RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

US bombs Syria

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » Area 51
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
linkster



Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 2622



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/06/17 9:53 pm    ::: US bombs Syria Reply Reply with quote

In a rush to judgement reminiscent of 911, The Tonkin Gulf, The louisitania and the "sinking" of the Maine, our government once again announces that they are striking out against evil-doers.

Oh yes, let's once again take the US government at their word. Don't question anything. Don't ask ourselves what possible reason the Assad government would commit such a provocative act when as every one agrees they were on the verge of defeating the invaders. Wouldn't it be more plausible that the US, knowing that they were losing their proxy war and desperate to involve themselves directly in the conflict would benefit from another of their famous false flag incidents? No, of course, let's just bite into the hook and wave our flags.

What really disturbs me is the way the media treats this as some sort of horror. Eighty eight killed. The Saudis kill that many wedding guests with a drone attack and the US says oops, sorry about that, our bad. Move on. Just an unfortunate mistake. The seals kill innocent women and children, making Trump look like an incompetent, and the US chalks it up to faulty intelligence. Oops, our bad.

So I guess that like the Tonkin Gulf incident we are supposed to just wave our flags and cheer the troops. And then, in ten or fifteen years, find out the truth from declassified documents.


pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 53897
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/06/17 9:59 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Thank goodness we didn't elect that warmonger Hillary Clinton Rolling Eyes



_________________
I'm not afraid of anyone. I'm not shy about anything. Not even my big nose.
justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 5987
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/06/17 10:28 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Ugh. Suggesting that the US used chemical weapons on civilians in some sort of false flag attack is beyond the pale. Actually have a shred of evidence for such a thing before going all "Info-Wars".

Personally, I am willing to give our military and intellegence communities the benefit of the doubt and see how all of this plays out. I don't really like the idea of getting more involved in the festering quagmire that is that region right now, but I really don't know if there was any right answer to Assad using chemical weapons.



_________________
Covfefe when the walls fell.
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 53897
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/06/17 10:33 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/375609403376144384

Donald Trump wrote:
AGAIN, TO OUR VERY FOOLISH LEADER, DO NOT ATTACK SYRIA - IF YOU DO MANY VERY BAD THINGS WILL HAPPEN & FROM THAT FIGHT THE U.S. GETS NOTHING!



_________________
I'm not afraid of anyone. I'm not shy about anything. Not even my big nose.
justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 5987
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/06/17 10:54 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

It's funny how candidates and armchair politicians all say things like that...

And then you are sitting behind the big desk and listening to all of the intellegence and policy experts while staring at pictures of gassed babies. It's very similar to the difference between the things candidate Obama said and the actions that President Obama took.

We will see what happens going forward, but airstrikes on the base where the chemical attack originated seems a fairly measured response.



_________________
Covfefe when the walls fell.
Shades



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 42759



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/07/17 12:10 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Justin has been siding with Trump? What in the world?



_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
linkster



Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 2622



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/07/17 1:28 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

justintyme wrote:
Ugh. Suggesting that the US used chemical weapons on civilians in some sort of false flag attack is beyond the pale. Actually have a shred of evidence for such a thing before going all "Info-Wars".

Personally, I am willing to give our military and intellegence communities the benefit of the doubt and see how all of this plays out. I don't really like the idea of getting more involved in the festering quagmire that is that region right now, but I really don't know if there was any right answer to Assad using chemical weapons.


Did you read my post? I don't know what happened in Syria but it is a documented fact that on several occasions the US has used "beyond the pale" methods to start a war. Admiral Morrison, the commander in the Tonkin Gulf has admitted that the incident that started the Viet Nam war never happened. It was invented. All the incidents I listed were lies told by our government to it's citizens.


linkster



Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 2622



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/07/17 1:36 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

justintyme wrote:
It's funny how candidates and armchair politicians all say things like that...

And then you are sitting behind the big desk and listening to all of the intellegence and policy experts while staring at pictures of gassed babies. It's very similar to the difference between the things candidate Obama said and the actions that President Obama took.

We will see what happens going forward, but airstrikes on the base where the chemical attack originated seems a fairly measured response.


How old are you? Were you around at the start of the first Iraqi war when our leaders bought a pretty young Kuwaiti women into a congressional hearing where she described witnessing babies being dumped from their incubators by Iraqi soldiers? A few years later we find out the she was the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the US and was in DC at the time of the incident she swore she witnessed.

The Syrian war was started to oust their leader, not because he is an evil person, which he may well be, but because he doesn't want to allow a gas pipeline to be laid through his country. It's about oil. Everything we do in the middle east is about oil.


cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 8076
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump is not president.


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/07/17 7:36 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

indeed, we have strict rules of engagement, without which we'd be hard-pressed to separate the evil doers (them) from the righteous (us). Rolling Eyes

i'm afraid donnie little hands has thrown his ace card as a last resort to stem the Red Tide which threatens his administration. When you're the least popular new president in the history of the US, and the feds are closing in, there is nothing like a war to save your lame ass.



_________________
Silly, stupid white people.
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 53897
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/07/17 7:44 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

cthskzfn wrote:
indeed, we have strict rules of engagement, without which we'd be hard-pressed to separate the evil doers (them) from the righteous (us). Rolling Eyes

i'm afraid donnie little hands has thrown his ace card as a last resort to stem the Red Tide which threatens his administration. When you're the least popular new president in the history of the US, and the feds are closing in, there is nothing like a war to save your lame ass.


Plus bombing the people the Russians have been helping makes it look like he's not a Putin puppet.



_________________
I'm not afraid of anyone. I'm not shy about anything. Not even my big nose.
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 8076
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump is not president.


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/07/17 7:55 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:
indeed, we have strict rules of engagement, without which we'd be hard-pressed to separate the evil doers (them) from the righteous (us). Rolling Eyes

i'm afraid donnie little hands has thrown his ace card as a last resort to stem the Red Tide which threatens his administration. When you're the least popular new president in the history of the US, and the feds are closing in, there is nothing like a war to save your lame ass.


Plus bombing the people the Russians have been helping makes it look like he's not a Putin puppet.


A strategic bombing for sure.



_________________
Silly, stupid white people.
Luuuc



Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 17230



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/07/17 8:27 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

This seems just as useful now as it was when it was published:
9 questions about Syria you were too embarrassed to ask



_________________
Seems rike no one takes me serirousreee
justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 5987
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/07/17 8:29 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

linkster wrote:
justintyme wrote:
Ugh. Suggesting that the US used chemical weapons on civilians in some sort of false flag attack is beyond the pale. Actually have a shred of evidence for such a thing before going all "Info-Wars".

Personally, I am willing to give our military and intellegence communities the benefit of the doubt and see how all of this plays out. I don't really like the idea of getting more involved in the festering quagmire that is that region right now, but I really don't know if there was any right answer to Assad using chemical weapons.


Did you read my post? I don't know what happened in Syria but it is a documented fact that on several occasions the US has used "beyond the pale" methods to start a war. Admiral Morrison, the commander in the Tonkin Gulf has admitted that the incident that started the Viet Nam war never happened. It was invented. All the incidents I listed were lies told by our government to it's citizens.

That is a total false equivalency.

Do I believe our country's leaders might make up an event to sell a war to the American people? Absolutely. Though I still would want actual evidence of this, not just wild conjecture. It's the same thing I demand of Trump when he throws out half-baked conspiracy theories about Obama wire tapping him or Obama being a secret Muslim...

But even then, what I was saying was beyond the pale was the idea that the US would actually use chemical weapons on children as a false flag attact to justify war. I just don't see that happening, and would beed some serious evidence of it occuring before I would even entertain the thought.



_________________
Covfefe when the walls fell.
justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 5987
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/07/17 8:36 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Shades wrote:
Justin has been siding with Trump? What in the world?

For the moment, and for this one action of bombing that one military installation. And I support his call for the removal of Assad, just as Obama did. I would not support any large scale unilateral action going forward akin to what we did in Iraq.

As I said, so far this was a measured response. I have no issue with that. Just because I find Trump disgusting doesn't mean I can't look at things objectively.



_________________
Covfefe when the walls fell.
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 8076
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump is not president.


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/07/17 8:54 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

justintyme wrote:
Shades wrote:
Justin has been siding with Trump? What in the world?

For the moment, and for this one action of bombing that one military installation. And I support his call for the removal of Assad, just as Obama did. I would not support any large scale unilateral action going forward akin to what we did in Iraq.

As I said, so far this was a measured response. I have no issue with that. Just because I find Trump disgusting doesn't mean I can't look at things objectively.



Illegal bombing done to distract the US population. See the corporate media fulfill its duty.

Trump condemns chemical weapon warfare while denying victims of it safety in US.



_________________
Silly, stupid white people.
justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 5987
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/07/17 9:02 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

cthskzfn wrote:
justintyme wrote:
Shades wrote:
Justin has been siding with Trump? What in the world?

For the moment, and for this one action of bombing that one military installation. And I support his call for the removal of Assad, just as Obama did. I would not support any large scale unilateral action going forward akin to what we did in Iraq.

As I said, so far this was a measured response. I have no issue with that. Just because I find Trump disgusting doesn't mean I can't look at things objectively.



Illegal bombing done to distract the US population. See the corporate media fulfill its duty.

Trump condemns chemical weapon warfare while denying victims of it safety in US.

Not sure how it is considered "illegal". So far it is well within his authority. Hell, Hillary Clinton had just said that she would do something similar...

As far as everything else, they are inconsequential to the logic of whether or not the action taken was appropriate. It is possible to both support (or at least not oppose) a specific action while still condeming other actions taken by that individual. I think Trump's policies for the most part are utterly disgusting.



_________________
Covfefe when the walls fell.
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 8076
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump is not president.


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/07/17 9:03 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Trump tells Putin, Putin tells Assad, Syrian and Russian troops and equipment moved, missiles launched, Trump tells NSC and congress.



_________________
Silly, stupid white people.
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 8076
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump is not president.


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/07/17 9:05 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

justintyme wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:
justintyme wrote:
Shades wrote:
Justin has been siding with Trump? What in the world?

For the moment, and for this one action of bombing that one military installation. And I support his call for the removal of Assad, just as Obama did. I would not support any large scale unilateral action going forward akin to what we did in Iraq.

As I said, so far this was a measured response. I have no issue with that. Just because I find Trump disgusting doesn't mean I can't look at things objectively.



Illegal bombing done to distract the US population. See the corporate media fulfill its duty.

Trump condemns chemical weapon warfare while denying victims of it safety in US.

Not sure how it is considered "illegal". So far it is well within his authority. Hell, Hillary Clinton had just said that she would do something similar...

As far as everything else, they are inconsequential to the logic of whether or not the action taken was appropriate. It is possible to both support (or at least not oppose) a specific action while still condeming other actions taken by that individual. I think Trump's policies for the most part are utterly disgusting.


How is it not?



_________________
Silly, stupid white people.
justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 5987
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/07/17 9:24 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

cthskzfn wrote:


How is it not?

Because there is no law against it?

Incidentally, I also supported Clinton’s belief that the US should establish a no-fly zone (which this would actually be a part of) over the area. Trump was very much against this idea during the campaign. How silly would it be for me to now oppose this just because Trump is the person doing it? If Bernie Sanders were president, and he ordered this sort of strike would you still oppose it? Because I am willing to bet he would have.



_________________
Covfefe when the walls fell.
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 8076
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump is not president.


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/07/17 9:30 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

justintyme wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:


How is it not?

Because there is no law against it?

Incidentally, I also supported Clinton’s belief that the US should establish a no-fly zone (which this would actually be a part of) over the area. Trump was very much against this idea during the campaign. How silly would it be for me to now oppose this just because Trump is the person doing it. [b]If Bernie Sanders were president, and he ordered this sort of strike would you still oppose it? Because I am willing to bet he would have[/b].


There is no law prohibiting bombing a sovereign nation that is not at war with the U.S.? Shocked


I doubt Bernie would do this. And if he did, I'd condemn it.



_________________
Silly, stupid white people.
justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 5987
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/07/17 10:21 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

cthskzfn wrote:

There is no law prohibiting bombing a sovereign nation that is not at war with the U.S.? Shocked

No. Not really. "International Law" is not this super codified thing like people seem to think. There are some specifics signed on through the Geneva convention and the like, but most things are not cut and dried. Based upon the US's position in this battle it would be a very hard case to make that they broke any law.

And you don't see any president, Sanders included, ordering the disablement of a military base used to stage chemical weapon attacks?



_________________
Covfefe when the walls fell.
justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 5987
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/07/17 10:37 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Now, if people want a good place to attack Trump it is on his budget proposals.

For instance this airstrike cost about $93.81 million (Tomahawk Missles cost about 1.5 million each, according to the DoD).

Yet Trump feels the need to cut the NEA, which has a total annual budget of $146.2 million.



_________________
Covfefe when the walls fell.
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 8076
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump is not president.


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/07/17 11:08 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

justintyme wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:

There is no law prohibiting bombing a sovereign nation that is not at war with the U.S.? Shocked

No. Not really. "International Law" is not this super codified thing like people seem to think. There are some specifics signed on through the Geneva convention and the like, but most things are not cut and dried. Based upon the US's position in this battle it would be a very hard case to make that they broke any law.

And you don't see any president, Sanders included, ordering the disablement of a military base used to stage chemical weapon attacks?



A friendly heads-up: the primary is over so you can stop with the Sanders sideswipes. Smile

This "measured response" apparently left the runway intact and hit no chemicals. It's only mission was to bump the criminal's favorability numbers and distract from the Russian probe.



_________________
Silly, stupid white people.
linkster



Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 2622



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/07/17 11:14 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

justintyme wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:

There is no law prohibiting bombing a sovereign nation that is not at war with the U.S.? Shocked

No. Not really. "International Law" is not this super codified thing like people seem to think. There are some specifics signed on through the Geneva convention and the like, but most things are not cut and dried. Based upon the US's position in this battle it would be a very hard case to make that they broke any law.

And you don't see any president, Sanders included, ordering the disablement of a military base used to stage chemical weapon attacks?


Like torturing enemy combatants? Remember, the US has refused to sign the Geneva conventions.

Here's a concise and compelling view of this bombing:
https://dailyreckoning.com/neocons-gotten-trump/

I can't understand why you don't think the US would intentionally murder innocent civilians, including women and children. Who do you think were living in those Afghan & Pakistani villages that we hit with missiles in order to kill some tribal leader we "thought" was there? Hell, we killed a few of these leaders 3 or 4 times over the years.

Who ever is in the white house is irrelevant.


justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 5987
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/07/17 11:18 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

cthskzfn wrote:
justintyme wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:

There is no law prohibiting bombing a sovereign nation that is not at war with the U.S.? Shocked

No. Not really. "International Law" is not this super codified thing like people seem to think. There are some specifics signed on through the Geneva convention and the like, but most things are not cut and dried. Based upon the US's position in this battle it would be a very hard case to make that they broke any law.

And you don't see any president, Sanders included, ordering the disablement of a military base used to stage chemical weapon attacks?



A friendly heads-up: the primary is over so you can stop with the Sanders sideswipes. Smile

This "measured response" apparently left the runway intact and hit no chemicals. It's only mission was to bump the criminal's favorability numbers and distract from the Russian probe.

I am, and was, a huge Sanders supporter. I voted for him in the Minnesota primary. So I am definitely not taking swipes at him. I was using him to point out that the action taken here is not "hawkish" behavior but is rather measured, at least so far. Going forward this could change, depending on what Trump decides to do.

If the attack failed to achieve its objectives, that is a different issue and fair to criticize in regards to its execution. However it shouldn't be conflated with whether or not the strike was the correct decision to begin with, as that is the fallacy of outcome bias.



_________________
Covfefe when the walls fell.
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 8076
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump is not president.


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/07/17 11:30 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

justintyme wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:
justintyme wrote:
cthskzfn wrote:

There is no law prohibiting bombing a sovereign nation that is not at war with the U.S.? Shocked

No. Not really. "International Law" is not this super codified thing like people seem to think. There are some specifics signed on through the Geneva convention and the like, but most things are not cut and dried. Based upon the US's position in this battle it would be a very hard case to make that they broke any law.

And you don't see any president, Sanders included, ordering the disablement of a military base used to stage chemical weapon attacks?



A friendly heads-up: the primary is over so you can stop with the Sanders sideswipes. Smile

This "measured response" apparently left the runway intact and hit no chemicals. It's only mission was to bump the criminal's favorability numbers and distract from the Russian probe.

I am, and was, a huge Sanders supporter. I voted for him in the Minnesota primary. So I am definitely not taking swipes at him. I was using him to point out that the action taken here is not "hawkish" behavior but is rather measured, at least so far. Going forward this could change, depending on what Trump decides to do.

If the attack failed to achieve its objectives, that is a different issue and fair to criticize in regards to its execution. However it shouldn't be conflated with whether or not the strike was the correct decision to begin with, as that is the fallacy of outcome bias.


The reason for the attack was for nothing other than boosting polls and distracting from the investigation.

You may have voted for Bernie but you seem to project your POV onto him. I seriously doubt a POTUS Sanders would have done any such thing. (his poll numbers wouldn't have tanked so bad in the first place. 2ndly, had they done so, this wouldn't be a strategy of his anyway, imo).



_________________
Silly, stupid white people.
justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 5987
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/07/17 11:49 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

The problem is that you are treating this as if it were only a politically motivated move. As I noted, Clinton herself was calling for Trump to do this because it was a militarily sound option to try and stop future chemical attacks without much esculation of our role in the region.

Presidents have a tendency to listen to their generals and intellegence officers when chosing a course of action, which is why what they say as candidates and what they do as presidents tend to be different.

I see no reason, based on Sander's positions that he took during the campagin (specifically when he said that he would have no issue using our military when the situation called for it), that would suggest he wouldn't have made the same decision under these circumstances.

By the way, Sanders has not condemned this strike. His statement was exactly the same as mine...no opposition to this, but concern that it might suggest getting pulled further into the quagmire.

He also called Assad a war criminal who needs to be removed.



_________________
Covfefe when the walls fell.
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 4800



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/07/17 2:41 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Does Trump need congressional approval to strike Syria? The debate, explained.


Genero36



Joined: 24 Apr 2005
Posts: 8294



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/07/17 2:45 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

<embed><iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/OJ-_Qjt3Rc0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe></embed>

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJ-_Qjt3Rc0

You voted for him.




_________________
I'm all for the separation of church and hate.
justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 5987
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/07/17 4:26 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

There is some irony in World Star putting up a video from an alt-right White Nationalist.This guy is the former leader of the white nationalist youth program.

So many conspiracy theories. This crap is literally on Info-Wars...



_________________
Covfefe when the walls fell.
Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 10541
Location: Oklahoma (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/08/17 11:58 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

If footage of innocents suffering painful deaths at the hands of warmongers is adequate reason to fire missiles, then why have there been no missiles fired in Sudan. Or Rwanda. Etc.



_________________
Oklahoma: Go Sooners!

<--Maddie Manning, Sooner Extraordinaire
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 4800



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/08/17 2:01 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Howee wrote:
If footage of innocents suffering painful deaths at the hands of warmongers is adequate reason to fire missiles, then why have there been no missiles fired in Sudan. Or Rwanda. Etc.


Ordinarily the difference would be proximity to Israel and oil, but in this case we still were overlooking the slaughter. So the key must be the use of WMDs, which was accentuated by the videos.


linkster



Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 2622



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/09/17 4:01 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

This is what the invasion of Syria is all about:

Quote:
This coalition and meddling in Syria came about immediately on the heels of discussions of an Iran-Iraq-Syria gas pipeline that was to be built between 2014 and 2016 from Iran’s giant South Pars field through Iraq and Syria. With a possible extension to Lebanon, it would eventually reach Europe, the target export market.

Perhaps the most accurate description of the current crisis over gas, oil and pipelines that is raging in Syria has been described by Dmitry Minin, writing for the Strategic Cultural Foundation in May 2013:

A battle is raging over whether pipelines will go toward Europe from east to west, from Iran and Iraq to the Mediterranean coast of Syria, or take a more northbound route from Qatar and Saudi Arabia via Syria and Turkey. Having realized that the stalled Nabucco pipeline, and indeed the entire Southern Corridor, are backed up only by Azerbaijan’s reserves and can never equal Russian supplies to Europe or thwart the construction of the South Stream, the West is in a hurry to replace them with resources from the Persian Gulf. Syria ends up being a key link in this chain, and it leans in favor of Iran and Russia; thus it was decided in the Western capitals that its regime needs to change.


It’s the oil, gas and pipelines, stupid!

Indeed, tensions were building between Russia, the U.S. and the European Union amid concerns that the European gas market would be held hostage to Russian gas giant Gazprom. The proposed Iran-Iraq-Syria gas pipeline would be essential to diversifying Europe’s energy supplies away from Russia.

Turkey is Gazprom’s second-largest customer. The entire Turkish energy security structure relies on gas from Russia and Iran. Plus, Turkey was harboring Ottoman-like ambitions of becoming a strategic crossroads for the export of Russian, Caspian-Central Asian, Iraqi and Iranian oil and even gas to Europe.


http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-09-10/competing-gas-pipelines-are-fueling-syrian-war-migrant-crisis


linkster



Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 2622



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/09/17 4:04 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Howee wrote:
If footage of innocents suffering painful deaths at the hands of warmongers is adequate reason to fire missiles, then why have there been no missiles fired in Sudan. Or Rwanda. Etc.


And why is the US giving support to the Saudi's dropping cluster bombs in Yemen?

There is no moral high ground to what is going on in the middle east.


Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 10541
Location: Oklahoma (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/09/17 9:46 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

linkster wrote:
Howee wrote:
If footage of innocents suffering painful deaths at the hands of warmongers is adequate reason to fire missiles, then why have there been no missiles fired in Sudan. Or Rwanda. Etc.


And why is the US giving support to the Saudi's dropping cluster bombs in Yemen?

There is no moral high ground to what is going on in the middle east.


And yet....Americans still puzzle over the intensity of ISIS' hatred of us.



_________________
Oklahoma: Go Sooners!

<--Maddie Manning, Sooner Extraordinaire
justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 5987
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/10/17 12:03 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Howee wrote:
linkster wrote:
Howee wrote:
If footage of innocents suffering painful deaths at the hands of warmongers is adequate reason to fire missiles, then why have there been no missiles fired in Sudan. Or Rwanda. Etc.


And why is the US giving support to the Saudi's dropping cluster bombs in Yemen?

There is no moral high ground to what is going on in the middle east.


And yet....Americans still puzzle over the intensity of ISIS' hatred of us.

ISIS hates everyone who is not ISIS. Just look at the way they treat other Muslims, or even worse how they treat the Yazidi.



_________________
Covfefe when the walls fell.
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 8076
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump is not president.


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/10/17 9:59 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

idea of a "liberal bias" in the media again shot to shit. Brian Williams calling the missile launches "beautiful" and some other asshole pundit proclaiming "Trump became president" tonight.

--------------------

Trump tweeted in 2013 that, “The president must get congressional approval before attacking Syria – big mistake if he does not!”


He also commented on Obama needing congressional approval for an attack on Syria, or the lack of a need for an attack on Syria, at least three other times.



More fun facts:

Obama travel expenses after 8 yrs.- $97 million

Trump's after 10 weeks- $23 million.

Trump has golfed every 5.6 days since inauguration.



_________________
Silly, stupid white people.
cthskzfn



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 8076
Location: In a world where a dbag like Trump is not president.


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/10/17 10:08 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

justintyme wrote:
Ugh. Suggesting that the US used chemical weapons on civilians in some sort of false flag attack is beyond the pale. Actually have a shred of evidence for such a thing before going all "Info-Wars".

Personally, I am willing to give our military and intellegence communities the benefit of the doubt and see how all of this plays out. I don't really like the idea of getting more involved in the festering quagmire that is that region right now, but I really don't know if there was any right answer to Assad using chemical weapons.


This is how it played out:

Trump told Putin (prior to US Congress), who then told Assad. All critical things at the minor airbase were moved out of harm's way. Missiles take out the mess hall and old planes (which will be replaced by state-of-the-art Russian planes) and the same airbase was used, the day after the strike, to bomb the same area that was gassed.

Sect of state Tillerson says there is no change in US policy in the region.

It was Wag the Dog and distraction from the Russia probe. Look over here, media, missiles!!!



_________________
Silly, stupid white people.
linkster



Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 2622



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/10/17 6:36 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

In further support of it being a false flag operation:

http://web.archive.org/web/20130129213824/http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2270219/U-S-planned-launch-chemical-weapon-attack-Syria-blame-Assad.html

Quote:
Leaked emails have allegedly proved that the White House gave the green light to a chemical weapons attack in Syria that could be blamed on Assad's regime and in turn, spur international military action in the devastated country.
A report released on Monday contains an email exchange between two senior officials at British-based contractor Britam Defence where a scheme 'approved by Washington' is outlined explaining that Qatar would fund rebel forces in Syria to use chemical weapons.



Notice that this article goes back to 2013.


justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 5987
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/10/17 7:19 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

linkster wrote:
In further support of it being a false flag operation:

http://web.archive.org/web/20130129213824/http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2270219/U-S-planned-launch-chemical-weapon-attack-Syria-blame-Assad.html

Quote:
Leaked emails have allegedly proved that the White House gave the green light to a chemical weapons attack in Syria that could be blamed on Assad's regime and in turn, spur international military action in the devastated country.
A report released on Monday contains an email exchange between two senior officials at British-based contractor Britam Defence where a scheme 'approved by Washington' is outlined explaining that Qatar would fund rebel forces in Syria to use chemical weapons.



Notice that this article goes back to 2013.


You have got to be kidding me. This is literally from InfoWars...

From the "article":

"According to Infowars.com, the December 25 email was sent from Britam's Business Development Director David Goulding to company founder Philip Doughty."

This is the same site that pushed the whole Pizzagate crap. It's clear that people are going to just believe what they want to believe and accept any worthless piece of shit "report" that comes along that echoes a narrative they already believe (or want to believe) no matter the source.

Evidence based thinking, and even moreso, the ability to distinguish actual evidence from utter rubbish seems to be in shorter and shorter supply these days.



_________________
Covfefe when the walls fell.
mercfan3



Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 17514



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/10/17 8:46 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

justintyme wrote:
linkster wrote:
In further support of it being a false flag operation:

http://web.archive.org/web/20130129213824/http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2270219/U-S-planned-launch-chemical-weapon-attack-Syria-blame-Assad.html

Quote:
Leaked emails have allegedly proved that the White House gave the green light to a chemical weapons attack in Syria that could be blamed on Assad's regime and in turn, spur international military action in the devastated country.
A report released on Monday contains an email exchange between two senior officials at British-based contractor Britam Defence where a scheme 'approved by Washington' is outlined explaining that Qatar would fund rebel forces in Syria to use chemical weapons.



Notice that this article goes back to 2013.


You have got to be kidding me. This is literally from InfoWars...

From the "article":

"According to Infowars.com, the December 25 email was sent from Britam's Business Development Director David Goulding to company founder Philip Doughty."

This is the same site that pushed the whole Pizzagate crap. It's clear that people are going to just believe what they want to believe and accept any worthless piece of shit "report" that comes along that echoes a narrative they already believe (or want to believe) no matter the source.

Evidence based thinking, and even moreso, the ability to distinguish actual evidence from utter rubbish seems to be in shorter and shorter supply these days.


There is a significant amount evidence to suggest Putin and Assad were tipped off.

Infowars is completely crap though..

And, I'm not necessarily opposed to military action in Syria. I'm opposed to going about it the wrong way (Which this administration did, in a few ways)..and honestly, I'm against *this* administration using any kind of military action. Laughing



_________________
TALENT

What it takes to play a gay pirate, a gay candymaker, and a gay mad hatter, and still land a role as John Dilinger.
justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 5987
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/10/17 11:10 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

mercfan3 wrote:

There is a significant amount evidence to suggest Putin and Assad were tipped off.

Yes. But I was under the impression that was common knowledge and openly admitted to. I believe they warned Putin so the Russians could move their equipment, and minimize the risk of esculation with Russia. They had to assume that Russia would then inform Syria.

And don't get me wrong, the idea of Trump leading us to war scares the shit out of me. I would not be in favor of any additional unilateral actions going forward.

But the strike itself was not out of line and was not in and of itself an overreach of presidential power. Basically, I asked myself if Obama had done this, would I have felt he overstepped? And my answer was no.



_________________
Covfefe when the walls fell.
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 53897
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/11/17 6:54 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

mercfan3 wrote:
And, I'm not necessarily opposed to military action in Syria


Why not? What do we gain from sticking another fist into the Middle East tar baby?



_________________
I'm not afraid of anyone. I'm not shy about anything. Not even my big nose.
mercfan3



Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 17514



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/11/17 4:33 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
mercfan3 wrote:
And, I'm not necessarily opposed to military action in Syria


Why not? What do we gain from sticking another fist into the Middle East tar baby?


By Military action, I don't necessarily mean bombing them.

But I can see possibilities where I wouldn't be against it. (For instance, if the people asked us for help, or if we were working with members of the United Nations..etc..)

I don't expect this administration to work with anyone, nor do I foresee them making correct decisions.



_________________
TALENT

What it takes to play a gay pirate, a gay candymaker, and a gay mad hatter, and still land a role as John Dilinger.
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » Area 51 All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin