Trump pledges forceful action in Syria showing he has been played.

a reply to: stormcell

Oh don’t get me wrong I agree, the 1st time claims were made against him using chemical weapons against his people a video weeks before came out of Iraq showing terrosists there testing a chemical out on a caged white rabbit

Such a shame politicians can be so easily fooled into going to war based on a lie.

If Trump was played in this scenario too, like in many others, then it were the israelis this time. They just waited till Trump threatened Syria again, and then the israelis send their rockets. So everybody thought it were the "U"S americans that attacked Syria illegally again. Just a coincidence?

But i am afraid the usual suspects don´t play each others, but they play together. There we have the british founded White Helmets propaganda team, we have the illegal israeli attacks, we have the illegal "U"S attacks and occupation, and we have the "red lines"(regarding chemical warfare agents, what else) of that french laughing stock Macron. All the usual suspects together.

And Assad seems to be really stupid(if one single person on earth would believe the stories of the western warmongerers). Every time he and his troops almost reached their goals, Assad starts an attack with chlorine or whatever chemical warfare agent. For absolutely no other reason that to not reach his goals, to deliver the west an alleged reason to start illegal interventions against Assad and his troops.

Incubator babies, WMD in Iraq, the Skripal case anyone?
Btw, if the children in the now shown White Helmets propaganda videos would really been attacked with chlorine, they would not have looked like in that video. The skin color of the kids was normal, they didn´t have blue lips, didn´t have bloody foam at the mouth, nothing that would show the negative effects of an chemical warfare agent attack. Nobody asks why all of their videos almost show only kids(which don´t know what is happening to them). Nobody asks why the "helpers" run without any gasmasks into the contaminated zone, to help, without any problems?

It would not be the first badly created propaganda video by that british founded terror propaganda troop:

Composed of Al Nusra and Al Quaeda terrorists:

To give "the good ones", the "right side" a, from their point of view, reason to attack Syria.

originally posted by: carewemust
www.washingtonpost.com... b79966_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.bd4821ab9c73

Seems like Russia wants to prove something. But what?

Edit: Uh Oh. Washington compost link no bueno. Google it.

You just gotta take all that mess after the ? out of the link.

This whole thing is really sad, especially when Trump uses the term "fake news" so freely. This whole chemical attack is what should be called "fake news" or maybe "false news". The term is not used correctly and it should be used in relation to things like the "Wag the Dog" movie, where they made a video about a fake war/attack that was later used to start a war or create an embargo/sanction or something like that. There needs to be a way to differentiate between biased news (that which leaves out important information which could change perspective completely), "Fake news" (reports about things that never happened, like The Onion), and "false news" which this syrian attack could be catagorized as (meaning there is incomplete or inaccurate reporting of the facts)

a reply to: WarPig1939

Such a shame that politicians only have to pretend to be easily fooled to justify going to war based on a lie.

a reply to: Reydelsol

I’m with you ,atleast in principle..

I remember the last “Chemical attack” that didn’t make any sense then either..

Assad is winning.. why the hell would he use chemical weapons that are likely to ensure some other world power intervenes. While he is winning?!?’

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: WarPig1939

Such a shame that politicians only have to pretend to be easily fooled to justify going to war based on a lie.

What a shambles that post is:

1. Unless we are not already at war, the nations have not said they will unilaterally attack Syria for unproven chemical weapons deployment.
2. An investigation is ongoing so stop jumping to conclusions.
3. You have no idea of the evidence, the area is surrounded, Russia says to the UN go and investigate, how do they get in and investigate? If I tell you to come and get my TV, its yours, and you turn up at my door, I wouldn't let you in.

Whereas the US, France and UK have all said, if it is proven WMDs were used...you apologists are already accusing US of jumping on the reversocycle to get back into a fight.

US could still pull out of Syrian and level a few facilities, storage depots and delivery vehicles from the Med and Iraq without setting foot in their, Trump didnt say that was off the table an it never is, thats why we have stand off weapons if required.

If it is proven that a barrel bomb from an MI8 with a chemical weapon inside was dropped on civilians, what would you say then?

a reply to: WarPig1939

Do you honestly think its a case of being fooled, or do you think that Trump has had the way money actually works and is generated in the United States and the Western world generally, properly explained to him, and has decided that money is more important than life? Because from everything it is possible to know about Trump, I would argue that option two is far more likely.

originally posted by: Forensick


1. Unless we are not already at war, the nations have not said they will unilaterally attack Syria for unproven chemical weapons deployment.

Trump has already committed the USA to action within the next 48 hours. No investigation can be done in 48 hours.

originally posted by: Forensick

3. You have no idea of the evidence, the area is surrounded, Russia says to the UN go and investigate, how do they get in and investigate? If I tell you to come and get my TV, its yours, and you turn up at my door, I wouldn't let you in.

Russia are letting the inspectors in. If the Syrian rebels wont let inspectors in to investigate then they obviously have something to hide.

originally posted by: Forensick
If it is proven that a barrel bomb from an MI8 with a chemical weapon inside was dropped on civilians, what would you say then?

Depends what evidence is SHOWN. The word of politicians and Intelligence chiefs are not proof and mean as much as the fluff in my bellybutton as they have shown to be lairs countless times. Only evidence from a independent and OPEN investigation would do.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: WarPig1939

Do you honestly think its a case of being fooled, or do you think that Trump has had the way money actually works and is generated in the United States and the Western world generally, properly explained to him, and has decided that money is more important than life? Because from everything it is possible to know about Trump, I would argue that option two is far more likely.

Money isn't worth a third world war which this has a very real chance of escalating to. Russia will not be silenced, you can take that to the bank. If money is worth 10-50 million dead bodies, Trump should be removed from office and executed.

To me this has nothing to do with Syria or Assad at all but a plan to start something with Russia because they are in the same theatre and this new attack is justification.

a reply to: WarPig1939

But that is just the point...

You know it is not worth ten to fifty million dead bodies, and I know it is not worth fifty million dead bodies. Hell, for me, its not even worth one dead body, leave alone a mass casualty incident. But does Donald Trump? Because this action, and many others besides of his, suggest to me that he does not value human lives at a higher worth than the money that can be made from the sale and purchase of things designed to end them.

If he is smarter than the generals, as he has claimed, he must know how much money is to be made from arms sales and purchase world wide, during a massive upheaval. He must also be aware that his actions as detailed here can only create MORE corpses. If we are to believe a word he has said, as many seem to, then his actions cannot be read as anything other than a willingness to prioritise doing business, over the lives of innocent people. If we are to disbelieve his intellectual superiority to the generals around him, his advisers, then one or more, perhaps all of them are making the judgement that human lives are worth less than the money which can be generated by continuing to end them, and either way, does this not represent a clear and justifiable reason to remove the current administration from its post at the nearest opportunity?

a reply to: Whereismypassword

If we go into full blown war mode with Syria, I will withdraw all support for Trump and admit I was wrong.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: WarPig1939

If we are to disbelieve his intellectual superiority to the generals around him, his advisers, then one or more, perhaps all of them are making the judgement that human lives are worth less than the money which can be generated by continuing to end them, and either way, does this not represent a clear and justifiable reason to remove the current administration from its post at the nearest opportunity?

The real problem is the entire US government system is corrupt and nothing would change even with removing the current admin from their post like you stated. Heck it might even get worse, there would need to be a military coup in my opinion in order for the US to change its current path.

That is stretching it by a long shot.

originally posted by: o0oTOPCATo0o
a reply to: Whereismypassword

If we go into full blown war mode with Syria, I will withdraw all support for Trump and admit I was wrong.

I will be the same boat right there with you. Syria isn't worth it, I still don't understand what was the point of sending the US military to Syria in the first place? There is nothing of strategic value? Just another possible regime change that the US wants to have like Iraq and risk having another ISIS as an end result?

a reply to: Reydelsol

Does this mean that the liberals who were screaming for war with Syria during the Obama/Hillary regime will now be pro Trump??

Honest Question.

Finally the war hawks on the left will get more blood in Syria!

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: WarPig1939

Do you honestly think its a case of being fooled, or do you think that Trump has had the way money actually works and is generated in the United States and the Western world generally, properly explained to him, and has decided that money is more important than life? Because from everything it is possible to know about Trump, I would argue that option two is far more likely.

What? We've wasted trillions of dollars in the middle east and our country is feeling it. Maybe specific groups of people are making money with wars in the ME, but not the U.S. as a whole.

a reply to: WarPig1939

I suppose what I am trying to understand, is what would it actually take for the people to say "You know what, this cannot go on any longer, we have had more than enough of this nonsense, and we are not allowing it any more"?

I have to ask, because there have been fifteen years of officially recognised conflict involving the US in the Middle East, plus decades of on again off again war prior, as well as the secret wars you only hear about from places you shouldn't be, and people whose conversations it is unwise to overhear, and you would have thought that at some time, after all the lives wasted on these for profit wars, all the good young people sent off to die for the petrodollar, all the uncountable ghosts made by the West in the Middle East over the last forty to fifty years, that the people would have had more than enough.

You would have thought the people would have stopped joining the military, would have stopped joining the intelligence services, would have stopped performing government work, would have protested by making a patriotic and noble choice, to do not a thing under the flag of the United States or any other western nation, until those flags no longer flew over nations run by sociopathic, greedy, shadow wrapped tyrants.

But there appears to be no public desire to actually stop this, and lets be honest, if the President is on board with the people hijacking the country for their own ends, and the intelligence industry is wrapped up in it, and the military that already exists, then its got to be the people who stop it, the public. Its got to be a citizen effort, not a governmental, congressional, senatorial or other entity led effort, but a citizen one. Where, exactly, is that? It seems utterly hopeless.

a reply to: Reydelsol

i'm thinking a subset of A) where the rebels had the chemical weapons stored in a warehouse that was hit by Assad's airforce and it leaked, poisoning locals....

www.youtube.com...