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.

(Guardian)   "Experts are unanimous......some sort of chemical attack, is real - but remain divided on whether it involved military-grade chemical weapons associated with Assad's arsenal, or were a more amateur concoction potentially linked to the rebels"   (theguardian.com) divider line 522
    More: Interesting, chemical warfares, chemical weapons associated, clandestine operations, french foreign minister, NATO Secretary General, proven oil reserves, chemical weapons, arsenals  
•       •       •

4369 clicks; posted to Main » on 01 Sep 2013 at 9:10 AM (51 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-09-01 07:42:05 AM
Clearly it was nothing but bee droppings.
 
2013-09-01 08:02:02 AM
I bet it was the CIA, building some pretext.
 
2013-09-01 08:25:23 AM
I'm guessing aliens, because why not
 
2013-09-01 08:25:32 AM
Anyone know anything about the "responsibility to protect doctrine"?
 
2013-09-01 08:31:18 AM
The "it  couuuld be about oil" thing is an annoying and ridiculous well-poisoning or derailment. I've seen a handful of these articles recently and they're nothing but conjecture.
 
2013-09-01 08:35:10 AM
We will do exactly what Israel tells us to do.
 
2013-09-01 08:39:59 AM
I was just looking at this on the Guardian before I clicked here. Oh da hell--why do we go to war? Sometimes I think it's just because some people like to use big old war toys.

I have no doubt that chemical weapons were used, I'm just not buying that it was definitely Assad's people who did it. Obama, you lie?
 
2013-09-01 08:51:18 AM

johnryan51: We will do exactly what Israel tells us to do.


because the Jews control the world.
 
2013-09-01 08:51:34 AM
How about we let the UN figure it out
 
2013-09-01 09:01:25 AM

Peter von Nostrand: How about we let the UN figure it out


They take too long, and the President is itching to bomb somebody and we all know that when a President just has to bomb somebody, he doesn't have time to wait for the UN.
 
2013-09-01 09:02:07 AM

Relatively Obscure: I'm guessing aliens, because why not


We should just let the Syrians die because of Russia, China, Iran, Israel, America, the CIA, the Bilderberg Group, the NWO, AIPAC, the UN, the EU, Al Qaeda, the oil men, the reptilian overlords, aliens, the Muslims, the Jews, the Christians, the atheists, the neoconservatives, the military industrial complex, etc, etc

It's like Syrians are dying by their thousands but we're too busy playing bogeyman bingo
 
2013-09-01 09:06:11 AM

Nabb1: Peter von Nostrand: How about we let the UN figure it out

They take too long, and the President is itching to bomb somebody and we all know that when a President just has to bomb somebody, he doesn't have time to wait for the UN.


I don't think he wants to. If he really did it would have already happened

I should have also noted in my OP that Congress should punt to the UN. If Boehner were smart, that's what he'd do
 
2013-09-01 09:09:25 AM

21-7-b: Relatively Obscure: I'm guessing aliens, because why not

We should just let the Syrians die because of Russia, China, Iran, Israel, America, the CIA, the Bilderberg Group, the NWO, AIPAC, the UN, the EU, Al Qaeda, the oil men, the reptilian overlords, aliens, the Muslims, the Jews, the Christians, the atheists, the neoconservatives, the military industrial complex, etc, etc

It's like Syrians are dying by their thousands but we're too busy playing bogeyman bingo


Well, if it's not entirely clear exactly who is using the chemical weapons on whom, which Syrians would you like us to bomb first? All of them?
 
2013-09-01 09:10:47 AM
The responsibility to protect (R2P or RtoP) is a United Nations initiative established in 2005. It consists of an emerging intended norm, or set of principles, based on the claim that sovereignty is not a right, but a responsibility.[1] R2P focuses on preventing and halting four crimes: genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and ethnic cleansing, which it places under the generic umbrella term of mass atrocity crimes.[2] The R2P has three "pillars":[3][4]

A state has a responsibility to protect its population from genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and ethnic cleansing.

The international community has a responsibility to assist the state to fulfill its primary responsibility.

If the state manifestly fails to protect its citizens from the four above mass atrocities and peaceful measures have failed, the international community has the responsibility to intervene through coercive measures such as economic sanctions. Military intervention is considered the last resort.
 
2013-09-01 09:13:09 AM
The problem is no matter what we do, we lose.  Do nothing, status quo and one or both sides continue using chemical weapons, a lot of people die,we look powerless.  Airstrikes, we spend millions of dollars, blow up some essentially meaningless buildings, a lot of people die, we look like we did something but even more people hate us for sticking our nose in, jihadi recruitment increases and the cycle continue.  Ground troops, we MIGHT actually decrease the violence in the short run, but the downsides of option increase exponentially.  Plus, there is no way ANYONE supports ground troops.

This whole mess is a Kobayashi Maru scenario, and no one can reprogram the parameters.
 
2013-09-01 09:14:21 AM

Nabb1: Peter von Nostrand: How about we let the UN figure it out

They take too long, and the President is itching to bomb somebody and we all know that when a President just has to bomb somebody, he doesn't have time to wait for the UN.


He has time to wait for Congress to get back from vacation.
 
2013-09-01 09:15:58 AM
So wait.

Wait. Wait. Wait.

I know we burned the WMD card with Iraq, and I'm good with that. I don't really WANT American servicepeople dying in the sand in Syria. But, are we honestly now going to say that the people - FOR YEARS - we've lectured others about not really being a big threat in some cave somewhere are now evil mastermind genuses with access to Chemical Weapons, and that's why we shouldn't intervene against the Syrian Government?

At this current point, the casualty count in Syria is 110,000. That's after less than a year.
 
2013-09-01 09:16:16 AM

LasersHurt: The "it  couuuld be about oil" thing is an annoying and ridiculous well-poisoning or derailment. I've seen a handful of these articles recently and they're nothing but conjecture.




This is about Russia.
 
2013-09-01 09:16:51 AM

Peter von Nostrand: How about we let the UN figure it out


Indeed. The one thing the Syrians are short on is toilet paper, and strongly worded letters will easily replace two-ply.
 
2013-09-01 09:17:15 AM

LasersHurt: The "it  couuuld be about oil" thing is an annoying and ridiculous well-poisoning or derailment. I've seen a handful of these articles recently and they're nothing but conjecture.


It's been about oil for at least 20 years. The chemical weapons thing is an excuse, not a reason. Just like 9/11 was an excuse for Afghanistan and Iraq. Nukes will probably be the excuse for Iran.
 
2013-09-01 09:17:32 AM
everything will be fine
so long as we kill enuf of the right people

sorting them out tho could get tricky
 
2013-09-01 09:18:05 AM

Nabb1: 21-7-b: Relatively Obscure: I'm guessing aliens, because why not

We should just let the Syrians die because of Russia, China, Iran, Israel, America, the CIA, the Bilderberg Group, the NWO, AIPAC, the UN, the EU, Al Qaeda, the oil men, the reptilian overlords, aliens, the Muslims, the Jews, the Christians, the atheists, the neoconservatives, the military industrial complex, etc, etc

It's like Syrians are dying by their thousands but we're too busy playing bogeyman bingo

Well, if it's not entirely clear exactly who is using the chemical weapons on whom, which Syrians would you like us to bomb first? All of them?


I'd like to see both Assad and the extremist elements within the uprising weakened. I think that's the route to take.
 
2013-09-01 09:18:49 AM
And let us make this very clear: even though we haven't begun testing, there is no chance the FSA used military grade chemical weapons provided to them by another country, so just forget about that. If you hear anyone even suggesting that, please report them to the DHS.
 
2013-09-01 09:19:21 AM

21-7-b: If the state manifestly fails to protect its citizens from the four above mass atrocities and peaceful measures have failed, the international community has the responsibility to intervene through coercive measures such as economic sanctions. Military intervention is considered the last resort


So we do what we did in Rwanda then.  That works for me.
 
2013-09-01 09:19:38 AM

StoPPeRmobile: LasersHurt: The "it  couuuld be about oil" thing is an annoying and ridiculous well-poisoning or derailment. I've seen a handful of these articles recently and they're nothing but conjecture.

This is about Russia.


http://www.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2013/aug/30/syr ia -chemical-attack-war-intervention-oil-gas-energy-pipelines
 
2013-09-01 09:21:19 AM
i2.photobucket.com
 
2013-09-01 09:21:59 AM
i.imgur.com
 
2013-09-01 09:22:36 AM
They bring chemical weapons, you bring a nuke

They asphyxiate your people, you incinerate theirs

That's the world war 3 way
 
2013-09-01 09:26:53 AM

Marcus Aurelius: 21-7-b: If the state manifestly fails to protect its citizens from the four above mass atrocities and peaceful measures have failed, the international community has the responsibility to intervene through coercive measures such as economic sanctions. Military intervention is considered the last resort

So we do what we did in Rwanda then.  That works for me.


I think the responsibility to protect doctrine was introduced as a result of rwanda - so i imagine that it advocates taking a different course to that taken with rwanda
 
2013-09-01 09:27:38 AM

log_jammin: johnryan51: We will do exactly what Israel tells us to do.

because the Jews control the world.


Because having the most influential lobby on Capitol Hill is the same as controlling the world. Why don't you explain to us all why AIPAC does spend all of that money up there on the Hill, and why we shouldn't believe they expect something in return.
 
2013-09-01 09:27:49 AM
single pot sarin? h3po4 + CaF2 + 2-propanol ... best done in a walmart restroom in missouri.
 
2013-09-01 09:27:55 AM
I love how people think those of us who voted for the President think war is "cool" or "good" because he's at the helm.  Most of the more adamant "we do not belong in Syria" pieces I have read are from people who voted for Obama.

Just because "my guy" (and it's in quotes because I don't think that way) is in charge does not mean a desert war in the Middle East with extremely blurred lines all around and convoluted "storylines" is a good idea.  It's as bad as Afghanistan was/is. And as bad as Iraq.

I really don't want to see this country involved. ESPECIALLY without United Nations support.  We're not the world police. Time to stop.  That actually is some of the change I was expecting from this President.
 
2013-09-01 09:31:59 AM

serpent_sky: I love how people think those of us who voted for the President think war is "cool" or "good" because he's at the helm.  Most of the more adamant "we do not belong in Syria" pieces I have read are from people who voted for Obama.


[Citation Needed - Who?]

Who is saying war is "cool" in the first place?

serpent_sky: J
ust because "my guy" (and it's in quotes because I don't think that way) is in charge does not mean a desert war in the Middle East with extremely blurred lines all around and convoluted "storylines" is a good idea.  It's as bad as Afghanistan was/is. And as bad as Iraq.

AFAIK, no one is suggesting putting boots on the ground. Kind of like Libya.

serpent_sky: I really don't want to see this country involved. ESPECIALLY without United Nations support.  We're not the world police. Time to stop.  That actually is some of the change I was expecting from this President.

I agree with you, but for the most part over the last 30 years, the United States HAS been the United Nations. Without the US being involved in - well - ANYTHING, whether in it's own best interests, or those of someone else, nothing will happen. The EU is impotent, and Russia has it's own interests in mind here - namely keeping it's major port open.
 
2013-09-01 09:32:02 AM

serpent_sky: I love how people think those of us who voted for the President think war is "cool" or "good" because he's at the helm. Most of the more adamant "we do not belong in Syria" pieces I have read are from people who voted for Obama.


They're just trying to make things degenerate into useless squabbling over whose team is better, rather than objective discussions about events.
 
2013-09-01 09:33:50 AM
None of this hand-wringing analysis matters anymore.  It's too late and congress should just throw this back in Obama's face.  All that matters is that he is now a laughing-stock to the entire world, and not just Republicans.  If anything was going to be 'done', it should have done a LONG, f*cking time ago.

Even Syria is having a good laugh over it...


/oh, and btw, Iran is going to get it's atom bombs too
 
2013-09-01 09:35:18 AM

johnryan51: We will do exactly what Israel tells us to do.


Yeah? You think obama is closer with israel than say turkey?

Are you huffing paint?
 
2013-09-01 09:35:28 AM

Nabb1: Peter von Nostrand: How about we let the UN figure it out

They take too long, and the President is itching to bomb somebody and we all know that when a President just has to bomb somebody, he doesn't have time to wait for the UN.


If this is about deterring countries from using chemical weapons, that message should come from a coalition of countries. The world needs to stand up and say this is not acceptable. If the US does it alone, it shows that we are the only ones who care.
 
2013-09-01 09:35:30 AM
Well, then you go to the circumstantial evidence like motive.
 
2013-09-01 09:36:30 AM

Neighborhood Watch: None of this hand-wringing analysis matters anymore.  It's too late and congress should just throw this back in Obama's face.  All that matters is that he is now a laughing-stock to the entire world, and not just Republicans.  If anything was going to be 'done', it should have done a LONG, f*cking time ago.

Even Syria is having a good laugh over it...


/oh, and btw, Iran is going to get it's atom bombs too


That is how you troll, gentlemen. Take notes. You stand in the presence of a level 5 derp ranger.
 
2013-09-01 09:36:52 AM

hardinparamedic: So wait.

Wait. Wait. Wait.

I know we burned the WMD card with Iraq, and I'm good with that. I don't really WANT American servicepeople dying in the sand in Syria. But, are we honestly now going to say that the people - FOR YEARS - we've lectured others about not really being a big threat in some cave somewhere are now evil mastermind genuses with access to Chemical Weapons, and that's why we shouldn't intervene against the Syrian Government?

At this current point, the casualty count in Syria is 110,000. That's after less than a year.


Apparently, they're not such geniuses; they're poisoning their own.
 
2013-09-01 09:37:24 AM

serpent_sky: I love how people think those of us who voted for the President think war is "cool" or "good" because he's at the helm.  Most of the more adamant "we do not belong in Syria" pieces I have read are from people who voted for Obama.

Just because "my guy" (and it's in quotes because I don't think that way) is in charge does not mean a desert war in the Middle East with extremely blurred lines all around and convoluted "storylines" is a good idea.  It's as bad as Afghanistan was/is. And as bad as Iraq.

I really don't want to see this country involved. ESPECIALLY without United Nations support.  We're not the world police. Time to stop.  That actually is some of the change I was expecting from this President.


That was posted elsewhere by a friend of mine who is extremely liberal and a huge Obama supporter. He has his disagreements from time to time.
 
2013-09-01 09:37:38 AM

serpent_sky: I love how people think those of us who voted for the President think war is "cool" or "good" because he's at the helm.  Most of the more adamant "we do not belong in Syria" pieces I have read are from people who voted for Obama.


On the other hand, it's always nice when idiots self-identify.  For example, the fellow in this thread can be safely tagged as a moron and you can just skip over his offerings in the future without the fear of missing anything important.
 
2013-09-01 09:38:52 AM

El_Swino: On the other hand, it's always nice when idiots self-identify.  For example, the fellow in this thread can be safely tagged as a moron and you can just skip over his offerings in the future without the fear of missing anything important.


I'm still waiting to know who is saying war is "cool" or "good"?
 
2013-09-01 09:39:27 AM
Sometimes I wonder if all of this meddling is to promote regional instability so OPEC can't hold us over a barrel ever again.
 
2013-09-01 09:39:49 AM
What? People in the Middle East are killing each other in horrible ways? Color me SHOCKED.

Listen. It's what they do over there. They do that kind of stuff all of the time.

If we intervene and tell them they can't gas each other, then we're being racist by trying to force them to change their culture.

All of you pro war people are racist and insensitive to other cultures.
 
2013-09-01 09:39:59 AM

hardinparamedic: El_Swino: On the other hand, it's always nice when idiots self-identify.  For example, the fellow in this thread can be safely tagged as a moron and you can just skip over his offerings in the future without the fear of missing anything important.

I'm still waiting to know who is saying war is "cool" or "good"?


So am I.
 
2013-09-01 09:40:20 AM

hardinparamedic: El_Swino: On the other hand, it's always nice when idiots self-identify.  For example, the fellow in this thread can be safely tagged as a moron and you can just skip over his offerings in the future without the fear of missing anything important.

I'm still waiting to know who is saying war is "cool" or "good"?


It's a joke, sweetheart. If it hurt your feelings, I'm so very sorry.
 
2013-09-01 09:41:42 AM

hardinparamedic: serpent_sky: I love how people think those of us who voted for the President think war is "cool" or "good" because he's at the helm.  Most of the more adamant "we do not belong in Syria" pieces I have read are from people who voted for Obama.

[Citation Needed - Who?]

Who is saying war is "cool" in the first place?

serpent_sky: J
ust because "my guy" (and it's in quotes because I don't think that way) is in charge does not mean a desert war in the Middle East with extremely blurred lines all around and convoluted "storylines" is a good idea.  It's as bad as Afghanistan was/is. And as bad as Iraq.

AFAIK, no one is suggesting putting boots on the ground. Kind of like Libya.

serpent_sky: I really don't want to see this country involved. ESPECIALLY without United Nations support.  We're not the world police. Time to stop.  That actually is some of the change I was expecting from this President.

I agree with you, but for the most part over the last 30 years, the United States HAS been the United Nations. Without the US being involved in - well - ANYTHING, whether in it's own best interests, or those of someone else, nothing will happen. The EU is impotent, and Russia has it's own interests in mind here - namely keeping it's major port open.


Sorry - look above my post (or below - depending how you read.) I was quoting a picture of a girl that was captioned "I never knew how cool war was until Obama started one."

as for the rest, you make points, but I think this country should really, really sit this one out because the facts are murky, at best.
 
2013-09-01 09:43:55 AM
Aren't wars expensive?  Aren't we broke?  Let someone with money handle it.
 
2013-09-01 09:44:18 AM

LasersHurt: The "it  couuuld be about oil" thing is an annoying and ridiculous well-poisoning or derailment. I've seen a handful of these articles recently and they're nothing but conjecture.


The U.S. could invade Easter Island, and there would be people claiming it was for oil.

/No blood for Moai.
 
Displayed 50 of 522 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report