Syria loads chemical weapons into bombs; military awaits Assad's order

Originally posted by Gridrebel
Oh, but the USA has them so it's their right, right???????

Gotta love the mentality

Whoever suggested the US really WANTS what it has, hasn't known anyone in the Military who actually has spent any time around any of that kind of thing. I think it's real safe to say that there are many things people wish they could UNinvent. The problem is that while other nations have similar things and all who have them distrust all others who have them almost universally, when you think about it, and only varying by degree of distrust.......it's a Mexican standoff in the truest and worst sense.

So it's not a love of nukes or slime bombs that keeps people making them....but the realization that once that Genie is out and loose, giving that up (Like Gaddafi did in 2003) is tantamount to suicide in the modern world.

That doesn't mean anyone in the world wants to see more nations get them, add more variety to them ,....or help others who don't already have any, get some. Just my thoughts.

reply to post by MrPlow


Look another idiotic deflection.

Your inner monologue: "Maybe if I say something cute about his use of sheeple I can get off the hook for not knowing how to answer his statements!"

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by ManBehindTheMask

 

So Clinton says they might use chemical weapons and then later that day they are preparing to use them?

Also, the media and US politicians have been fibbing quite a bit when it comes to Syria. Like saying the Syrian Army bombed that Mosque when in reality it was the FSA pulling a false flag, and the US media never pulled back on that story. I think there is huge manipulation going on here. Not that Assad isn't a total bastard, but I think the FSA would be worse for Syrians and for the world since they are just Al Qeada for hire.

No one else thinks the time frame on this is weird given Clinton's statements like less than a day ago?

I also don't see why a regime trying to keep their country would use nerve gas on civilians. I am doubting this story a lot.

edit on 6-12-2012 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)

again like i stated before, thats the issue with this..........the US gov is notorious for putting out information thats not correct, and so are media outlets.......

So who do you believe?

Syria however has admitted that they have the capability but would never use it on its own people........

That is yet to be seen and I hope we dont.........I hope this article is wrong........

But if it proves to be right, then there needs to be an even more critical eye on the information that comes out of the US Gov.......more so then there already is........

Add to that, I already hold anything that comes out of Hilary's mouth to close scrutiny........as well as news reports........

its kind of a crap shoot

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by ManBehindTheMask

 

Come on! The rebels have been the ones killing civilians and blaming Syria. The same that's happened in all these countries that have fallen lately. Clinton says it is a possibility and now it's happening? Like the media is in front of US intelligence on this one?

The same US intelligence the administration blamed for bad intel Benghazi?

So which is it? You cant have it both ways......and I think you see my point

reply to post by princeofpeace


Woah woah..
you said Obama = Ron Paul. That is never right. No matter how small the two things you are comparing.
What is scary is how wrong you are about both of them, but especially Obama. It sincerely pains me to see people on this site parroting the MSM's little headlines.

Obama is soooo far from an isolationist. I wish he were more of one (well what you guys think one is lol).
Ron Paul is far from an isolationist, which is funny because you don't know what one is if you sincerely think he promotes isolationism. Ron Paul's foreign policy is probably the best we have seen in over a hundred years.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by GoalPoster

 

Responsible for 28,000 civilians says who?
We have plenty of evidence that the FSA are killing civilians by the truck load and blaming it on the Syrian Army. Its not in question, it's happening. And the FSA are working towards a goal the US supports so our media reports them positively. Just like in Libya.

care to post your proof please that they are murdering civilians in masse and then blaming it on the Syrian Army?

Again, who do you trust? Reports that could be true, or the gov who is notorious for putting out disinformation, unless they are grilled and exposed?

reply to post by MrPlow

We were told Iraq had such weapons...but we just need to find them.
Syria admits to having them, but only for use during foreign invasions

There is no difference. The implied threat is their use. Not that they have been used, but might be used. That is a safe accusation, isn't it? There is no crime but there could be? So something must be done?

That "Something" being "Sanctions" (i.e., siege measures), "humanitarian aid" (meaning weapons), "no fly zones" (only we fly zones). And "Regime Change" (Coup de tat).

Gentle Euphemisms, masking the true intent to wage aggressive war on another sovereign nation in the middle east.

So yah, go ahead and believe its "different this time".

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by princeofpeace

 

Woah woah..
you said Obama = Ron Paul. That is never right. No matter how small the two things you are comparing.
What is scary is how wrong you are about both of them, but especially Obama. It sincerely pains me to see people on this site parroting the MSM's little headlines.

Obama is soooo far from an isolationist. I wish he were more of one (well what you guys think one is lol).
Ron Paul is far from an isolationist, which is funny because you don't know what one is if you sincerely think he promotes isolationism. Ron Paul's foreign policy is probably the best we have seen in over a hundred years.

There will come a time when Americans will look back on this election in fond recollection and sadness that they did not elect the one man, Ron Paul, who could have saved this country and our interaction with the rest of the world......

i truly believe that

reply to post by ManBehindTheMask


How am I trying to have it both ways? You aren't really making a point here.
Nothing about your story makes sense, multiple other stories refute it, and it would have to be ahead of government intel which it's not.

It's just propaganda to support the FSA and make the Assad regime look worse (not that it's good, it's just not as bad as the rebels our media [ and you seem to be] supporting).

reply to post by ManBehindTheMask


I agree, but i thought you were against Ron Paul and supported Romney. Are you one of the people that turned to support Ron Paul a day late?

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by ManBehindTheMask

 

How am I trying to have it both ways? You aren't really making a point here.
Nothing about your story makes sense, multiple other stories refute it, and it would have to be ahead of government intel which it's not.

It's just propaganda to support the FSA and make the Assad regime look worse (not that it's good, it's just not as bad as the rebels our media [ and you seem to be] supporting).

Its not MY story, so attacking me gets you no where........I simply posted a breaking news article that came up, and found it quite interesting, giving the details that came out earlier this week.......

Actually multiple sources are reporting this story..........if you can find more credible sources that prove this article wrong, please feel free to post them here........

Again, id like nothing more then for this to be un true..........

But the fact is, YOU dont know, and I dont know, if its true or not..........those my friend are the only facts we KNOW

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by GoalPoster

 

Responsible for 28,000 civilians says who?
We have plenty of evidence that the FSA are killing civilians by the truck load and blaming it on the Syrian Army. Its not in question, it's happening. And the FSA are working towards a goal the US supports so our media reports them positively. Just like in Libya.

FSA has been killing civilians says who?
see how easy that is?

Last time I checked, the FSA didn't have fighter jets to bomb hospitals. Oh, and I have a source to back that up.
Vice.com has/had a correspondent in syria, interviewed the doctors of the hospital who were treating wounded children, and that hospital got destroyed in an airstrike.
It's easy to pretend that the FSA is a bunch of thugs, and there may be thugs associated with the FSA, but I can guarantee you that there are a lot of normal people like me and you who got wrapped up in the horror.
www.vice.com...

Ah yes, lets not forget about the evil fundamentalist veterinarian-turned doctor who is fighting for the U.S. by helping children.

Edit: I can't wait to see the obligatory "that's just propaganda, it's fake!" line. I know it's coming.

A bit misleading. Assad doesn't control the military. Do some homework, and you'll see this is more than likely propaganda.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by ManBehindTheMask

 

I agree, but i thought you were against Ron Paul and supported Romney. Are you one of the people that turned to support Ron Paul a day late?

Thats what you get for not paying attention.........contrary, I actually early voted for paul.......

Do you ever pause between personally attacking me or is it just instinct to immediately get condescending?

I was active on the threads early on, from before last year actually, Ive always followed paul, and began support for him actively his second bid for president, and I helped in nashville to spread awareness of his campaign this last go......

So you can stop with the "johnny come lately" shtick.......

reply to post by ManBehindTheMask


Well there have been multiple instances.
One that is verifiable is the video that a defecting FSA member posted of the FSA blowing up a mosque that they then blamed on the Syrian Army (saying they bombed it with jets). The media (not knowing a video showing the FSA carbombing and celebrating the destruction of the mosque existed and would be leaked) reported that it was Assad's army that destroyed the mosque with jets. Days later the video came out showing the FSA carbombing the mosque for the sole purpose of blaming it an Assad. Killing/injuring innocent civilians etc.
That one is verifiable.

Another instance was when the FSA said that Assads army had killed tons of people by shelling a town, but when pictures were taken of the victims, many of the civilians had their throats slit.. so either the FSA lied or that is some very accurate throat seeking shrapnel.

I am not saying Assad is good by any measure, but the FSA is al qeada and they are the same people that took Libya and are making what's bad about the middle easy worse. For some reason, which you can try to figure out for yourself when you open your eyes, western media is supporting the rebels.

reply to post by ManBehindTheMask


My apologies. I thought you supported Romney.
My bad, good for you. I actually ended up voting Johnson, but I voted Paul in the primaries.
I wasn't happy he didn't support Johnson just for Rand's sake, and I was hoping to help Johnson hit that 5 million he needed knowing is running in '16, but I can't knock a vote for Paul.

As for the rest, we disagree a lot, it happens. It's happening right now.
You should look into it instead of agreeing the pronounced boogeyman is indeed the true boogeyman over there.

reply to post by ManBehindTheMask

care to post your proof please that they are murdering civilians in masse and then blaming it on the Syrian Army?

Door swings both ways.
Care to prove they aren't?

If you have ever studied guerrilla conflict you would already know of the tactic that carries out executions (murder) of civilians and then blames it on the government. It is one front of an incursion designed to smear the governments reputation thus giving rise to the peoples resistance in order to persuade them to take up arms against their own government. In widely reported cases the media is employed to mold world opinion against the targeted government or "regime".

You should do some study of Viet Cong tactics in the Vietnam War (they wrote the book), and maybe Cambodia under Pol Pot or even what happened in Libya for instance.

reply to post by MeesterB


Sigh..
See you aren't thinking.
You think how can someone without a plane bomb a building. That's where you went wrong, way back at the beginning. How about, they bomb the buildings and then say the Syiran regime bombed it with planes.

Like how the news said Syria bombed a mosque with jets. You can read about it HERE

What they didn't know is that the FSA had actually bombed it with car bombs and filmed it and it got leaked. Did they do a retraction? Nope.
Read and viewHERE

So to you, I ask, why do you believe everything you read?

And you didn't even get your obligatory that's fake, because it doesn't matter. I am dealing you evidence, I don't just spit on non sense claims.

reply to post by intrptr


I posted a little evidence. I doubt they will look at it.
It's certainly more than they can and will provide for their arguments.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by MeesterB

 

Sigh..
See you aren't thinking.
You think how can someone without a plane bomb a building. That's where you went wrong, way back at the beginning. How about, they bomb the buildings and then say the Syiran regime bombed it with planes.

Like how the news said Syria bombed a mosque with jets. You can read about it HERE

What they didn't know is that the FSA had actually bombed it with car bombs and filmed it and it got leaked. Did they do a retraction? Nope.
Read and viewHERE

So to you, I ask, why do you believe everything you read?

And you didn't even get your obligatory that's fake, because it doesn't matter. I am dealing you evidence, I don't just spit on non sense claims.

edit on 6-12-2012 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)

ah yes, the obligatory "sigh" indicating that you can't handle discussion and have an unhealthy obsession with being right.

I never denied that there are terrorist elements in the FSA, but there is a difference between bombing an empty mosque and bombing a hospital with people who help you when you get shot. Neither side has clean hands, and it seems we are both getting our information from sources that can be incredibly biased, so neither of us can claim absolute authority on what is happening. Syrianews huh? might be the mouthpiece of Assad. Vice? might be the mouthpiece of U.S. liberals.

I have no problem agreeing that both sides have unscrupulous elements, and I think we can agree that bloodshed won't stop until Assad is out of power. Can we agree that the violence should stop?

Edit: typo