Kerry: Chemical Weapons 'Undeniable'

Originally posted by dominicus
I don't believe a single bit of this. I think it's all smoke and mirrors BS to get attention off of Obama & the Rouge NSA fiasco.

I wonder what Russia has to say about this.

Could be a trigger for WW III. Russia backs Asad, rouge us gov backs rebels

If Russia’s Intel agencies were on the ball being able to prove that it wasn’t Assad, they would be splashing this all over the worldwide MSM, with proof to back it up.

But like Intel agencies all over the world, they don’t talk to well to each other. All the secret squirrels have their own stack of nuts stored for their own use.

Kerry is about 5 days behind in this announcement. Isn't he aware these statements have been asserted for almost a week now? What is the point of making it seem like its a new discovery?

Originally posted by Senduko

It seems to me that one they are on a strict timetable and two at this point the gloves come of and they are removing this veil of deceit.

I think that is exactly what is happening, I mean the rest of the world is noticing that the U.S. was lying to them, if the U.S. attacks Syria because of a chemical weapon attack that turns out it was initiated by the rebels, it is going to look desperate, and I'm not really sure how other countries will react to that.

If it becomes obvious that the U.S. is lying and attacking Syria for basically no reason except pride or whatever, I mean there are other countries out there that could fight the U.S. right now, especially after we keep depleting all of our resources on wars for basically no reason.

Originally posted by SloAnPainful
reply to post by neo96

 

Lets be real for a moment. I'm sure both sides used chemical weapons...

Assad used them, the "rebels" used them. I mean theres some pretty ruthless stuff going on there...

Syria is eventually just gonna look like a giant hole if this keeps up... Attack after attack... It's gotta stop sometime...

-SAP-

Ruthless or not it just makes no sense for Assad to use them. It gives is US and UK the excuse they want to get down and dirty in another war. Add to that the potential awkward situation it would put russia in. I would say its likely the rebels. They are the ones that stand to benefit from western intervention. Framing Assad for chemical weapons use is the perfect way. Lets not forget the affiliations of these rebel terrorists. They are not freedom fighters. No matter what the MSM would have to believe. Just my opinion, but to me it makes no sense at all that Assad would use them and too much sense that the rebels (who are already being investigated for chemical attacks) would.

reply to post by Megatronus


If the west does find that the rebels are using chemical weapons, and makes a case for going in to restore peace and limit chemical weapon use, that's not a bad idea -

This looks kind of more like a desperate last stand that is totally going to fail, but is going to be carried through anyway, probably due to momentum of policy and the inability to adapt.


By the way, O.P., thanks for the post. I was against the Iraq war and stuff but this, to me, at least with the information we have, seems pretty transparent

Originally posted by neo96

Kerry: Chemical Weapons 'Undeniable'

www.weeklystandard.com

Secretary of State John Kerry says the use of chemical weapons in Syria is "undeniable" and that the U.S. is considering how to respond

(visit the link for the full news article)

Do try to keep up Kerry old boy...nobody is denying chemicals were used, the debate is over who used them on whom..not whether they were used or not.

Mind you, it's perfectly reasonable for Kerry to say this if he were a visitor here from a parallel planet working about a week behind...if so, welcome to the present.

reply to post by MysterX


I see, he saw the YouTube videos and decided that there were chemical weapons used, but didn't think to check on who used them.

Originally posted by darkbake

Originally posted by Senduko

It seems to me that one they are on a strict timetable and two at this point the gloves come of and they are removing this veil of deceit.

I think that is exactly what is happening, I mean the rest of the world is noticing that the U.S. was lying to them, if the U.S. attacks Syria because of a chemical weapon attack that turns out it was initiated by the rebels, it is going to look desperate, and I'm not really sure how other countries will react to that.

If it becomes obvious that the U.S. is lying and attacking Syria for basically no reason except pride or whatever, I mean there are other countries out there that could fight the U.S. right now, especially after we keep depleting all of our resources on wars for basically no reason.

edit on 26-8-2013 by darkbake because: (no reason given)

I think you are spot on. The US and the World didn't do anything other than send a angry letter to Saddam after he gassed the Kurds, AND that was proven. Even admitted.

Here we have a crime committed with no real perp. Just peoples opinions.

If we are to go to war for resources, let the U.S. do it in Africa...there are a CRAPLOAD of resources there at least. But I guess genocide and starvation are not reason enough.

reply to post by TDawgRex


Well, we can't just go take other countries resources without asking or trading for them, that is kind if ridiculous. I guess that is obvious.

Sec. Kerry made a statement from Washington, DC on Monday afternoon underscoring that the White House has little doubt the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad deployed chemical weapons on the outskirts of Damascus last week, killing hundreds. Reports from Syria of chemical warfare “should shock the conscience of the world,” Kerry said, adding that the indiscriminate slaughter of women and children carried out by the Assad regime constitutes a “moral obscenity.”

I cant argue with that statement. Its an atrocity....but its also the UN'S position and job to mediate disputes between nations? How about in civil matters like Syria?

For a nation that's so broken we certainly keep trying to play devils advocate.


This is the other shoe i was looking for.

“Moreover, we know that the Syrian regime maintains custody of these weapons,”

Means the US will play world police yet again and enter Syria now.

RT



Crap wrong thread, semi relevant though. I can delete NEO?

Originally posted by darkbake
reply to post by Megatronus

 

If the west does find that the rebels are using chemical weapons, and makes a case for going in to restore peace and limit chemical weapon use, that's not a bad idea -

This looks kind of more like a desperate last stand that is totally going to fail, but is going to be carried through anyway.

I think its likely the US and UK governments will just push past the UN and try to intervene say the have definate intel that its definately Assad using them. Once we are in there, claim it wasn't thier fault the got poor intel and that indeed the rebels did use chemical weapons. Even so they needed to intervene so it all worked out. Just like the mess that was Iraq. They know they can get away with it. They already have over Iraq. Even years after, when its common knowlege we knew there were bo WMDs not a single politician has even been investigated let alone taken to task over it.

Its a tried and tested method that they know works.

reply to post by darkbake


I was trying to be just a tad bit sarcastic. I did edit the post as you were posting.

I supported the invasion of Afghanistan at first, and that mission should have been declared over once OBL was declared dead. I did not support OIF, even though I did deploy there three times. I went to try to keep my Soldiers alive, not country.

I am totally opposed to any Syrian action. It's two bad guys taking on each other. All we should do is try to contain it within it's borders and let them duke it out.

I have a feeling more is at stake here. America strikes Syrian targets people die, angry people start hitting soft targets in the U.S., American cities implement curfews, Americans get angry, Martial Law goes into effect. Then the real game starts.

Good enough excuse to drop a missile on his head.

I mean, if we can use a drone strike on an American citizen and his son.

What is stopping us from killing this two bit despot?

It's not like we even care what the Constitution says anyway.

The cats out the bag: BUSTED!!!!!!!!!!!

Originally posted by Chrisfishenstein
reply to post by gladtobehere

 

U.S. 'backed plan to launch chemical weapon attack on Syria and blame it on Assad's regime'
•Leaked emails from defense contractor refers to chemical weapons saying 'the idea is approved by Washington'
•Obama issued warning to Syrian president Bashar al-Assad last month that use of chemical warfare was 'totally unacceptable'By Louise Boyle
PUBLISHED: 14:16 EST, 29 January 2013 | UPDATED: 14:16 EST, 29 January 2013

This is from article!!! FROM January 29th, 2013!!!

Oh boy.....What have you stumbled upon here?? This is not good!!!

I knew it was BS

reply to post by dominicus


I seen this a few days ago. If i remember, its source was flaky. I think it was written off as propaganda. Time to reopen this?

Nice link, jumping in.

Its clear the Aliens are running our government since they cant hold urges to go agaisnt another failure of an interventionism, where are the anti war protesters?

Originally posted by shaneslaughta
reply to post by dominicus

 

I seen this a few days ago. If i remember, its source was flaky. I think it was written off as propaganda. Time to reopen this?

They knew the source would have made sense thats why our MSM deleted now that source of the emails are proving to be true.

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
Its clear the Aliens are running our government since they cant hold urges to go agaisnt another failure of an interventionism, where are the anti war protesters?

Protesting on Facebook? Playing video games? all the crap they shove in peoples faces now days to keen them placid.

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
Its clear the Aliens are running our government since they cant hold urges to go agaisnt another failure of an interventionism, where are the anti war protesters?

They only come out when there is a R by their names.