Just fuck off and stop trying to derail a reasonable and important conversation. You are back on IGNORE.
Syria
- Thread starter Al Wohlstrom
- Start date
Just fuck off and stop trying to derail a reasonable and important conversation. You are back on IGNORE.
Pete McCluskey.
Lifetime Supporter
Fuck me Jim you do become boring after a time. Muslims are killing Muslims it is a civil war
Why should the U.S. get involved? Why don't the Muslim countries in the region step in and stop the babies getting killed?
It will not make any difference if the U.S. lob a couple of cruise missiles in the area just more people being killed by a different method. Why the f..ck get involved they all hate you anyway. If they thin their own ranks out a bit so much the better for the world.
Why should the U.S. get involved? Why don't the Muslim countries in the region step in and stop the babies getting killed?
It will not make any difference if the U.S. lob a couple of cruise missiles in the area just more people being killed by a different method. Why the f..ck get involved they all hate you anyway. If they thin their own ranks out a bit so much the better for the world.
My thoughts too Pete!
Jim Craik
Lifetime Supporter
Pete,
I think you are missing the point, the question here is should the world react to a gas attack, not just having WMDs but using them.
I know back in 2002, we were told that Iraq possesed WMDs, I know that most people here in the US believed our Goverment and most people including Al and Mr Fechter felt that an attack, even an invasion of Iraq was warranted.
Now in the end it turned out that they did not have WMDs, and the invasion and quick "Mission Accomplished" turned into a painful occupation.
Am I alone in thinking that the World needs to draw the line on gas attacks. If we do nothing, despots the world over could turn to this type of slaughter.
Would you see this differently if it was North Korea using WMDs, how about Mexico, how about Indonisia, how about Ireland?
I'm not saying we should invade Syria, I'm not saying we sould take sides, I'm saying that the Word needs to take a stand, that those responsibe should be punished!
If it can be proven that he used WMDs, smart bomb his palaces, his cars and his military........
Everyone needs to see that this sort of thing will not be tolerated!
How would history have changed if from day one, the Allied bombing campaign instead of carpet bombing cities, they had done nothing but carpet bomb anywhere Hitler might have been?
I think you are missing the point, the question here is should the world react to a gas attack, not just having WMDs but using them.
I know back in 2002, we were told that Iraq possesed WMDs, I know that most people here in the US believed our Goverment and most people including Al and Mr Fechter felt that an attack, even an invasion of Iraq was warranted.
Now in the end it turned out that they did not have WMDs, and the invasion and quick "Mission Accomplished" turned into a painful occupation.
Am I alone in thinking that the World needs to draw the line on gas attacks. If we do nothing, despots the world over could turn to this type of slaughter.
Would you see this differently if it was North Korea using WMDs, how about Mexico, how about Indonisia, how about Ireland?
I'm not saying we should invade Syria, I'm not saying we sould take sides, I'm saying that the Word needs to take a stand, that those responsibe should be punished!
If it can be proven that he used WMDs, smart bomb his palaces, his cars and his military........
Everyone needs to see that this sort of thing will not be tolerated!
How would history have changed if from day one, the Allied bombing campaign instead of carpet bombing cities, they had done nothing but carpet bomb anywhere Hitler might have been?
Last edited:
It's not possible to carry on an intelligent line of thought with you. You didn't address anything, you just like to push your agenda. If you can't add to the discussion, why bother. You're not worth the time!
Mike Pass
Supporter
Which countries are supporting Assad's regime? It might be pertinent to ask them why?
What exactly is going to be bombed? Seems like blowing up piles of chemical weapons could raise more than one kind of stink.
But what do I know about american politics.(apart from that they are boring)
Cheers
Mike
What exactly is going to be bombed? Seems like blowing up piles of chemical weapons could raise more than one kind of stink.
But what do I know about american politics.(apart from that they are boring)
Cheers
Mike
Saddam moved his shit to Syria while he was dicking around with the UN inspectors then, just as Assad is going to do now. I've said that from the beginning. Let Syria's neighbors deal with it. There is no point in U.S. involvement unless we make glass out of the entire region, which is not a bad idea anyway. They will continue to destroy one another regardless.
I believe the entire Lybia attack on our embassy annex was over the CIA
secretly sending arms and support to the Syrian rebels through Lybia to Turkey, and then Syria. It would be pretty niave to think that this was not happening. How about the recent purchase order by the US Gov't to Bulgaria for 600,000 rifle magazines.
Mike its a fecking mess. I just had a quick read up on it and you have Iran and the Russians giving military support to the Syrian government, the rebels are being supported by Qatar and Saudi Arabia. There are tens of thousands of rebels banged up and thousands being tortured. I cant change my vote but I would now be on the NO list.
Bob
Bob
Pete McCluskey.
Lifetime Supporter
Jim, tell me I'm wrong, if a right wing government wanted to retaliate because of Syrias alledged attack on its citizens... (It may have been the other side) other than Obama you would have been against it correct? Be honest now!
Al is correct when he says Saddam sent the WMD to Syria while the U.N. was dicking around following" the rules". Wankers all!
Al is correct when he says Saddam sent the WMD to Syria while the U.N. was dicking around following" the rules". Wankers all!
Hey, whatever Nancy wants, Nancy gets. She is the alter ego, role model of the effeminate male Leftie.
Nancy Pelosi the hawk tells Barack Obama to act on Syria - POLITICO.com
Nancy Pelosi the hawk tells Barack Obama to act on Syria - POLITICO.com
One person has voted "yes". Clearly that person was in error an missed the "no" button by accident....
Jim Craik
Lifetime Supporter
Pete, you are wrong.
I like most Americans felt Gulf War 1 was justified, we can not allow a UN Member Nation to be invaded.
I like most Americans supported Gulf War 2, because we were told that absolutly Iraq had WMDs and had used them. When the truth came out, I like most Americans was pissed off and no longer supported the President or the war.
Unless there is new data I do not know about, there is no evidence that Iraq had or transferred WMDs to Syria or anywhere else. The Iraq Military denied having or sending WMDs to Syria.
I like most Americans felt Gulf War 1 was justified, we can not allow a UN Member Nation to be invaded.
I like most Americans supported Gulf War 2, because we were told that absolutly Iraq had WMDs and had used them. When the truth came out, I like most Americans was pissed off and no longer supported the President or the war.
Unless there is new data I do not know about, there is no evidence that Iraq had or transferred WMDs to Syria or anywhere else. The Iraq Military denied having or sending WMDs to Syria.
Last edited:
Pete McCluskey.
Lifetime Supporter
Well fuck me that's a surprise!:lol::lol::lol::lol:
Jim Craik
Lifetime Supporter
Pete, Jack, this really has nothing to do with the current discussion, but both BushII and Cheney have said there were no WMDs.
Bush has said Iraq was the biggest mistake of his presidency, why would he say that if there were WMDs, but they were sent to Syria?
After the fall of Sadam, why would the folks running the Iraq WMD section deny to the US that they existed?
If there had been WMDs and they were sent to Syria, wouln't Bush and Cheney have said that, wouldn't the Iraq military have said that?
Now this gas may have come from Iraq, back soon after the Iran/Iraq war, that I do not know, but it did not come from Iraq just before or during Gulf War 2.
Bush has said Iraq was the biggest mistake of his presidency, why would he say that if there were WMDs, but they were sent to Syria?
After the fall of Sadam, why would the folks running the Iraq WMD section deny to the US that they existed?
If there had been WMDs and they were sent to Syria, wouln't Bush and Cheney have said that, wouldn't the Iraq military have said that?
Now this gas may have come from Iraq, back soon after the Iran/Iraq war, that I do not know, but it did not come from Iraq just before or during Gulf War 2.
Last edited:
Pete McCluskey.
Lifetime Supporter
O.k. Jim so what weapon would you use to bring the Syrian Government to its knees?
Jim Craik
Lifetime Supporter
Assuming this is proved.....
Well, I could guess, but it would only be a guess. I think in this case this sort of things should be left to the professionals.
I'm not sure about bringing the Syrian Government to its knees, but the folks responsable need to be brought to justice. If the Syrian Military or Police will turn over those responsible, then the Government may not fall.
I'm fairly sure that will not happen, but I bet we have people talking to their Military leaders.
Well, I could guess, but it would only be a guess. I think in this case this sort of things should be left to the professionals.
I'm not sure about bringing the Syrian Government to its knees, but the folks responsable need to be brought to justice. If the Syrian Military or Police will turn over those responsible, then the Government may not fall.
I'm fairly sure that will not happen, but I bet we have people talking to their Military leaders.
Last edited:
I would let them have at it, but take the "stay out of my backyard" approach.
If the USA is really directly threatened by this, or actually directly threatening our staunchest allies, and I'll add the words "Imminent Danger". Then and only then should we take any action whatsoever. Read upon some Islamic history folks, say from around 760BC. While you're at it, read the Koran. Then, how about the writings of Sun Tzu for some insight.
If the USA is really directly threatened by this, or actually directly threatening our staunchest allies, and I'll add the words "Imminent Danger". Then and only then should we take any action whatsoever. Read upon some Islamic history folks, say from around 760BC. While you're at it, read the Koran. Then, how about the writings of Sun Tzu for some insight.
Nothing we do short term will bring Syria to it's knees.
If nukes are used, some very stupid people will die.
If nukes are used, some very stupid people will die.
Similar threads
