effective.  Knock out anything flying over Syria.  Fly over it night and day knocking out every site that is capable of launching CW, and every radar site that targets our jets.  No distinction on Assad or Rebels.  Everything that is capable of firing CW or shooting down a modern jet, or is flying over the country and doesn't know the words to The Devil Went Down to Georgia is blown up.


I can live with that.
 
2013-08-28 10:22:52 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: Headso: Because the government is never engaged in security/military theater, everything they do at the airports is all really about safety, W invading Iraq was really about terrorism, this is really about preventing more chemical weapons attacks.That's not naive at all

You're conflating the TSA and the USA PATRIOT Act with something completely different.


When does believing the official line become naive, when you say so? You believe this is all about preventing further attacks and you believe Iraq was all about terrorism but the TSA is all bullshiat?
 
2013-08-28 10:23:15 AM  

Infernalist: Personally, I don't give a single fark if someone lied to get us into Libya.  It turned out for the best for all involved except for the Russians, Daffy and his inner circle and the GOP.


So you admit that you're just a hypocrite? That's ok, I am sometimes too. I'm trying to get better though
 
2013-08-28 10:23:24 AM  

Infernalist: Personally, I don't give a single fark if someone lied to get us into Libya.


Sure, because we spent most of a decade complaining about Bush lying us into a war for no particular reason.
 
2013-08-28 10:23:50 AM  

DubtodaIll: I don't take home any taxes. And yes, after a decrease in taxes, when taxes go back up, that's called a tax increase. If they're able to make it "temporarily" go down, then they can make it go down whenever they're able to put it on paper and sign it


Aren't you a republican?
Never heard of fiscal responsibility?
 
2013-08-28 10:24:22 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: IdBeCrazyIf: So maybe, just maybe if we offer a helping hand, not boots on the ground but real true support....who knows?

Alright, what do you suggest?


Everyone loves chocolate.
 
2013-08-28 10:24:35 AM  

Headso: cameroncrazy1984: Headso: Because the government is never engaged in security/military theater, everything they do at the airports is all really about safety, W invading Iraq was really about terrorism, this is really about preventing more chemical weapons attacks.That's not naive at all

You're conflating the TSA and the USA PATRIOT Act with something completely different.

When does believing the official line become naive, when you say so? You believe this is all about preventing further attacks and you believe Iraq was all about terrorism but the TSA is all bullshiat?


Where did I say that Iraq was all about terrorism? I believe Iraq was about starting a war so that Halliburton and defense contractors could get no-bid contracts and so that Bush could be a War President.
 
2013-08-28 10:24:44 AM  
www.globalresearch.ca
 
2013-08-28 10:25:27 AM  

BullBearMS: Infernalist: Personally, I don't give a single fark if someone lied to get us into Libya.

Sure, because we spent most of a decade complaining about Bush lying us into a war for no particular reason.


Yeah, because Libya happened the same way, right? We're still the...wait, are you telling me it was over in 2  months and cost 0 American lives? Huh. It's almost as if the two situations were completely different.
 
2013-08-28 10:25:36 AM  

I_C_Weener: Everyone loves chocolate.


They don't even like naked women over there
 
2013-08-28 10:26:02 AM  

BullBearMS: Infernalist: Personally, I don't give a single fark if someone lied to get us into Libya.

Sure, because we spent most of a decade complaining about Bush lying us into a war for no particular reason.


If Libya had turned out like Iraq, you might have had a point.

Tat'dGreaser: Infernalist: Personally, I don't give a single fark if someone lied to get us into Libya.  It turned out for the best for all involved except for the Russians, Daffy and his inner circle and the GOP.

So you admit that you're just a hypocrite? That's ok, I am sometimes too. I'm trying to get better though


So, you're just playing a personal game of 'gotcha'?   As I said to the other guy, if Libya had turned out as farked as Iraq, I'd be just as mad as I was about Iraq.

But, it didn't.  Libya was a home run with three on base.  It was a perfectly run foreign policy effort that resulted in good things in the short term, the long term and it was the morally right thing to do.

If you people are more concerned with trying to equate Libya with Iraq, then you show yourself for what you are: Partisan hacks mostly concerned with trying to paint Obama with the same brush used on Bush and 'that' is why you are mocked, scorned and ignored.
 
2013-08-28 10:26:17 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: cost 0 American lives?


Omg get the f*ck off my internet
 
2013-08-28 10:26:58 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: DubtodaIll: cameroncrazy1984: DubtodaIll: And yes, after a decrease in taxes, when taxes go back up, that's called a tax increase.  If they're able to make it "temporarily" go down, then they can make it go down whenever they're able to put it on paper and sign it.

Ah, so you believe that when a product goes on sale, once the sale ends, they increase the price of that product. Because you're a moron.

Is that all you've got to say "You're stupid"?  Just like a Dookie, thinking you're right.  You seem to be OK with the government running itself like a retail store though.

I love how after maybe 30 comments on this topic you finally admitted that it was due to the tax holiday expiring. Do you yell at the store clerk when he charges you full price on an item that went off sale yesterday? A tax holiday has a sunset. Allowing that sunset to occur isn't "raising taxes" anymore than charging the regular price for a movie ticket at night is raising the rates.


I'd rather see tax funerals than holidays.
 
2013-08-28 10:27:05 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: IdBeCrazyIf: So maybe, just maybe if we offer a helping hand, not boots on the ground but real true support....who knows?

Alright, what do you suggest?


Pull an Iron Man "he's all yours"

Using remote missiles, air strikes from Isreal/Turkey we flatten the military, crush any ports ability to import weapons, impose a blockade except for humanitarian aid, offer Turkey support for refugees and then offer the Syrian people a chance to pick what they want as their government while we stand by and keep our helping hands open.
 
2013-08-28 10:27:09 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: cameroncrazy1984: cost 0 American lives?

Omg get the f*ck off my internet


How many soldiers died in Libya?
 
2013-08-28 10:27:12 AM  

Infernalist: If you people are more concerned with trying to equate Libya with Iraq, then you show yourself for what you are: Partisan hacks mostly concerned with trying to paint Obama with the same brush used on Bush and 'that' is why you are mocked, scorned and ignored.


What the f*ck are you rambling about!?!?!

Now you're cool with drone strikes on children?
 
2013-08-28 10:28:06 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: cameroncrazy1984: cost 0 American lives?

Omg get the f*ck off my internet


Was I wrong? It really seems like your opposition to this was the fact that Obama didn't fail like Bush did.
 
2013-08-28 10:29:08 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: I_C_Weener: Everyone loves chocolate.

They don't even like naked women over there


They would if they were covered in melted chocolate.
 
2013-08-28 10:29:08 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: I_C_Weener: Everyone loves chocolate.

They don't even like naked women over there


Sure they do, they just want 70 of them
 
2013-08-28 10:29:08 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: Infernalist: If you people are more concerned with trying to equate Libya with Iraq, then you show yourself for what you are: Partisan hacks mostly concerned with trying to paint Obama with the same brush used on Bush and 'that' is why you are mocked, scorned and ignored.

What the f*ck are you rambling about!?!?!

Now you're cool with drone strikes on children?


They've always been cool with drone strikes on children.....it just took a different guy in office for them to not be afraid of sharing that opinion with everyone.
 
2013-08-28 10:29:20 AM  

vygramul: People only release weapons when they have made a decision to use them, and only long enough to use them.


People don't keep weapons in known or suspected stockpiles if they want to be able to use them after a greater power bombs them.


vygramul: The U.S. isn't a dictatorship and has a strong civil-military relationship. Note that I said tyrannies exert more control


The Us has a failry robust system in place to make sure our dangerous pwespons are only used at the right time, yet we still make mistakes.

I have never worked in Syria, but I have worked in Egypt and knwo govt control over things like explosives and raduioactive sources wasn't nearly as tight as it was in the US. Devoting time and energy to safeguarfds liek that is a hallmark of first world countries. It is very easy for me to see someon farking up with what warhead they are using in Syria. Now I am nto saying I know that is what happened, just that it is entirely possible.
 
2013-08-28 10:30:01 AM  

Infernalist: How many soldiers died in Libya?


A lot actually....ohh wait you meant our soldiers

Let's not wax intellectual that war doesn't cost SOME lives
 
2013-08-28 10:31:20 AM  

Infernalist: Tat'dGreaser: cameroncrazy1984: cost 0 American lives?

Omg get the f*ck off my internet

How many soldiers died in Libya?


The Libyan ones or NATO?
 
2013-08-28 10:31:30 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: Headso: cameroncrazy1984: Headso: Because the government is never engaged in security/military theater, everything they do at the airports is all really about safety, W invading Iraq was really about terrorism, this is really about preventing more chemical weapons attacks.That's not naive at all

You're conflating the TSA and the USA PATRIOT Act with something completely different.

When does believing the official line become naive, when you say so? You believe this is all about preventing further attacks and you believe Iraq was all about terrorism but the TSA is all bullshiat?

Where did I say that Iraq was all about terrorism? I believe Iraq was about starting a war so that Halliburton and defense contractors could get no-bid contracts and so that Bush could be a War President.


But it's naive to think this strike is a meaningless gesture? Is this all rooted in extreme partisanship?
 
2013-08-28 10:31:35 AM  

DubtodaIll: cameroncrazy1984: DubtodaIll: Right, and I was told by my President that none of them would go up.  It's not like I'm surprised, but I don't see why you're trying to convince me the President is a man of his word when even his rhetoric turns out to be bull.

A) Your FICA tax didn't go up and B) He never said they wouldn't go up if you made more money, you dumbass.

I'm not making more money...I'm taking home less.


So stop whining, bootsrap yourself up, and get a better job.  Why do you expect the government to fix the economy and do everything FOR you?

/GOP medicine...why don't they take it?
 
2013-08-28 10:32:21 AM  

I_C_Weener: Infernalist: Tat'dGreaser: cameroncrazy1984: cost 0 American lives?

Omg get the f*ck off my internet

How many soldiers died in Libya?

The Libyan ones or NATO?


Contractors don't count as soldiers.

Technically correct is best kind of correct.
 
2013-08-28 10:32:31 AM  

IdBeCrazyIf: Infernalist: How many soldiers died in Libya?

A lot actually....ohh wait you meant our soldiers

Let's not wax intellectual that war doesn't cost SOME lives


And if we were discussing the overall cost of the war over there, that might have been a relevant point.  Yonder yokel was ranting on about the cost of the Libyan conflict and I simply pointed out that America didn't lose a single soldier in the conflict.  Not even one.  And it was so cheap that the budget for that timeframe didn't even need to be adjusted to cover the cost.  In short, budget-wise, the Libyan conflict left no impact.  None.
 
2013-08-28 10:32:42 AM  
 
2013-08-28 10:33:02 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: You have way too much faith in military intelligence. Now you want to drag Turkey into this? What if they don't want a part in it? What if you miss all your targets? You want to destroy a port that creates money for their economy just on the off chance of importing weapons? How long are you willing to hold this blockade? What if Russia wants to get involved then?


That's the cool thing about the UN security council, is that the door swings both ways. Russia would have to go through normal channels first and their sudden 1 2 vote with China because a minority weakness instead of strength.

Obviously you would miss some things, but it worked in Libya and it would work here.

And yes, Turkey is already IN this as they have been fired at on the border before rebels were able to take the north land and they also have a bulk stake in this since nearly 2/3 of the refugees are camping out there. Pretty sure Turkey would love to see them go home.

And once things are settled down, we'll help them rebuild. We're doing the same thing in Libya. We blew up the asshole who was causing shiat, took a step back and said "Hey, we're here when you want us"
 
2013-08-28 10:33:03 AM  

SpectroBoy: shower_in_my_socks: I have yet to read an article that tells us how the neighborhood that was attacked was of such strategic importance to Assad that it warranted a chemical gas attack that would assure an ass-kicking by the US and our allies.

Same here. Something seems fishy with all of this.


Objectively, it may not have been.

That doesn't mean that it may not have seemed to be to the Assad regime, based upon the intelligence they had at the time.  I mean, it's not like we haven't acted on faulty intelligence in the past *COUGH*Iraq*COUGH*.

Also, we don't know who or what else was in the neighborhood.  Perhaps it was a meeting of rebel commanders for a strategy session.  We don't know one way or the other, and the rebels of course aren't going to talk because if they did, it would serve to let the Assad regime know if their intelligence was good, or if it was bad.

That's assuming, of course, that it wasn't some local commander who was either over-eager, or who farked up.
 
2013-08-28 10:33:14 AM  

Infernalist: I'll ask again.  How many soldiers died in Libya?  Can you answer that?


That's how you measure success??
 
2013-08-28 10:33:18 AM  

Headso: cameroncrazy1984: Headso: cameroncrazy1984: Headso: Because the government is never engaged in security/military theater, everything they do at the airports is all really about safety, W invading Iraq was really about terrorism, this is really about preventing more chemical weapons attacks.That's not naive at all

You're conflating the TSA and the USA PATRIOT Act with something completely different.

When does believing the official line become naive, when you say so? You believe this is all about preventing further attacks and you believe Iraq was all about terrorism but the TSA is all bullshiat?

Where did I say that Iraq was all about terrorism? I believe Iraq was about starting a war so that Halliburton and defense contractors could get no-bid contracts and so that Bush could be a War President.

But it's naive to think this strike is a meaningless gesture? Is this all rooted in extreme partisanship?


Yes. Because you have no idea what is going to happen yet. You and many others in this thread are speaking as if something has been done.
 
2013-08-28 10:33:41 AM  

I_C_Weener: Infernalist: Tat'dGreaser: cameroncrazy1984: cost 0 American lives?

Omg get the f*ck off my internet

How many soldiers died in Libya?

The Libyan ones or NATO?


Are pilots really soldiers?  What if a sailor died?  How about civilians?  Do they count?  What if killing 1000 saves a million?  Does Diet Dr. Pepper really taste more like the Dr. Pepper?
 
2013-08-28 10:34:12 AM  

IdBeCrazyIf: And once things are settled down, we'll help them rebuild. We're doing the same thing in Libya. We blew up the asshole who was causing shiat, took a step back and said "Hey, we're here when you want us"


Look up, Libya was no success
 
2013-08-28 10:34:24 AM  
Just make sure we keep Asma safe. She's a hottie so that'd be a shame....

digitaljournal.com


Seriously though I work in a marketing so am pretty much a clueless hack on foreign policy. However, I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, and while flipping through the "experts" on Anderson Cooper, Greta, etc last night I took away a couple things that no one seemed to refute.

1. al Assad is a bad guy.

2. Whoever would replace al-Assad is far worse and we'd have another case of refuges running for the border while being slaughtered.

3. We don't know what this chemical substance is, or who ordered it.

4. We can't bomb the chemical warehouses, we don't want to "own" another situation so we're not bombing al-Assad and pretty much any target we choose will have little effect on Syria - but WILL cause unrest in other Arab countries and embolden them to make terrorist attacks as revenge.

So, as I have said in since being a college kid during the Clinton years... why do we want any part of the Middle East? It's a cluster fudge of insanity. Why don't we just buy our oil and wish them good luck? Either they will work it out eventually or finally blow up the whole damn place, correct?
 
2013-08-28 10:34:29 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: Considering I didn't vote for either of those guys. I'm so heavily invested in a political party that I cheer for death and destruction when it's my team on the helm.


Yeah, sure you didn't vote for Bush twice.
 
2013-08-28 10:34:37 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: Infernalist: I'll ask again.  How many soldiers died in Libya?  Can you answer that?

That's how you measure success??


Answer the question.
 
2013-08-28 10:35:13 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: IdBeCrazyIf: And once things are settled down, we'll help them rebuild. We're doing the same thing in Libya. We blew up the asshole who was causing shiat, took a step back and said "Hey, we're here when you want us"

Look up, Libya was no success


Sure it was.
 
2013-08-28 10:35:50 AM  
Casualties of the Libyan civil war

Zero Dead U.S. soldiers
 
2013-08-28 10:36:18 AM  

Infernalist: f you people are more concerned with trying to equate Libya with Iraq, then you show yourself for what you are: Partisan hacks mostly concerned with trying to paint Obama with the same brush used on Bush and 'that' is why you are mocked, scorned and ignored.


dl.dropboxusercontent.com

/Butthurt Obama shill is butthurt
 
2013-08-28 10:36:41 AM  

I_C_Weener: Tat'dGreaser: I_C_Weener: Everyone loves chocolate.

They don't even like naked women over there

They would if they were covered in melted chocolate.


I think we all could use a break from this heavy handed discussion to look on some of the more important things in life

www.freshfood.net.au
 
2013-08-28 10:36:47 AM  

neversubmit: Casualties of the Libyan civil war

Zero Dead U.S. soldiers


Butbutbut Obama was just as bad as Bush! How can this be?!
 
2013-08-28 10:36:55 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: Yeah, sure you didn't vote for Bush twice.


Nope. I had never voted before until last election

Infernalist: Answer the question.


Why? So you can take some tiny little point and act like that's your victory? F*cking hell, you are a hypocrite
 
2013-08-28 10:37:24 AM  

BullBearMS: Infernalist: f you people are more concerned with trying to equate Libya with Iraq, then you show yourself for what you are: Partisan hacks mostly concerned with trying to paint Obama with the same brush used on Bush and 'that' is why you are mocked, scorned and ignored.

[dl.dropboxusercontent.com image 441x311]

/Butthurt Obama shill is butthurt


Is what people say when they've lost the argument on merit.
 
2013-08-28 10:37:28 AM  

DubtodaIll: cameroncrazy1984: DubtodaIll: cameroncrazy1984: DubtodaIll: And yes, after a decrease in taxes, when taxes go back up, that's called a tax increase.  If they're able to make it "temporarily" go down, then they can make it go down whenever they're able to put it on paper and sign it.

Ah, so you believe that when a product goes on sale, once the sale ends, they increase the price of that product. Because you're a moron.

Is that all you've got to say "You're stupid"?  Just like a Dookie, thinking you're right.  You seem to be OK with the government running itself like a retail store though.

I love how after maybe 30 comments on this topic you finally admitted that it was due to the tax holiday expiring. Do you yell at the store clerk when he charges you full price on an item that went off sale yesterday? A tax holiday has a sunset. Allowing that sunset to occur isn't "raising taxes" anymore than charging the regular price for a movie ticket at night is raising the rates.

I'd rather see tax funerals than holidays.



Why are other people able to succeed despite taxes, but not Republicans?  Either the system is rigged against the middle class and the wealthy elite have advantages the rest of us don't have REGARDLESS of tax breaks, or the rank and file GOP anti-government echo stations are just incapable of doing what everyone at the top has figured out how to do.

Which is it?  Is the system wide open for anyone regardless of taxes and regulations, or are wealthy elites controlling everything and tricking you into thinking what's good for them is good for you?
 
2013-08-28 10:37:31 AM  

lordjupiter: DubtodaIll: cameroncrazy1984: DubtodaIll: Right, and I was told by my President that none of them would go up.  It's not like I'm surprised, but I don't see why you're trying to convince me the President is a man of his word when even his rhetoric turns out to be bull.

A) Your FICA tax didn't go up and B) He never said they wouldn't go up if you made more money, you dumbass.

I'm not making more money...I'm taking home less.

So stop whining, bootsrap yourself up, and get a better job.  Why do you expect the government to fix the economy and do everything FOR you?

/GOP medicine...why don't they take it?


I didn't say I'm struggling, I said I'm taking home less, and that's not my fault. I'm performing the same kind of work and not being able to use as much of the value I create.  Also the services I'm paying the government for have not improved.  So I'm paying more for the same, and usually worse, service.  Also, prices have been outpacing wages.  Why are you OK with that?
 
2013-08-28 10:37:38 AM  

liam76: vygramul: People only release weapons when they have made a decision to use them, and only long enough to use them.

People don't keep weapons in known or suspected stockpiles if they want to be able to use them after a greater power bombs them.


They also don't hand them out to lower-level field commanders who could be bribed by the Mossad to maybe lob one in the opposite direction.

vygramul: The U.S. isn't a dictatorship and has a strong civil-military relationship. Note that I said tyrannies exert more control

The Us has a failry robust system in place to make sure our dangerous pwespons are only used at the right time, yet we still make mistakes.


Yes, but our controls are not, nor do not have to be, as strict. Our president is not scared of our military. Tyrannies tend to be. That's why their militaries tend not to practice much, lest they be effective enough to take power, have watchers, like the Republican Guard, who also have watchers, like the Special Republican Guard... people who do that don't just hand out their regime-ending weapons to lower-level field commanders to use on their own volition.

I have never worked in Syria, but I have worked in Egypt and knwo govt control over things like explosives and raduioactive sources wasn't nearly as tight as it was in the US. Devoting time and energy to safeguarfds liek that is a hallmark of first world countries. It is very easy for me to see someon farking up with what warhead they are using in Syria. Now I am nto saying I know that is what happened, just that it is entirely possible.

There's a difference between losing something and giving a lower-level field commander authority.

(And Egypt has a lot of social classes involved in their militaries. A colleague did a study of why F-16s underperform so much in their hands.)
 
2013-08-28 10:37:50 AM  

Infernalist: Look up, Libya was no success

Sure it was.


Arming Al Qaeda and giving them a base of operations is a success?
 
2013-08-28 10:38:22 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: Nope. I had never voted before until last election


Wait, so are you saying that sometimes people say things about others in this thread that are not true, and may be putting words into their mouths? Huh. Something to think about.
 
2013-08-28 10:39:31 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: Look up, Libya was no success


The less we interfere with trying to make people into something they are not, the less likely a chance they'll want to kill us.

There may be camps setup, but make no mistake the Libyans don't want them there and are actively working with us to try and root them out as they continue to build a coalition government. Like I said, after the consulate attack they rounded up a posse and stormed the compound of the assholes who blew up the building.
 
2013-08-28 10:39:42 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: cameroncrazy1984: Yeah, sure you didn't vote for Bush twice.

Nope. I had never voted before until last election

Infernalist: Answer the question.

Why? So you can take some tiny little point and act like that's your victory? F*cking hell, you are a hypocrite


No need to get mad, bro.  Just answer the question and we can move on.
 
2013-08-28 10:40:51 AM  

DubtodaIll: lordjupiter: DubtodaIll: cameroncrazy1984: DubtodaIll: Right, and I was told by my President that none of them would go up.  It's not like I'm surprised, but I don't see why you're trying to convince me the President is a man of his word when even his rhetoric turns out to be bull.

A) Your FICA tax didn't go up and B) He never said they wouldn't go up if you made more money, you dumbass.

I'm not making more money...I'm taking home less.

So stop whining, bootsrap yourself up, and get a better job.  Why do you expect the government to fix the economy and do everything FOR you?

/GOP medicine...why don't they take it?

I didn't say I'm struggling, I said I'm taking home less, and that's not my fault. I'm performing the same kind of work and not being able to use as much of the value I create.  Also the services I'm paying the government for have not improved.  So I'm paying more for the same, and usually worse, service.  Also, prices have been outpacing wages.  Why are you OK with that?


Why are you lying?
 
2013-08-28 10:42:12 AM  
shillseverywhere.jpg
 
2013-08-28 10:42:44 AM  

BullBearMS: Infernalist: Look up, Libya was no success

Sure it was.

Arming Al Qaeda and giving them a base of operations is a success?


We're not God and we can't control the actions of every person in Africa.  We can simply do the right thing, which we did, and deal with all consequences as they arise.

But, Libya was not only a success, but it was the singularly most successful use of our military in recent history.  No deaths, no great loss of treasure, a complete strategic victory resulting in a friendly government and a new ally in the region.
 
2013-08-28 10:42:57 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: neversubmit: Casualties of the Libyan civil war

Zero Dead U.S. soldiers

Butbutbut Obama was just as bad as Bush! How can this be?!


Another easy question, He (Mr. Obama) is not as bad as Mr. Bush
 
2013-08-28 10:43:11 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: cameroncrazy1984: No, it's not hard to understand that you're a crazy person.

Because I don't want this country to get involved in more conflicts that we have no place getting involved in?

I lost two good friends over one. I want to keep it at that


I believe for the past two years the US did not want to get involved, but wanted to stay out of it while we clear up our own domestic issues. My question is what does one do when you see innocent people getting murdered by a regime for NO reason? Do we sit back and watch this brutal regime kill their own people by using chemical weapons?

I would prefer the UN to get more involved but it seems as though they're becoming powerless.
 
2013-08-28 10:44:09 AM  

neversubmit: cameroncrazy1984: neversubmit: Casualties of the Libyan civil war

Zero Dead U.S. soldiers

Butbutbut Obama was just as bad as Bush! How can this be?!

Another easy question, He (Mr. Obama) is not as bad as Mr. Bush


My rolling chair would have made a better President than Bush did.  A chair can't get us into a quagmire of an occupation resulting in thousands of dead Americans and hundreds of thousands of dead civilians.
 
2013-08-28 10:45:17 AM  
Well, it was an interesting thread, but it looks like the discussion has turned from Syria to the usual party cheer leading.


/Go Team!
 
2013-08-28 10:45:17 AM  
I've been saying this all along. Assad had nothing to gain from a chemical attack, but lower-level commanders who are sick of getting sniped at sure did. Although I, uh, hate to judge before all the facts are in, it's beginning to look like, uh, General Ripper exceeded his authority.
 
2013-08-28 10:45:57 AM  

lordjupiter: DubtodaIll: lordjupiter: DubtodaIll: cameroncrazy1984: DubtodaIll: Right, and I was told by my President that none of them would go up.  It's not like I'm surprised, but I don't see why you're trying to convince me the President is a man of his word when even his rhetoric turns out to be bull.

A) Your FICA tax didn't go up and B) He never said they wouldn't go up if you made more money, you dumbass.

I'm not making more money...I'm taking home less.

So stop whining, bootsrap yourself up, and get a better job.  Why do you expect the government to fix the economy and do everything FOR you?

/GOP medicine...why don't they take it?

I didn't say I'm struggling, I said I'm taking home less, and that's not my fault. I'm performing the same kind of work and not being able to use as much of the value I create.  Also the services I'm paying the government for have not improved.  So I'm paying more for the same, and usually worse, service.  Also, prices have been outpacing wages.  Why are you OK with that?

Why are you lying?


I'm not, when did you stop beating your wife?
 
2013-08-28 10:46:04 AM  

Infernalist: As for spending billions....Do you honestly think that this President is going to do to Syria what the GOP did to Iraq?


I don't know that he has a choice. The only player not interested in ethnically cleansing all the losers once this is over is the Kurds, and they have no interest in running the non-Kurdish areas of Syria (i.e. most of it).

But there's going to be a reckoning, it's just a matter of who is going to be exterminated for it.
 
2013-08-28 10:46:11 AM  
If that intercept is true, that does point to the fact that the leadership of Syria had no idea what was happening, and that this action is not a valid reason to enter the conflict.

Not sure what the Obama administration is trying to do here.

It also could be the Syrian government trying to figure out WTF is happening. Like "yo, just making sure that our sh*t is still there."
 
2013-08-28 10:46:33 AM  

Infernalist: Look up, Libya was no success

Sure it was.


Libyan rebel commander admits his fighters have al-Qaeda links
Handing over a nation to the guys we are fighting a "global war on terror" against is a success?
 
2013-08-28 10:46:42 AM  

BullBearMS: cameroncrazy1984: BullBearMS: Infernalist: f you people are more concerned with trying to equate Libya with Iraq, then you show yourself for what you are: Partisan hacks mostly concerned with trying to paint Obama with the same brush used on Bush and 'that' is why you are mocked, scorned and ignored.

[dl.dropboxusercontent.com image 441x311]

/Butthurt Obama shill is butthurt

Is what people say when they've lost the argument on merit.

Speaking of butthurt Obama shills.

Perhaps you can explain why Obama's lying us into a war for oil in Libya that resulted in giving a huge weapons cache to Al Qaeda as well as giving them a base of operations is a great success.


It's complicated. It's going to happen no matter who is in office, you can get on board or get ran over.
 
2013-08-28 10:47:01 AM  

cowsspinach: I would prefer the UN to get more involved but it seems as though they're becoming powerless.


In the words of President Bush, albeit paraphrased, "If the UN fails to act, it risks becoming irrelevant."  Then we invaded Iraq.  Bush was right though.  The UN is irrelevant because it cannot act to prevent or help in these situations.  That is what the entire Cold War was about....the US/USSR sniping at each other while preventing the UN from acting.

Then the UN went one further and added countries like Syria to its Human Rights Council
 
2013-08-28 10:48:06 AM  

This text is now purple: Infernalist: As for spending billions....Do you honestly think that this President is going to do to Syria what the GOP did to Iraq?

I don't know that he has a choice. The only player not interested in ethnically cleansing all the losers once this is over is the Kurds, and they have no interest in running the non-Kurdish areas of Syria (i.e. most of it).

But there's going to be a reckoning, it's just a matter of who is going to be exterminated for it.


Oh, he has a choice.  He knows plain and simple that to get involved in Syria, to occupy the country would be to cede control of the government to the GOP for the next three election cycles and he's not insane.

I can't see any situation where he'd put military forces on the ground in Syria.  Not one.  It would be political suicide and he knows it.
 
2013-08-28 10:48:46 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: IdBeCrazyIf: And once things are settled down, we'll help them rebuild. We're doing the same thing in Libya. We blew up the asshole who was causing shiat, took a step back and said "Hey, we're here when you want us"

Look up, Libya was no success


We accomplished precisely what we set out to do: get Gaddhafi killed for all the crap he's pulled over the years.
 
2013-08-28 10:49:02 AM  

BullBearMS: Handing over a nation to the guys we are fighting a "global war on terror" against is a success?


Surely there must be some reason these people want us dead......maybe if we addressed that concern this stupid global war on terror can be put down like a rabid dog
 
2013-08-28 10:49:40 AM  

BullBearMS: Infernalist: Look up, Libya was no success

Sure it was.

Libyan rebel commander admits his fighters have al-Qaeda links
Handing over a nation to the guys we are fighting a "global war on terror" against is a success?


Like I said before, we can't control the actions of every person in Africa.  We can simply do the right thing and deal with the consequences as they arise.

The Libyan conflict was an amazing success and I personally like the fact that it drove a stake through the heart of the old adage that Democrats don't do war well.
 
2013-08-28 10:50:53 AM  

Infernalist: This text is now purple: Infernalist: As for spending billions....Do you honestly think that this President is going to do to Syria what the GOP did to Iraq?

I don't know that he has a choice. The only player not interested in ethnically cleansing all the losers once this is over is the Kurds, and they have no interest in running the non-Kurdish areas of Syria (i.e. most of it).

But there's going to be a reckoning, it's just a matter of who is going to be exterminated for it.

Oh, he has a choice.  He knows plain and simple that to get involved in Syria, to occupy the country would be to cede control of the government to the GOP for the next three election cycles and he's not insane.

I can't see any situation where he'd put military forces on the ground in Syria.  Not one.  It would be political suicide and he knows it.


I can't help but think that Republicans who are arguing this will be a land war (like they said Libya would be) are just hoping that the assertion will have the same effect that an actual land-war in Iraq had in 2006.
 
2013-08-28 10:50:57 AM  
His whole stupid argument begs the question that the Nation as a whole was handed over to and is controlled by Al Qaeda. It's ridiculous. Don't engage him as if his premise were sound.
 
2013-08-28 10:51:01 AM  

cowsspinach: I believe for the past two years the US did not want to get involved, but wanted to stay out of it while we clear up our own domestic issues. My question is what does one do when you see innocent people getting murdered by a regime for NO reason? Do we sit back and watch this brutal regime kill their own people by using chemical weapons?

I would prefer the UN to get more involved but it seems as though they're becoming powerless.


Yet we've done nothing for countries like Rwanda. Besides, we are the UN.

We can't afford to get involved in every single conflict in this world.
 
2013-08-28 10:51:39 AM  

Purdue_Pete: So, as I have said in since being a college kid during the Clinton years... why do we want any part of the Middle East? It's a cluster fudge of insanity. Why don't we just buy our oil and wish them good luck? Either they will work it out eventually or finally blow up the whole damn place, correct?


Because they can cut that oil off if they want to.   Just like they did in the 1970s.

In fact, entire wars have started because of oil embargoes.
 
2013-08-28 10:52:26 AM  
I'm tired of war. I just don't care anymore.
They can all go blow themselves off the face of the Earth.
Just keep me out of it and don't make it more than a 10 second spot on the news.
 
2013-08-28 10:52:49 AM  

vygramul: Infernalist: This text is now purple: Infernalist: As for spending billions....Do you honestly think that this President is going to do to Syria what the GOP did to Iraq?

I don't know that he has a choice. The only player not interested in ethnically cleansing all the losers once this is over is the Kurds, and they have no interest in running the non-Kurdish areas of Syria (i.e. most of it).

But there's going to be a reckoning, it's just a matter of who is going to be exterminated for it.

Oh, he has a choice.  He knows plain and simple that to get involved in Syria, to occupy the country would be to cede control of the government to the GOP for the next three election cycles and he's not insane.

I can't see any situation where he'd put military forces on the ground in Syria.  Not one.  It would be political suicide and he knows it.

I can't help but think that Republicans who are arguing this will be a land war (like they said Libya would be) are just hoping that the assertion will have the same effect that an actual land-war in Iraq had in 2006.


If Obama was a deaf-mute, that might be a concern, but the man only has to open his mouth and speak and that assertion gets destroyed.  "Despite the assertions of my colleagues on the right, Syria is not Iraq and I am not George W Bush.  There will no occupation of Syria under my watch."
 
2013-08-28 10:53:25 AM  

Infernalist: neversubmit: cameroncrazy1984: neversubmit: Casualties of the Libyan civil war

Zero Dead U.S. soldiers

Butbutbut Obama was just as bad as Bush! How can this be?!

Another easy question, He (Mr. Obama) is not as bad as Mr. Bush

My rolling chair would have made a better President than Bush did.  A chair can't get us into a quagmire of an occupation resulting in thousands of dead Americans and hundreds of thousands of dead civilians.


Bill Clinton wouldn't invade Iraq and look at all the grief he got for it. Al Gore would not have invaded either so he was replaced by Mr. Bush. It could have been done better but the ones who could have done it better wouldn't do it at all.
 
2013-08-28 10:53:41 AM  

IdBeCrazyIf: I_C_Weener: Tat'dGreaser: I_C_Weener: Everyone loves chocolate.

They don't even like naked women over there

They would if they were covered in melted chocolate.

I think we all could use a break from this heavy handed discussion to look on some of the more important things in life

[834x1500 from http://www.freshfood.net.au/images/Chocolate-Covered-Girl.jpg image 834x1500]


She shouldn't've been standing so close to tubgirl.
 
2013-08-28 10:53:57 AM  

The Irresponsible Captain: I'm tired of war. I just don't care anymore.
They can all go blow themselves off the face of the Earth.
Just keep me out of it and don't make it more than a 10 second spot on the news.


Once we get 100% supplied by green energy sources located within our borders, we can do that.
 
2013-08-28 10:56:23 AM  

lordjupiter: Why are other people able to succeed despite taxes, but not Republicans?  Either the system is rigged against the middle class and the wealthy elite have advantages the rest of us don't have REGARDLESS of tax breaks, or the rank and file GOP anti-government echo stations are just incapable of doing what everyone at the top has figured out how to do.

Which is it?  Is the system wide open for anyone regardless of taxes and regulations, or are wealthy elites controlling everything and tricking you into thinking what's good for them is good for you?


Third option: nobody is able to succeed despite taxes, only those with special personal exemptions to the taxes are able to succeed. You're just pretending that success is possible without exemptions because you're disingenously trying to pretend crony capitalism is the same as all capitalism, much like the Romans tried to make Jesus drink gall while insisting it was water.

/Detroit was the first to burn
//it will not be the last, due in part to your actions
///keep on deflecting, you'll only die in the fires you set, while the people you hate will survive and rebuild from the ashes
 
2013-08-28 10:56:31 AM  

vygramul: They also don't hand them out to lower-level field commanders who could be bribed by the Mossad to maybe lob one in the opposite direction.


they coudl be handed out to higher level or completely trusted commanders who weren't good at hiding them.  nobody is saying it must eb a Mossad plot.

vygramul: Yes, but our controls are not, nor do not have to be, as strict. Our president is not scared of our military. Tyrannies tend to be. That's why their militaries tend not to practice much, lest they be effective enough to take power, have watchers, like the Republican Guard, who also have watchers, like the Special Republican Guard... people who do that don't just hand out their regime-ending weapons to lower-level field commanders to use on their own volition.


I am sorry, but you are mkaing a good case for them farking up.

There are only so many places they could hide them, and in ammo depots for conventioanl weaposn is a great place in many aspects.


vygramul: There's a difference between losing something and giving a lower-level field commander authority.


I think we just aren;t going to agree here, but to be clear I am not sayingt hey were handed out and given to commaders to do with as they wished.  I think they were given out "for safe keeping" and whoever had them farked up (or somebodey below them did).

vygramul: (And Egypt has a lot of social classes involved in their militaries. A colleague did a study of why F-16s underperform so much in their hands


I only worked in the oil field, but my father was involved in FMS with soem arab countries.  He had some hilarious/sad stories abotu piltos who were there because of their family vice skill.
 
2013-08-28 10:58:30 AM  

Carth: There was no real evidence to go to war with Iraq and we made some up to justify it. Why can't we ignore real evidence of war crimes in Syria and make up evidence to not go to war?


actually worse! Saddam actually DID use WMD on the Kurds and other sects so there was at least actual evidence he used it before yet it was still a big giant clusterfark.
Now, we're not even 100% sure Assad used it at all in this case and we're already parking AEGIS ships and the USS Eisenhower Strike Group not far from the coast of Syria and threatening strikes!
WTF Obama!
 
2013-08-28 10:59:43 AM  

vygramul: We accomplished precisely what we set out to do: get Gaddhafi killed for all the crap he's pulled over the years.


So we're in the business of assassination now?

IdBeCrazyIf: Surely there must be some reason these people want us dead......maybe if we addressed that concern this stupid global war on terror can be put down like a rabid dog


Dude.........they've expressly stated that American involvement in their countries is why they want us dead
 
2013-08-28 11:00:48 AM  

SuperNinjaToad: Carth: There was no real evidence to go to war with Iraq and we made some up to justify it. Why can't we ignore real evidence of war crimes in Syria and make up evidence to not go to war?

actually worse! Saddam actually DID use WMD on the Kurds and other sects so there was at least actual evidence he used it before yet it was still a big giant clusterfark.
Now, we're not even 100% sure Assad used it at all in this case and we're already parking AEGIS ships and the USS Eisenhower Strike Group not far from the coast of Syria and threatening strikes!
WTF Obama!


To be fair, the State dept has come out and said in no uncertain terms that it was the Syrian government behind this last CW attack and they tend not to be so direct without unmistakable proof.  Diplomats don't use unequivocal terminology without very very very very good reason.  Smoking-gun levels of proof, even.
 
2013-08-28 11:01:23 AM  
Few things warm the heart more than the fact that Americans hold the entity subjugating them as completely dishonest, and believe not a word that exits their mouth. The US government has absolutely ZERO credibility.

How's that peace President doing for you? Guess he doesn't care what Article 2, Section 8 of the Constitution says, either. When did Syria attack the United States?
 
2013-08-28 11:02:32 AM  

jpbreon: Few things warm the heart more than the fact that Americans hold the entity subjugating them as completely dishonest, and believe not a word that exits their mouth. The US government has absolutely ZERO credibility.

How's that peace President doing for you? Guess he doesn't care what Article 2, Section 8 of the Constitution says, either. When did Syria attack the United States?


When did he attack Syria?
 
2013-08-28 11:02:45 AM  

BullBearMS: Obama lied us into a war for oil by claiming "humanitarian reasons" just like Bush lied us into a war for oil claiming WMD's.



Which war was that?
I don't recall us invading a third country.
 
2013-08-28 11:03:26 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: Dude.........they've expressly stated that American involvement in their countries is why they want us dead


Lack of involvement is what created the Jihad movement Tat, our complete abandonment after the Soviet collapse and their interest and power in the region waned. Their shiat was farked up and we had promised them aid and help in rebuilding, we walked away.

I'd be righteously pissed as well.

Perhaps though after stopping the killing of civilians by crushing a ruthless dictator we step in and assist in rebuilding, not dictate how they run their shiat then maybe just maybe they'll like us again?

I think we're missing the bigger point though, we're missing a chance here to post more chocolate covered breasts
 
2013-08-28 11:03:59 AM  

vygramul: Tat'dGreaser: IdBeCrazyIf: And once things are settled down, we'll help them rebuild. We're doing the same thing in Libya. We blew up the asshole who was causing shiat, took a step back and said "Hey, we're here when you want us"

Look up, Libya was no success

We accomplished precisely what we set out to do: get Gaddhafi killed for all the crap he's pulled over the years.


That was never our goal until he threatened to tear up western oil firm's contracts, kick them out of Libya, and nationalize their oil wells.

Western nations had already forgiven him for terrorist bombings that killed Americans and gotten the terrorist behind the killings released from prison.

The oil giant BP faced a new furor on Thursday as it confirmed that it had lobbied the British government to conclude a prisoner-transfer agreement that the Libyan government wanted to secure the release of the only person ever convicted for the 1988 Lockerbie airliner bombing over Scotland, which killed 270 people, most of them Americans.

The admission came after American legislators, grappling with the controversy over the company's disastrous Gulf of Mexico oil spill, called for an investigation into BP's actions in the case of the freed man, Abdel Basset Ali al-Megrahi.

The former Libyan intelligence agent was released and allowed to return to Libya last August after doctors advised the Scottish government that he was likely to die within three months of advanced prostate cancer. But nearly a year later, he remains alive, and free, in the Libyan capital, Tripoli.
 
2013-08-28 11:04:27 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: vygramul: We accomplished precisely what we set out to do: get Gaddhafi killed for all the crap he's pulled over the years.

So we're in the business of assassination now?

IdBeCrazyIf: Surely there must be some reason these people want us dead......maybe if we addressed that concern this stupid global war on terror can be put down like a rabid dog

Dude.........they've expressly stated that American involvement in their countries is why they want us dead


We've always been in that business and anyone who thinks we haven't done so in the past, through Dem/GOP administrations alike for the last...forever...is either naive or stupid.

Governments do what is in their best interests, plain and simple.  Such things transcend moral standards, and while that sounds callous, it's also realistic.  Driving Daffy and his inner circle out of power as the best thing to do for the US and many other nations 'and' it was more moral than turning our backs and letting him squash the rebels.

And just to remind you, we didn't kill Daffy.  The new Libyan government did.  And I heard it was a painful and messy death out in the desert, too.
 
2013-08-28 11:04:44 AM  

Tatterdemalian: lordjupiter: Why are other people able to succeed despite taxes, but not Republicans?  Either the system is rigged against the middle class and the wealthy elite have advantages the rest of us don't have REGARDLESS of tax breaks, or the rank and file GOP anti-government echo stations are just incapable of doing what everyone at the top has figured out how to do.

Which is it?  Is the system wide open for anyone regardless of taxes and regulations, or are wealthy elites controlling everything and tricking you into thinking what's good for them is good for you?

Third option: nobody is able to succeed despite taxes, only those with special personal exemptions to the taxes are able to succeed. You're just pretending that success is possible without exemptions because you're disingenously trying to pretend crony capitalism is the same as all capitalism, much like the Romans tried to make Jesus drink gall while insisting it was water.

/Detroit was the first to burn
//it will not be the last, due in part to your actions
///keep on deflecting, you'll only die in the fires you set, while the people you hate will survive and rebuild from the ashes


Could you paraphrase that?  I'm unclear how you feel about this.
 
2013-08-28 11:07:20 AM  

Infernalist: Diplomats don't use unequivocal terminology without very very very very good reason. Smoking-gun levels of proof, even.


Like that lie that we were going into Iraq because of weapons of mass destruction that never turned up?

Or the lie that we were forcing a regime change in Libya for "humanitarian reasons".

Or all those recent lies about the NSA spying on Americans?
 
2013-08-28 11:07:48 AM  

BullBearMS: vygramul: Tat'dGreaser: IdBeCrazyIf: And once things are settled down, we'll help them rebuild. We're doing the same thing in Libya. We blew up the asshole who was causing shiat, took a step back and said "Hey, we're here when you want us"

Look up, Libya was no success

We accomplished precisely what we set out to do: get Gaddhafi killed for all the crap he's pulled over the years.

That was never our goal until he threatened to tear up western oil firm's contracts, kick them out of Libya, and nationalize their oil wells.

Western nations had already forgiven him for terrorist bombings that killed Americans and gotten the terrorist behind the killings released from prison.

The oil giant BP faced a new furor on Thursday as it confirmed that it had lobbied the British government to conclude a prisoner-transfer agreement that the Libyan government wanted to secure the release of the only person ever convicted for the 1988 Lockerbie airliner bombing over Scotland, which killed 270 people, most of them Americans.

The admission came after American legislators, grappling with the controversy over the company's disastrous Gulf of Mexico oil spill, called for an investigation into BP's actions in the case of the freed man, Abdel Basset Ali al-Megrahi.

The former Libyan intelligence agent was released and allowed to return to Libya last August after doctors advised the Scottish government that he was likely to die within three months of advanced prostate cancer. But nearly a year later, he remains alive, and free, in the Libyan capital, Tripoli.


Let me be completely frank:  Who cares?

I don't give a damn as to the underlying causes for the oil market instability that provoked Western involvement.  It happened, we got involved, and we were faced with two choices: Support Daffy or support the rebels.

We chose to support the rebels, thank god.  For the first time in a very long time, our military was 'cheered' by the people of the Middle East for doing the right thing and defying a dictatorship and helping them to reclaim their nation.
 
2013-08-28 11:08:53 AM  

dittybopper: Purdue_Pete: So, as I have said in since being a college kid during the Clinton years... why do we want any part of the Middle East? It's a cluster fudge of insanity. Why don't we just buy our oil and wish them good luck? Either they will work it out eventually or finally blow up the whole damn place, correct?

Because they can cut that oil off if they want to.   Just like they did in the 1970s.

In fact, entire wars have started because of oil embargoes.


Japan knew it was going to go to war with us long before we embargoed their oil.
 
2013-08-28 11:09:56 AM  

Infernalist: We chose to support the rebels, thank god. For the first time in a very long time, our military was 'cheered' by the people of the Middle East for doing the right thing and defying a dictatorship and helping them to reclaim their nation.


Seeing thousands of people cheering in the streets waving American flags was something amazing too see.
 
2013-08-28 11:10:01 AM  

give me doughnuts: Frederick: Since I dont know a lot about this situation I'd first ask "what was gained by a chemical attack?"


Dead enemies and fearful survivors. The same in every kind of attack.


It makes me wonder, were they calling the U.S. bluff using a scapegoat within the syrian army (after all, with this "intelligence call", it sounds as though they have someone ready to blame)?  If they got away with this without any intervention (US or others), would that not inspire real fear in the rebels and the rest of the population?

Time to bow down for good. No one will help you.
 
2013-08-28 11:11:29 AM  

LasersHurt: jpbreon: Few things warm the heart more than the fact that Americans hold the entity subjugating them as completely dishonest, and believe not a word that exits their mouth. The US government has absolutely ZERO credibility.

How's that peace President doing for you? Guess he doesn't care what Article 2, Section 8 of the Constitution says, either. When did Syria attack the United States?

When did he attack Syria?


August 17th, with the first wave of approximately 300 FSA (Free Syrian Army) rebels crossing the border into Syria from Jordan. Now, you ask, what were FSA rebels doing in Jordan? Well, they were being trained and equipped by approximately 300 US Marines and a lot more Jordanian special forces troops. Another group, sent in August 19, was trained in Turkey with CIA assistance.

We call this a proxy war, and it's been going on a lot longer than August 17th. In fact, there is a good chance the Benghazi 'consulate' that was attacked was a CIA operation to funnel weapons from Lubya to Syrian al-Nusra Front via Turkey.
 
2013-08-28 11:12:00 AM  

BullBearMS: Infernalist: Diplomats don't use unequivocal terminology without very very very very good reason. Smoking-gun levels of proof, even.

Like that lie that we were going into Iraq because of weapons of mass destruction that never turned up?

Or the lie that we were forcing a regime change in Libya for "humanitarian reasons".

Or all those recent lies about the NSA spying on Americans?


As much as I wish the State Dept was filled with people that stayed and maintained a respect across the administrations that come and go, that isn't the reality.  Each administration stocks the State Dept with their own peoples, so while the GOP administrations are quick to lie to the American people and the world at large in order to get us into quagmire occupations of other nations, the Democrats don't seem to be in a rush to do so.

And yes, there were humanitarian reasons behind stopping Daffy and toppling him, but the alternative was ignoring the rebels and letting him squash them.  Now if you're hung up on the 'humanitarian' thing, that's your right, but if you think we shouldn't have gone in there and toppled him, then you're just messed up, bro.

Sometimes, the best option is also the morally superior option, too, on very rare wonderful occasions.
 
2013-08-28 11:12:32 AM  

jpbreon: Article 2, Section 8 of the Constitution


Article 2 only has four sections.
 
2013-08-28 11:12:50 AM  

IdBeCrazyIf: Infernalist: We chose to support the rebels, thank god. For the first time in a very long time, our military was 'cheered' by the people of the Middle East for doing the right thing and defying a dictatorship and helping them to reclaim their nation.

Seeing thousands of people cheering in the streets waving American flags was something amazing too see.


Aw, yeah, right?! Totally super awesome, just like the liberation of Paris! If there's anything that makes going to war worthwhile it's those cheering civilians. Why wait for an existential threat or an attack on Americans or our allies? I mean it's the 21st century for cripes sake.
 
2013-08-28 11:13:38 AM  
Okay, so if we EMP the entire country...would that satisfy any of you people?  No death.  Just a nice step back in time.  A simpler time.  A biblical era...so to speak.
 
2013-08-28 11:14:21 AM  

liam76: vygramul: They also don't hand them out to lower-level field commanders who could be bribed by the Mossad to maybe lob one in the opposite direction.

they coudl be handed out to higher level or completely trusted commanders who weren't good at hiding them.  nobody is saying it must eb a Mossad plot.


I didn't say it WAS a Mossad plot, but what Assad would worry about, and why he wouldn't just hand authority to lower-level officers. And his generals have some of the same interests. Under tyrannies, militaries tend to horde authority, not distribute it in greater amounts. They don't give as much access to REGULAR ammo as other nations do, not to mention special weapons.

vygramul: Yes, but our controls are not, nor do not have to be, as strict. Our president is not scared of our military. Tyrannies tend to be. That's why their militaries tend not to practice much, lest they be effective enough to take power, have watchers, like the Republican Guard, who also have watchers, like the Special Republican Guard... people who do that don't just hand out their regime-ending weapons to lower-level field commanders to use on their own volition.

I am sorry, but you are mkaing a good case for them farking up.

There are only so many places they could hide them, and in ammo depots for conventioanl weaposn is a great place in many aspects.


I don't see why you have to hide them. The lower-level officers just wouldn't be given the keys. Post an SS corporal at a door and a Wehrmacht general isn't getting past.

vygramul: There's a difference between losing something and giving a lower-level field commander authority.

I think we just aren;t going to agree here, but to be clear I am not sayingt hey were handed out and given to commaders to do with as they wished.  I think they were given out "for safe keeping" and whoever had them farked up (or somebodey below them did).

vygramul: (And Egypt has a lot of social classes involved in their militaries. A colleague did a study of why F-16s underperform so much in their hands

I only worked in the oil field, but my father was involved in FMS with soem arab countries.  He had some hilarious/sad stories abotu piltos who were there because of their family vice skill.


There are parts that are sold in packs of 10, but have to be kept sealed. Their maintenance crews frequently open a pack for a new part, but don't seal them. They know this, so the next part requires opening another pack of 10. Some of their maintenance costs are an order of magnitude more JUST for that reason alone.
 
2013-08-28 11:15:47 AM  

UrukHaiGuyz: IdBeCrazyIf: Infernalist: We chose to support the rebels, thank god. For the first time in a very long time, our military was 'cheered' by the people of the Middle East for doing the right thing and defying a dictatorship and helping them to reclaim their nation.

Seeing thousands of people cheering in the streets waving American flags was something amazing too see.

Aw, yeah, right?! Totally super awesome, just like the liberation of Paris! If there's anything that makes going to war worthwhile it's those cheering civilians. Why wait for an existential threat or an attack on Americans or our allies? I mean it's the 21st century for cripes sake.


The instability in Libya was threatening the recovery of the Western European economy.  They had to stabilize the oil market one way or the other.  They had to choose a side and settle the country down to bring oil prices back down and continue their recovery.

On occasion, some threats to a nation's interest don't come from men with guns and bombs.
 
2013-08-28 11:16:05 AM  

jpbreon: LasersHurt: jpbreon: Few things warm the heart more than the fact that Americans hold the entity subjugating them as completely dishonest, and believe not a word that exits their mouth. The US government has absolutely ZERO credibility.

How's that peace President doing for you? Guess he doesn't care what Article 2, Section 8 of the Constitution says, either. When did Syria attack the United States?

When did he attack Syria?

August 17th, with the first wave of approximately 300 FSA (Free Syrian Army) rebels crossing the border into Syria from Jordan. Now, you ask, what were FSA rebels doing in Jordan? Well, they were being trained and equipped by approximately 300 US Marines and a lot more Jordanian special forces troops. Another group, sent in August 19, was trained in Turkey with CIA assistance.

We call this a proxy war, and it's been going on a lot longer than August 17th. In fact, there is a good chance the Benghazi 'consulate' that was attacked was a CIA operation to funnel weapons from Lubya to Syrian al-Nusra Front via Turkey.


You are not supposed to talk about how things work or might work, only crazy people do that. Stuff just happens, who you gonna call?
 
2013-08-28 11:16:14 AM  

give me doughnuts: jpbreon: Article 2, Section 8 of the Constitution

Article 2 only has four sections.


Hopefully you can forgive the typo.
 
2013-08-28 11:16:17 AM  

Tat'dGreaser: vygramul: We accomplished precisely what we set out to do: get Gaddhafi killed for all the crap he's pulled over the years.

So we're in the business of assassination now?


What do you think Bush tried to do time and again with B-1s loitering with weapons earmarked for dropping anywhere we even THOUGHT Saddam was?
 
2013-08-28 11:16:57 AM  

Infernalist: UrukHaiGuyz: IdBeCrazyIf: Infernalist: We chose to support the rebels, thank god. For the first time in a very long time, our military was 'cheered' by the people of the Middle East for doing the right thing and defying a dictatorship and helping them to reclaim their nation.

Seeing thousands of people cheering in the streets waving American flags was something amazing too see.

Aw, yeah, right?! Totally super awesome, just like the liberation of Paris! If there's anything that makes going to war worthwhile it's those cheering civilians. Why wait for an existential threat or an attack on Americans or our allies? I mean it's the 21st century for cripes sake.

The instability in Libya was threatening the recovery of the Western European economy.  They had to stabilize the oil market one way or the other.  They had to choose a side and settle the country down to bring oil prices back down and continue their recovery.

On occasion, some threats to a nation's interest don't come from men with guns and bombs.


That's wonderful. What is the existential threat from Syria?
 
2013-08-28 11:17:31 AM  

Infernalist: Let me be completely frank: Who cares? No matter what Obama does I will make lame ass excuses for his actions


Yes, we all understand that Obama shills will make excuses for him no matter what.

The problem is that the rest of us don't like being lied into constant never ending wars.

How much money did we blow forcing a regime change in Libya over oil profits?
Meanwhile, BP is poisoning the whole Gulf.
 
2013-08-28 11:18:11 AM  

LasersHurt: jpbreon: Few things warm the heart more than the fact that Americans hold the entity subjugating them as completely dishonest, and believe not a word that exits their mouth. The US government has absolutely ZERO credibility.

How's that peace President doing for you? Guess he doesn't care what Article 2, Section 8 of the Constitution says, either. When did Syria attack the United States?

When did he attack Syria?


There's also no Article 2, Section 8. I think he's referring to Article I, Section 8. Congress should probably assert control rather than rolling over, if they're so sure this is a violation.
 
2013-08-28 11:19:46 AM  

jpbreon: give me doughnuts: jpbreon: Article 2, Section 8 of the Constitution

Article 2 only has four sections.

Hopefully you can forgive the typo.


Just this once. Do'nt let it happen again.

/snrk
 
2013-08-28 11:20:06 AM  

vygramul: LasersHurt: jpbreon: Few things warm the heart more than the fact that Americans hold the entity subjugating them as completely dishonest, and believe not a word that exits their mouth. The US government has absolutely ZERO credibility.

How's that peace President doing for you? Guess he doesn't care what Article 2, Section 8 of the Constitution says, either. When did Syria attack the United States?

When did he attack Syria?

There's also no Article 2, Section 8. I think he's referring to Article I, Section 8. Congress should probably assert control rather than rolling over, if they're so sure this is a violation.


His example was also the training of some rebels, which isn't by any definition I'm aware of a violation of the section he intended to mention. Unless he's being absolutist about military action in a very broad sense.
 
2013-08-28 11:20:12 AM  
I'm still wary on intervention. I'm still scratching my head why Assad, who was previously on the ropes but managed to comeback and retake important territory taken by the rebels and is now winning the war, would risk Western intervention on a non-strategic target.

On another point, if North Korea gassed its people would we attack them? Probably not. Why? They have a large, albeit, outdated military and possibly have nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons. So if a nation doesn't want foreign military intervention, they need to have deterrence and nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons are probably less expensive than equipping, training, and maintaining a modern military on par with the US.
 
2013-08-28 11:20:36 AM  

UrukHaiGuyz: Infernalist: UrukHaiGuyz: IdBeCrazyIf: Infernalist: We chose to support the rebels, thank god. For the first time in a very long time, our military was 'cheered' by the people of the Middle East for doing the right thing and defying a dictatorship and helping them to reclaim their nation.

Seeing thousands of people cheering in the streets waving American flags was something amazing too see.

Aw, yeah, right?! Totally super awesome, just like the liberation of Paris! If there's anything that makes going to war worthwhile it's those cheering civilians. Why wait for an existential threat or an attack on Americans or our allies? I mean it's the 21st century for cripes sake.

The instability in Libya was threatening the recovery of the Western European economy.  They had to stabilize the oil market one way or the other.  They had to choose a side and settle the country down to bring oil prices back down and continue their recovery.

On occasion, some threats to a nation's interest don't come from men with guns and bombs.

That's wonderful. What is the existential threat from Syria?


At this point, nothing as far as I can see.  Which is why I've been steadfastly against any involvement whatsoever.  My solution would be to step back, do nothing and when there's a clear winner, THEN we send the UN in to see if the winners engaged in war crimes/atrocities and deal with it along the normal channels in the UN.

I see little reason for any involvement at all and the MOST that I would be even marginally okay with would be a no-fly zone for all parties involved and the targeting of any KNOWN and VERIFIED CW units.
 
2013-08-28 11:21:29 AM  
I'm starting to wonder if we're not in another Cold War with Russia. These Proxy Wars and blatant propaganda combined with seemingly unreasonably paranoid security measures could easily be explained by one.
 
2013-08-28 11:23:23 AM  

netweavr: I'm starting to wonder if we're not in another Cold War with Russia. These Proxy Wars and blatant propaganda combined with seemingly unreasonably paranoid security measures could easily be explained by one.


If we are, the Russians are losing badly.  Libya was one of their proxy nations, along with Syria.
 
2013-08-28 11:23:28 AM  

LasersHurt: His example was also the training of some rebels, which isn't by any definition I'm aware of a violation of the section he intended to mention. Unless he's being absolutist about military action in a very broad sense.



It's also an unproven assertion.
 
2013-08-28 11:24:16 AM  

I_C_Weener: Okay, so if we EMP the entire country...would that satisfy any of you people?  No death.  Just a nice step back in time.  A simpler time.  A biblical era...so to speak.


Ak47s don't need batteries last i checked
 
2013-08-28 11:24:35 AM  

Infernalist: vygramul: Infernalist: vygramul: Infernalist: tirob: All right, *now* I'm confused.

Is this a case of:

a)  

or

b) 

or

c) Something else?

If I had to guess, I'd say:

c) Some lower ranking field officer made the horrible mistake of using CWs on his own volition.

That's highly unlikely. Or the Assad regime is packed full of morons.

You say that as if that's an unlikely prospect.

Long-term dictators don't tend to make the fundamental mistake of putting the authority of using regime-changing WMDs in the hands of lower-level field officers.

The calls indicate otherwise.  As has been noted in the past, the US has straight up LOST nuclear weapons in past.  And that was without the pressure of a violent civilian insurrection to stress things up.

The possibility of CWs being used by mistake by some lower level flunkies is entirely possible and even probable, as it would allow both sides to right at the same time.


I doubt that a lower level flunky could have done this, but I would buy the idea that a particularly incompetent lieutenant colonel could have--say, for example, someone who could be Assad's wife's cousin, who got his job through family connections.  But we're all speculating at this point.
 
2013-08-28 11:24:40 AM  

Infernalist: And yes, there were humanitarian reasons behind stopping Daffy and toppling him, but the alternative was ignoring the rebels and letting him squash them. Now if you're hung up on the 'humanitarian' thing, that's your right, but if you think we shouldn't have gone in there and toppled him, then you're just messed up, bro.


If we didn't continually support regimes that brutally torture and murder their own people, but are sufficiently obedient to our commands, you might have a point.

Torture and police abuse under the regime of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak were one of the main causes of the protests that have engulfed the country for more than a week, Human Rights Watch said.

The 95-page report, entitled "Work on Him Until he Confesses: Impunity for Torture in Egypt," documents dozens of cases of torture and death in custody, the New-York-based organisation said in a report released today.

"The Egyptian government's foul record on this issue is a huge part of what is still bringing crowds onto the streets today," Joe Stork, deputy director of the group's Middle East and North Africa division.


meanwhile, the Secretary of State is spouting bullshiat like this:

I really consider President and Mrs. Mubarak to be friends of my family. So I hope to see him often here in Egypt and in the United States."

"Humanitarian reasons" my ass.

Obama lied us into another war for oil.
 
2013-08-28 11:25:27 AM  

give me doughnuts: LasersHurt: His example was also the training of some rebels, which isn't by any definition I'm aware of a violation of the section he intended to mention. Unless he's being absolutist about military action in a very broad sense.


It's also an unproven assertion.


It's probable, all the same.  Such things are designed to be very hard to be proven.  If they're easily proven, then that proxy war has a very distinct chance of becoming a real war.
 
2013-08-28 11:25:52 AM  

Infernalist: netweavr: I'm starting to wonder if we're not in another Cold War with Russia. These Proxy Wars and blatant propaganda combined with seemingly unreasonably paranoid security measures could easily be explained by one.

If we are, the Russians are losing badly.  Libya was one of their proxy nations, along with Syria.


Classic rope a dope strategy.  Block any UN action.  Let us exhaust ourselves in many smaller engagements around the world.  Spread ourselves so thin that the North Koreans can invade via Hollywood technology.  But I'm not falling for it.
 
2013-08-28 11:26:05 AM  
You are not supposed to talk about how things work or might work, only crazy people do that. Stuff just happens, who you gonna call?

Haha, I know, right? I once asked in a thread how these people can ignore the evidence of what's going on. It isn't hidden; the US government is not half so good at keeping its secrets, and the evidence is all there for people who want to see it.

I had one person respond that it might have happened, but until they saw it on CNN then it was conspiracy theory crap. It was then and there I realized that these people revel in their ignorance. They wrap it about themselves like Linus' blanket. If you never go looking, then the narrative Obama/Bush/whatever feeds the media, and you, stays intact. You can always be the righteous force, with altruistic motives, and nothing but humanitarian goals if you simply try hard enough to stay blind.
 
2013-08-28 11:28:09 AM  

Launch Code: So we're going to war AGAIN! Where are the anti war protestors? Where's the code pink nuts? I guess biden and almost all the other demahippocrates are ok with this fight. Most democrats won't speak out against barry or his policies because they fear the almighty jackboot of liberal scorn, political suicide, death threats cold shoulders at dem gatherings etc. Does anyone on the left have the intestinal fortitude to question anything at all that this guy does?

barry is a known narcissist. Are you sure he's not doing this because he's tired of being laughed at by the other world leaders for being soft, wishy washy and not understanding how the rest of the world works? Is it possible that in his circle of advisors, hollywood friends, news outlets, can't do so I teach educators and other obamorons, that he believes he solved the worlds hatred of America with some really hip speeches? He's about to provide some very heavy ordnance to rebel fighters. Some of these same rebels are terrorists. Has he forgotten what happened a little over a decade ago to America? barry doesn't fit the Bush cowboy mo. He's more of the guy in charge of the Apple Dumpling gang, but do you really want him invading another country just because his feelings are constantly hurt at world leader meetings or so he can support his rebel (hint, they really hate Americans) friends? It wouldn't surprise me if the whole reason for this invasion is because Syria had lots of sunlight and its windy. No Blood For Green Energy!


Might wanna check the expiry date on your meds..
 
2013-08-28 11:28:15 AM  

BullBearMS: Infernalist: And yes, there were humanitarian reasons behind stopping Daffy and toppling him, but the alternative was ignoring the rebels and letting him squash them. Now if you're hung up on the 'humanitarian' thing, that's your right, but if you think we shouldn't have gone in there and toppled him, then you're just messed up, bro.

If we didn't continually support regimes that brutally torture and murder their own people, but are sufficiently obedient to our commands, you might have a point.

Torture and police abuse under the regime of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak were one of the main causes of the protests that have engulfed the country for more than a week, Human Rights Watch said.

The 95-page report, entitled "Work on Him Until he Confesses: Impunity for Torture in Egypt," documents dozens of cases of torture and death in custody, the New-York-based organisation said in a report released today.

"The Egyptian government's foul record on this issue is a huge part of what is still bringing crowds onto the streets today," Joe Stork, deputy director of the group's Middle East and North Africa division.

meanwhile, the Secretary of State is spouting bullshiat like this:

I really consider President and Mrs. Mubarak to be friends of my family. So I hope to see him often here in Egypt and in the United States."

"Humanitarian reasons" my ass.

Obama lied us into another war for oil.


Well, we have to start somewhere, don't you think?  Pointing to the rest of our well-documented sins doesn't detract from the moral rightness of the Libyan conflict and the role we played in it.

In short, we're still bastards, but we were on the sides of the angels for once.

Also saying "The US did bad things in Egypt, therefore Obama lied to get us into a oil war" just sounds silly.  I wanted you to know that.
 
2013-08-28 11:28:53 AM  

I_C_Weener: Infernalist: netweavr: I'm starting to wonder if we're not in another Cold War with Russia. These Proxy Wars and blatant propaganda combined with seemingly unreasonably paranoid security measures could easily be explained by one.

If we are, the Russians are losing badly.  Libya was one of their proxy nations, along with Syria.

Classic rope a dope strategy.  Block any UN action.  Let us exhaust ourselves in many smaller engagements around the world.  Spread ourselves so thin that the North Koreans can invade via Hollywood technology.  But I'm not falling for it.


I'm right there with you, buddy.  WOLVERINES
 
2013-08-28 11:29:29 AM  

IdBeCrazyIf: I_C_Weener: Okay, so if we EMP the entire country...would that satisfy any of you people?  No death.  Just a nice step back in time.  A simpler time.  A biblical era...so to speak.

Ak47s don't need batteries last i checked


Vehicles to transport ammo do.
 
2013-08-28 11:30:51 AM  

Infernalist: UrukHaiGuyz: Infernalist: UrukHaiGuyz: IdBeCrazyIf: Infernalist: We chose to support the rebels, thank god. For the first time in a very long time, our military was 'cheered' by the people of the Middle East for doing the right thing and defying a dictatorship and helping them to reclaim their nation.

Seeing thousands of people cheering in the streets waving American flags was something amazing too see.

Aw, yeah, right?! Totally super awesome, just like the liberation of Paris! If there's anything that makes going to war worthwhile it's those cheering civilians. Why wait for an existential threat or an attack on Americans or our allies? I mean it's the 21st century for cripes sake.

The instability in Libya was threatening the recovery of the Western European economy.  They had to stabilize the oil market one way or the other.  They had to choose a side and settle the country down to bring oil prices back down and continue their recovery.

On occasion, some threats to a nation's interest don't come from men with guns and bombs.

That's wonderful. What is the existential threat from Syria?

At this point, nothing as far as I can see.  Which is why I've been steadfastly against any involvement whatsoever.  My solution would be to step back, do nothing and when there's a clear winner, THEN we send the UN in to see if the winners engaged in war crimes/atrocities and deal with it along the normal channels in the UN.

I see little reason for any involvement at all and the MOST that I would be even marginally okay with would be a no-fly zone for all parties involved and the targeting of any KNOWN and VERIFIED CW units.


I'mokwiththis.jpg

Really though, I think and hope that this is more or less how things play out. Do we really need another few decades of proxy wars with Russia? The cynic in me says "duh" or how else could we continue to justify the ridiculously bloated state of our military.

I'm really sick of these retarded military misadventures where we confirm to the world that we are, in fact, a bunch of thick-browed gunslinging idiots that can be made the world's tool with amazingly little provocation. Not to mention the opportunity cost in human suffering we could be alleviating instead of dropping bombs.
 
2013-08-28 11:32:11 AM  

Infernalist: On occasion, some threats to a nation's interest don't come from men with guns and bombs.


In this case, there were no threats to our nation. Only threats to oil company profits if Gaddafi carried out the threats we know he made thanks to leaks of State Department cables by Manning.
 
2013-08-28 11:32:47 AM  

UrukHaiGuyz: I'm really sick of these retarded military misadventures where we confirm to the world that we are, in fact, a bunch of thick-browed gunslinging idiots that can be made the world's tool with amazingly little provocation. Not to mention the opportunity cost in human suffering we could be alleviating instead of dropping bombs.


Maybe do the propaganda thing.  Just fly over Syria all day long dropping satellite photos of where the rebels and Assad forces are, are moving to, and what their forces consist of.  Just constantly give intel  to both sides and the public.
 
2013-08-28 11:32:49 AM  

BullBearMS: Infernalist: On occasion, some threats to a nation's interest don't come from men with guns and bombs.

In this case, there were no threats to our nation. Only threats to oil company profits if Gaddafi carried out the threats we know he made thanks to leaks of State Department cables by Manning.


He posted right after that that is why he doesn't support military action in Syria.
 
2013-08-28 11:33:29 AM  

I_C_Weener: Infernalist: netweavr: I'm starting to wonder if we're not in another Cold War with Russia. These Proxy Wars and blatant propaganda combined with seemingly unreasonably paranoid security measures could easily be explained by one.

If we are, the Russians are losing badly.  Libya was one of their proxy nations, along with Syria.

Classic rope a dope strategy.  Block any UN action.  Let us exhaust ourselves in many smaller engagements around the world.  Spread ourselves so thin that the North Koreans can invade via Hollywood technology.  But I'm not falling for it.


It would be Al Qaida's tactic but backed by Russian might. Honestly if we invade Syria and Russia responds by invading a Western interest (e.g. Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Egypt) we'd be unable to respond.
 
2013-08-28 11:34:08 AM  

I_C_Weener: UrukHaiGuyz: I'm really sick of these retarded military misadventures where we confirm to the world that we are, in fact, a bunch of thick-browed gunslinging idiots that can be made the world's tool with amazingly little provocation. Not to mention the opportunity cost in human suffering we could be alleviating instead of dropping bombs.

Maybe do the propaganda thing.  Just fly over Syria all day long dropping satellite photos of where the rebels and Assad forces are, are moving to, and what their forces consist of.  Just constantly give intel  to both sides and the public.


You are one sick puppy.
 
2013-08-28 11:34:17 AM  

jpbreon: You are not supposed to talk about how things work or might work, only crazy people do that. Stuff just happens, who you gonna call?

Haha, I know, right? I once asked in a thread how these people can ignore the evidence of what's going on. It isn't hidden; the US government is not half so good at keeping its secrets, and the evidence is all there for people who want to see it.

I had one person respond that it might have happened, but until they saw it on CNN then it was conspiracy theory crap. It was then and there I realized that these people revel in their ignorance. They wrap it about themselves like Linus' blanket. If you never go looking, then the narrative Obama/Bush/whatever feeds the media, and you, stays intact. You can always be the righteous force, with altruistic motives, and nothing but humanitarian goals if you simply try hard enough to stay blind.


It's worse than that, like children hoping for presents, they expect to get paid.
 
2013-08-28 11:36:05 AM  

BullBearMS: Infernalist: On occasion, some threats to a nation's interest don't come from men with guns and bombs.

In this case, there were no threats to our nation. Only threats to oil company profits if Gaddafi carried out the threats we know he made thanks to leaks of State Department cables by Manning.


You're right, there was no real threat to the US, but we're not alone in the world.  Our allies in Western Europe needed our help in this and we took a secondary role once the first waves of aerial attacks were done.  We supplied our military infrastructure and communications and military advice once the French and other nations had their aircraft in the air and working.

That's part of having allies, helping them when they need it.
 
2013-08-28 11:36:43 AM  

netweavr: I_C_Weener: Infernalist: netweavr: I'm starting to wonder if we're not in another Cold War with Russia. These Proxy Wars and blatant propaganda combined with seemingly unreasonably paranoid security measures could easily be explained by one.

If we are, the Russians are losing badly.  Libya was one of their proxy nations, along with Syria.

Classic rope a dope strategy.  Block any UN action.  Let us exhaust ourselves in many smaller engagements around the world.  Spread ourselves so thin that the North Koreans can invade via Hollywood technology.  But I'm not falling for it.

It would be Al Qaida's tactic but backed by Russian might. Honestly if we invade Syria and Russia responds by invading a Western interest (e.g. Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Egypt) we'd be unable to respond.


China laughs and counts yuans all day.
 
2013-08-28 11:37:24 AM  
His example was also the training of some rebels, which isn't by any definition I'm aware of a violation of the section he intended to mention. Unless he's being absolutist about military action in a very broad sense.

Nearly any nation, if not all, takes the instigation of armed conflict by a foreign power to be an act of aggression. We'd be fooling ourselves to think that if Russia started arming and training far right-wing insurrectionists that the US government wouldn't respond as if that was an act of war. There's also the historical precedent of using rebels or funding rebel groups prior to an actual invasion to soften up the target and create disruptions that benefit the invasion force.

I'm not saying that Obama will be foolish enough to send in the Marines to Damascus, though I've been wrong before about how brazen these interventionists can be. He is very much an interventionist, though.
 
2013-08-28 11:37:41 AM  

UrukHaiGuyz: netweavr: I_C_Weener: Infernalist: netweavr: I'm starting to wonder if we're not in another Cold War with Russia. These Proxy Wars and blatant propaganda combined with seemingly unreasonably paranoid security measures could easily be explained by one.

If we are, the Russians are losing badly.  Libya was one of their proxy nations, along with Syria.

Classic rope a dope strategy.  Block any