FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Trump on Syria
Trump on Syria
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Can anyone actually win there, or will it go on for decades without a solution?" Yes, and the right people are winning. Assad and the Baathists are odious creatures, but the alternative is worse! I do not like Putin, he is a brutal senior KGB interrogation officer. But he is a pragmatist and understands some basic truths about the character of the Arab and is supporting the faction that will protect Russia from the worst excesses of the Arabs. It is a shame we refuse to do the same but instead help overthrow the men whose existence was protecting us. | |||
"Can anyone actually win there, or will it go on for decades without a solution? Yes, and the right people are winning. Assad and the Baathists are odious creatures, but the alternative is worse! I do not like Putin, he is a brutal senior KGB interrogation officer. But he is a pragmatist and understands some basic truths about the character of the Arab and is supporting the faction that will protect Russia from the worst excesses of the Arabs. It is a shame we refuse to do the same but instead help overthrow the men whose existence was protecting us." My guess is that Russia will throw it's lot in with Iran, who are fast becoming the powerhouse in the Middle East. | |||
"Can anyone actually win there, or will it go on for decades without a solution?" the british amongst others have interfered in syria for a century and the problems have rolled on on for 100 years as a result..... it'd be a safe bet that it will continue for many more decades yet | |||
| |||
"My guess is that Russia will throw it's lot in with Iran, who are fast becoming the powerhouse in the Middle East. " And so should we... Fact is Al Qaeda, IS, Boko Haram and all the other radical Islamic international terrorist groups as Salafists, that's Suni Muslims inspired and funded by Saudi followers of the ultra orthodox and extremist version of Suni Islam know as Wahhabism. Iran is the home of Shia Islam, and funnily enough the only thing the Salafists hate more than Kafas (unbelievers) are Shias who they consider to be apostates. | |||
| |||
"Better the despot dictator you know than the despot dictator you don't know." Better the despot dictator who looks north and thinks I want what they have and will kill those who want to destroy it than the despot dictator who looks north and thinks INFIDELS! I want to kill them destroy all they have built. | |||
"Can anyone actually win there, or will it go on for decades without a solution? Yes, and the right people are winning. Assad and the Baathists are odious creatures, but the alternative is worse! I do not like Putin, he is a brutal senior KGB interrogation officer. But he is a pragmatist and understands some basic truths about the character of the Arab and is supporting the faction that will protect Russia from the worst excesses of the Arabs. It is a shame we refuse to do the same but instead help overthrow the men whose existence was protecting us."  
If anybody has doubts about the concept of a lesser evil ..... just remember Muammar Gaddafi , Libya and the whole "Arab Spring" Utopia BS !   | |||
"Can anyone actually win there, or will it go on for decades without a solution? Yes, and the right people are winning. Assad and the Baathists are odious creatures, but the alternative is worse! I do not like Putin, he is a brutal senior KGB interrogation officer. But he is a pragmatist and understands some basic truths about the character of the Arab and is supporting the faction that will protect Russia from the worst excesses of the Arabs. It is a shame we refuse to do the same but instead help overthrow the men whose existence was protecting us." How can the 'right people be winning' when they have used sarin against their own citizens? | |||
"if you see all the trump tweets on syria over the last 3 years, they have all said "don't go into syria and get the us involved" obama actually put it to congress and it was rejected.... so to see the trump administration yesterday blame the obama administration for doing nothing smacks of revisionism.... " At least Trump , unlike Obama , is not establishing "red lines" 
Of course these so called "red lines " were disregarded and crossed By Assad !
What did Obama do ? Nothing !
That actually came to define his catastrophic foreign policy that is in part responsible for the vacuum that helped create ISIS !
| |||
"Can anyone actually win there, or will it go on for decades without a solution? Yes, and the right people are winning. Assad and the Baathists are odious creatures, but the alternative is worse! I do not like Putin, he is a brutal senior KGB interrogation officer. But he is a pragmatist and understands some basic truths about the character of the Arab and is supporting the faction that will protect Russia from the worst excesses of the Arabs. It is a shame we refuse to do the same but instead help overthrow the men whose existence was protecting us. How can the 'right people be winning' when they have used sarin against their own citizens?" Well "the right people winning" is a relative Statement ! No one is in favour of using any Chemical weapon on anyone , but , war is a messy business, and a civil war even more so ! Innocent people always get caught in the middle , and lets not forget the Propaganda war too ! In this regard , its unfortunately "normal" for all sides to use the civilian non combatant population as human shields ! Its always a win win situation for the side that does it ! So you have the choice of attacking , using all means , and thus causing harm to your enemy , and killing/harming civilians in the process , or refrain from doing so , in order not to harm non combatants, thus losing ground and advantage ! Hope this helps answer your question ! | |||
"Can anyone actually win there, or will it go on for decades without a solution? Yes, and the right people are winning. Assad and the Baathists are odious creatures, but the alternative is worse! I do not like Putin, he is a brutal senior KGB interrogation officer. But he is a pragmatist and understands some basic truths about the character of the Arab and is supporting the faction that will protect Russia from the worst excesses of the Arabs. It is a shame we refuse to do the same but instead help overthrow the men whose existence was protecting us. How can the 'right people be winning' when they have used sarin against their own citizens? Well "the right people winning" is a relative Statement ! No one is in favour of using any Chemical weapon on anyone , but , war is a messy business, and a civil war even more so ! Innocent people always get caught in the middle , and lets not forget the Propaganda war too ! In this regard , its unfortunately "normal" for all sides to use the civilian non combatant population as human shields ! Its always a win win situation for the side that does it ! So you have the choice of attacking , using all means , and thus causing harm to your enemy , and killing/harming civilians in the process , or refrain from doing so , in order not to harm non combatants, thus losing ground and advantage ! Hope this helps answer your question ! "Not really....unless you are arguing for utilitarianism on the basis that the only alternative to Assad is ISIS? That is what they (Russia/Assad) would like us to think. | |||
"Can anyone actually win there, or will it go on for decades without a solution? Yes, and the right people are winning. Assad and the Baathists are odious creatures, but the alternative is worse! I do not like Putin, he is a brutal senior KGB interrogation officer. But he is a pragmatist and understands some basic truths about the character of the Arab and is supporting the faction that will protect Russia from the worst excesses of the Arabs. It is a shame we refuse to do the same but instead help overthrow the men whose existence was protecting us. How can the 'right people be winning' when they have used sarin against their own citizens? Well "the right people winning" is a relative Statement ! No one is in favour of using any Chemical weapon on anyone , but , war is a messy business, and a civil war even more so ! Innocent people always get caught in the middle , and lets not forget the Propaganda war too ! In this regard , its unfortunately "normal" for all sides to use the civilian non combatant population as human shields ! Its always a win win situation for the side that does it ! So you have the choice of attacking , using all means , and thus causing harm to your enemy , and killing/harming civilians in the process , or refrain from doing so , in order not to harm non combatants, thus losing ground and advantage ! Hope this helps answer your question !
Not really....unless you are arguing for utilitarianism on the basis that the only alternative to Assad is ISIS? That is what they (Russia/Assad) would like us to think. "Problem is.... Assad is a better alternative to ISIS !
But... if you have a better solution... Please say what that is .... | |||
"Can anyone actually win there, or will it go on for decades without a solution? Yes, and the right people are winning. Assad and the Baathists are odious creatures, but the alternative is worse! I do not like Putin, he is a brutal senior KGB interrogation officer. But he is a pragmatist and understands some basic truths about the character of the Arab and is supporting the faction that will protect Russia from the worst excesses of the Arabs. It is a shame we refuse to do the same but instead help overthrow the men whose existence was protecting us. How can the 'right people be winning' when they have used sarin against their own citizens? Well "the right people winning" is a relative Statement ! No one is in favour of using any Chemical weapon on anyone , but , war is a messy business, and a civil war even more so ! Innocent people always get caught in the middle , and lets not forget the Propaganda war too ! In this regard , its unfortunately "normal" for all sides to use the civilian non combatant population as human shields ! Its always a win win situation for the side that does it ! So you have the choice of attacking , using all means , and thus causing harm to your enemy , and killing/harming civilians in the process , or refrain from doing so , in order not to harm non combatants, thus losing ground and advantage ! Hope this helps answer your question !
Not really....unless you are arguing for utilitarianism on the basis that the only alternative to Assad is ISIS? That is what they (Russia/Assad) would like us to think.
Problem is.... Assad is a better alternative to ISIS !
But... if you have a better solution... Please say what that is .... "There are no easy answers...but I'm not convinced the only alternative to Assad is ISIS...plus the West turning a blind eye to these war crimes promotes recruitment to the ISIS ideology don't you think? | |||
"Can anyone actually win there, or will it go on for decades without a solution? Yes, and the right people are winning. Assad and the Baathists are odious creatures, but the alternative is worse! I do not like Putin, he is a brutal senior KGB interrogation officer. But he is a pragmatist and understands some basic truths about the character of the Arab and is supporting the faction that will protect Russia from the worst excesses of the Arabs. It is a shame we refuse to do the same but instead help overthrow the men whose existence was protecting us. How can the 'right people be winning' when they have used sarin against their own citizens? Well "the right people winning" is a relative Statement ! No one is in favour of using any Chemical weapon on anyone , but , war is a messy business, and a civil war even more so ! Innocent people always get caught in the middle , and lets not forget the Propaganda war too ! In this regard , its unfortunately "normal" for all sides to use the civilian non combatant population as human shields ! Its always a win win situation for the side that does it ! So you have the choice of attacking , using all means , and thus causing harm to your enemy , and killing/harming civilians in the process , or refrain from doing so , in order not to harm non combatants, thus losing ground and advantage ! Hope this helps answer your question !
Not really....unless you are arguing for utilitarianism on the basis that the only alternative to Assad is ISIS? That is what they (Russia/Assad) would like us to think.
Problem is.... Assad is a better alternative to ISIS !
But... if you have a better solution... Please say what that is ....
There are no easy answers...but I'm not convinced the only alternative to Assad is ISIS...plus the West turning a blind eye to these war crimes promotes recruitment to the ISIS ideology don't you think?"No ! it doesn't , because e for ISIS there is no such thing as War crimes ! In fact , "war Crimes" is a western concept ! Whatever the West does , will always be wrong for Isis or any islamic faction ! For them western culture is the problem , regardless of turning a blind eye or not ! | |||
"Can anyone actually win there, or will it go on for decades without a solution? Yes, and the right people are winning. Assad and the Baathists are odious creatures, but the alternative is worse! I do not like Putin, he is a brutal senior KGB interrogation officer. But he is a pragmatist and understands some basic truths about the character of the Arab and is supporting the faction that will protect Russia from the worst excesses of the Arabs. It is a shame we refuse to do the same but instead help overthrow the men whose existence was protecting us. How can the 'right people be winning' when they have used sarin against their own citizens? Well "the right people winning" is a relative Statement ! No one is in favour of using any Chemical weapon on anyone , but , war is a messy business, and a civil war even more so ! Innocent people always get caught in the middle , and lets not forget the Propaganda war too ! In this regard , its unfortunately "normal" for all sides to use the civilian non combatant population as human shields ! Its always a win win situation for the side that does it ! So you have the choice of attacking , using all means , and thus causing harm to your enemy , and killing/harming civilians in the process , or refrain from doing so , in order not to harm non combatants, thus losing ground and advantage ! Hope this helps answer your question !
Not really....unless you are arguing for utilitarianism on the basis that the only alternative to Assad is ISIS? That is what they (Russia/Assad) would like us to think.
Problem is.... Assad is a better alternative to ISIS !
But... if you have a better solution... Please say what that is ....
There are no easy answers...but I'm not convinced the only alternative to Assad is ISIS...plus the West turning a blind eye to these war crimes promotes recruitment to the ISIS ideology don't you think?
No ! it doesn't , because e for ISIS there is no such thing as War crimes ! In fact , "war Crimes" is a western concept !
Whatever the West does , will always be wrong for Isis or any islamic faction ! For them western culture is the problem , regardless of turning a blind eye or not ! "So you don't think that Western intervention in Iraq & Afghanistan has contributed to the growth of so-called ISIS? | |||
"Can anyone actually win there, or will it go on for decades without a solution? Yes, and the right people are winning. Assad and the Baathists are odious creatures, but the alternative is worse! I do not like Putin, he is a brutal senior KGB interrogation officer. But he is a pragmatist and understands some basic truths about the character of the Arab and is supporting the faction that will protect Russia from the worst excesses of the Arabs. It is a shame we refuse to do the same but instead help overthrow the men whose existence was protecting us. How can the 'right people be winning' when they have used sarin against their own citizens? Well "the right people winning" is a relative Statement ! No one is in favour of using any Chemical weapon on anyone , but , war is a messy business, and a civil war even more so ! Innocent people always get caught in the middle , and lets not forget the Propaganda war too ! In this regard , its unfortunately "normal" for all sides to use the civilian non combatant population as human shields ! Its always a win win situation for the side that does it ! So you have the choice of attacking , using all means , and thus causing harm to your enemy , and killing/harming civilians in the process , or refrain from doing so , in order not to harm non combatants, thus losing ground and advantage ! Hope this helps answer your question !
Not really....unless you are arguing for utilitarianism on the basis that the only alternative to Assad is ISIS? That is what they (Russia/Assad) would like us to think.
Problem is.... Assad is a better alternative to ISIS !
But... if you have a better solution... Please say what that is ....
There are no easy answers...but I'm not convinced the only alternative to Assad is ISIS...plus the West turning a blind eye to these war crimes promotes recruitment to the ISIS ideology don't you think?
No ! it doesn't , because e for ISIS there is no such thing as War crimes ! In fact , "war Crimes" is a western concept !
Whatever the West does , will always be wrong for Isis or any islamic faction ! For them western culture is the problem , regardless of turning a blind eye or not !
So you don't think that Western intervention in Iraq & Afghanistan has contributed to the growth of so-called ISIS?"It certainly helped, but lets not forget the history of that region ! Its never really been very stable, conflict being more or less normal in the last 2000 years !  | |||
"Can anyone actually win there, or will it go on for decades without a solution? Yes, and the right people are winning. Assad and the Baathists are odious creatures, but the alternative is worse! I do not like Putin, he is a brutal senior KGB interrogation officer. But he is a pragmatist and understands some basic truths about the character of the Arab and is supporting the faction that will protect Russia from the worst excesses of the Arabs. It is a shame we refuse to do the same but instead help overthrow the men whose existence was protecting us. How can the 'right people be winning' when they have used sarin against their own citizens?" allegedly. they denied it was them and to be honest why would using a chemical weapon benefit assad knowing the worlds watching. it wouldnt and makes no sense. obviously though the west who have been gagging for regime change for years are going to point the finger at assad becsuse it suits their agenda. | |||
"Can anyone actually win there, or will it go on for decades without a solution? Yes, and the right people are winning. Assad and the Baathists are odious creatures, but the alternative is worse! I do not like Putin, he is a brutal senior KGB interrogation officer. But he is a pragmatist and understands some basic truths about the character of the Arab and is supporting the faction that will protect Russia from the worst excesses of the Arabs. It is a shame we refuse to do the same but instead help overthrow the men whose existence was protecting us. How can the 'right people be winning' when they have used sarin against their own citizens? allegedly. they denied it was them and to be honest why would using a chemical weapon benefit assad knowing the worlds watching. it wouldnt and makes no sense. obviously though the west who have been gagging for regime change for years are going to point the finger at assad becsuse it suits their agenda." Bombing hospitals in Aleppo with the whole world watching doesnt help Assad's reputation, yet he does it anyway. Using barrel bombs on civilian centres with the world watching doesn't help Assad's reputation, yet he does it anyway. Previously using chemical weapons on his own people while the whole world was watching didn't help Assad's reputation, yet he did it anyway. Are you starting to see a pattern here? He doesn't give a shit about what the rest of the world thinks, he just wants to win by any means possible. If he doesn't, he's likely to be murdered or executed like other regional dictators, including he good buddy Sadam. | |||
"Can anyone actually win there, or will it go on for decades without a solution? Yes, and the right people are winning. Assad and the Baathists are odious creatures, but the alternative is worse! I do not like Putin, he is a brutal senior KGB interrogation officer. But he is a pragmatist and understands some basic truths about the character of the Arab and is supporting the faction that will protect Russia from the worst excesses of the Arabs. It is a shame we refuse to do the same but instead help overthrow the men whose existence was protecting us. How can the 'right people be winning' when they have used sarin against their own citizens? allegedly. they denied it was them and to be honest why would using a chemical weapon benefit assad knowing the worlds watching. it wouldnt and makes no sense. obviously though the west who have been gagging for regime change for years are going to point the finger at assad becsuse it suits their agenda. Bombing hospitals in Aleppo with the whole world watching doesnt help Assad's reputation, yet he does it anyway. Using barrel bombs on civilian centres with the world watching doesn't help Assad's reputation, yet he does it anyway. Previously using chemical weapons on his own people while the whole world was watching didn't help Assad's reputation, yet he did it anyway. Are you starting to see a pattern here? He doesn't give a shit about what the rest of the world thinks, he just wants to win by any means possible. If he doesn't, he's likely to be murdered or executed like other regional dictators, including he good buddy Sadam." Who's bombing civilians in Mosul? | |||
" Who's bombing civilians in Mosul?" Now now Kellyanne, we're talking about Syria. | |||
"Can anyone actually win there, or will it go on for decades without a solution? Yes, and the right people are winning. Assad and the Baathists are odious creatures, but the alternative is worse! I do not like Putin, he is a brutal senior KGB interrogation officer. But he is a pragmatist and understands some basic truths about the character of the Arab and is supporting the faction that will protect Russia from the worst excesses of the Arabs. It is a shame we refuse to do the same but instead help overthrow the men whose existence was protecting us. How can the 'right people be winning' when they have used sarin against their own citizens? allegedly. they denied it was them and to be honest why would using a chemical weapon benefit assad knowing the worlds watching. it wouldnt and makes no sense. obviously though the west who have been gagging for regime change for years are going to point the finger at assad becsuse it suits their agenda. Bombing hospitals in Aleppo with the whole world watching doesnt help Assad's reputation, yet he does it anyway. Using barrel bombs on civilian centres with the world watching doesn't help Assad's reputation, yet he does it anyway. Previously using chemical weapons on his own people while the whole world was watching didn't help Assad's reputation, yet he did it anyway. Are you starting to see a pattern here? He doesn't give a shit about what the rest of the world thinks, he just wants to win by any means possible. If he doesn't, he's likely to be murdered or executed like other regional dictators, including he good buddy Sadam." is he bombing schools etc though? They denied that too...and its the same western govenents pointing the finger to put the blame on a government they want rid off. I find it funny that there was no rebels in syria at all until the "rebels" that distabilised libiya was over and done with all of a sudden theres rebels over in syria. they are the same group of people trained by cia to distabilise the middle east and now the focus is on syria and has been for a few years. if it wasnt for russia vetoing actiom a few years back syria would have gone the same as libya | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"British reporter in the US on 10 o'clock news said it was a "certainty" that there would be military action, US Govt is now just thrashing out the method, targets etc. Wonder how Russia will take that? "well russia interestingly moved a bit away from al-assad on this one.... the phrased use "russia's support for al-assad is not unconditional" which in polit-o-speak is backing away a bit.... what you might see is the US try to take out syrian air bases..... | |||
"There are no easy answers...but I'm not convinced the only alternative to Assad is ISIS...plus the West turning a blind eye to these war crimes promotes recruitment to the ISIS ideology don't you think?" You are wrong, your thinking is wrong, your approach to the problem is wrong. That is wrong, wrong, wrong on your part! The problem is you are projecting your values which are shaped by a Christian influenced society on to an Islamic influenced society. The question is not about which is best and are the alternatives Baathist or IS. The question is do we want to see secular or Islamic dominance of the middle east? And if we choose Islamic dominance do we want it to be Suni or Shia? There are no other choices, all are repressive, all are violent. Some are pro the industrialised would, some are for the most part neutral, some want to destroy anything that is not approved by the Koan. For some reason we have been overthrowing ever pro industrialised world regime and destroying their power bases. Now we wring our hands when they ate replaced by organisations who wish to destroy us and wonder how it is that their killers are now reaching us. Hint, they no longer are fighting the likes of Gaddafi or Saddam who used to stand between them and us. Of course you are free to believe what ever you like, but when the Donald removes Assad then there will be one less pro East/West hard man to hold the Islamist's in check and the will move on to their next target (us). | |||
"Can anyone actually win there, or will it go on for decades without a solution? Yes, and the right people are winning. Assad and the Baathists are odious creatures, but the alternative is worse! I do not like Putin, he is a brutal senior KGB interrogation officer. But he is a pragmatist and understands some basic truths about the character of the Arab and is supporting the faction that will protect Russia from the worst excesses of the Arabs. It is a shame we refuse to do the same but instead help overthrow the men whose existence was protecting us." Wow I'm amazed, I find myself actually agreeing with you, luckily I'm sitting down | |||
"British reporter in the US on 10 o'clock news said it was a "certainty" that there would be military action, US Govt is now just thrashing out the method, targets etc. Wonder how Russia will take that?
well russia interestingly moved a bit away from al-assad on this one.... the phrased use "russia's support for al-assad is not unconditional"
which in polit-o-speak is backing away a bit....
what you might see is the US try to take out syrian air bases....."Yup, that's my take on it too, just hope they don't take out any Russian planes or pilots, not sure Putin would sit still for that. | |||
"British reporter in the US on 10 o'clock news said it was a "certainty" that there would be military action, US Govt is now just thrashing out the method, targets etc. Wonder how Russia will take that? "It will be done by cruise missiles on his air bases, they won't send planes in | |||
| |||
"So the Donald ordered 93 missiles to be fired at a Syrian airbase and the US is calling it proporpitinal... At least I'll say one thing for the man, he seems to understand that for a strike to be effective it must do real damage and be followed by the 'no mate, if you think that was over the top have another go and I'll show you over the top' message. Shame he has just helped IS..." Not surprised. I agree it will destabilise the relationship. But Assad has been their target for a while. So I wonder if they'll do the same thing as Iraq and Lybia and grow support for ISIS. I do feel they're throwing petrol into a fire. | |||
| |||
| |||
"British reporter in the US on 10 o'clock news said it was a "certainty" that there would be military action, US Govt is now just thrashing out the method, targets etc. Wonder how Russia will take that?
well russia interestingly moved a bit away from al-assad on this one.... the phrased use "russia's support for al-assad is not unconditional"
which in polit-o-speak is backing away a bit....
what you might see is the US try to take out syrian air bases....."you missed the part where they also said that the west need to stop with all the allegations and provide proof. but the west isnt interested in that..the war drums are banging away. it just wouldnt make any sense for assad to order a chemical attack especially as with thehelp of russia they are winning agsinst the rebels/isis. And only last week the trump said that assad can stay (well he said the syrains can choose their own leader). So why now go and order a chemical attack nahhh the man might be an arse but hes not stupid, the only people to benefit from this would be the ones wanting regime change. so I am thinking this is a false flag and blame being put on assad. and im surprised trump is gullable enough to fall for it after going on about fske news fake news for months. ah well this isnt looking to good now, possible war with russia/syria and also china/north korea. | |||
"What does Russia gain by supporting Syria? " Everyone in the West is being sold a crock when they are led to believe that Russia are backing Assad to gain a strategic advantage in the Middle East. Look at a map, and see where Syria and Iraq are relative to other countries! You will note that firstly Syria does not control access to the Mediterranean from the black sea (that is via the Bosphorus and is totally controlled by Turkey. However Syria and Iraq were a strong secular cork blocking the land route for the spread of radical Islam out of Saudi. Since the start of the latest Salafist expansion in the 70's first the USSR and now the Russians have been backing any secular regime that opposes Salafism and especially those who located between Saudi and the Russian borders. We (the West) in our turn have supported any group that destabilised the countries that the USSR and Russia support because we see Russia as our enemy and an enemy of our enemy is our friend. This has been a catastrophic mistake! And like most dicks (and we are dicks) we have dug ourselves a big hole and refuse to stop digging even when the walls are starting to collapse and as a result we will bury ourselves rather than admit we picked the wrong side and should be helping Russia and the secularists put down the Salafists. | |||
"first it seems that the original report I heard exaggerated the number of missiles fired, now the reports say 59. I really hope this does not turn out to be another damp squib. What does Russia gain by supporting Syria? Everyone in the West is being sold a crock when they are led to believe that Russia are backing Assad to gain a strategic advantage in the Middle East. Look at a map, and see where Syria and Iraq are relative to other countries! You will note that firstly Syria does not control access to the Mediterranean from the black sea (that is via the Bosphorus and is totally controlled by Turkey. However Syria and Iraq were a strong secular cork blocking the land route for the spread of radical Islam out of Saudi. Since the start of the latest Salafist expansion in the 70's first the USSR and now the Russians have been backing any secular regime that opposes Salafism and especially those who located between Saudi and the Russian borders. We (the West) in our turn have supported any group that destabilised the countries that the USSR and Russia support because we see Russia as our enemy and an enemy of our enemy is our friend. This has been a catastrophic mistake! And like most dicks (and we are dicks) we have dug ourselves a big hole and refuse to stop digging even when the walls are starting to collapse and as a result we will bury ourselves rather than admit we picked the wrong side and should be helping Russia and the secularists put down the Salafists." | |||
| |||
| |||
"Well at least we can stop with this nonsense that trump was in putins pocket, trump wont cause wars, trump is a move away from old us foreign policy.. Etc etc Meet the new boss, same as the old boss" unfortunately thats what it seems like. Was reading a RT article on trumps reaction to syria on face book last night and there was hundreds of posts from Americans (and other nations) that was behind trump and in suppprt of him right up until this point and think hes completely wrong and dont believe it was assad that even did this chemical attack. He is gonna lose support of his followers if he carrys on. | |||
"Well at least we can stop with this nonsense that trump was in putins pocket, trump wont cause wars, trump is a move away from old us foreign policy.. Etc etc Meet the new boss, same as the old boss unfortunately thats what it seems like. Was reading a RT article on trumps reaction to syria on face book last night and there was hundreds of posts from Americans (and other nations) that was behind trump and in suppprt of him right up until this point and think hes completely wrong and dont believe it was assad that even did this chemical attack. He is gonna lose support of his followers if he carrys on." Good news then. | |||
"Well at least we can stop with this nonsense that trump was in putins pocket, trump wont cause wars, trump is a move away from old us foreign policy.. Etc etc Meet the new boss, same as the old boss unfortunately thats what it seems like. Was reading a RT article on trumps reaction to syria on face book last night and there was hundreds of posts from Americans (and other nations) that was behind trump and in suppprt of him right up until this point and think hes completely wrong and dont believe it was assad that even did this chemical attack. He is gonna lose support of his followers if he carrys on.Good news then. "Good news if you've never liked trump sure...no so good news for any kind of peace any time soon  | |||
"Some people think its ok helping a butcher like Assad.They are away with the fairies.That stain will never wash out if that happens." Some people fail to understand that you can't impose your ethics and morals onto people who have a different value system. All you can do is either isolate them completely or hold your nose and support the side that is least dangerous to you. They are all butchers, at least Assad was a secularist. If he falls he will be replaced by a radical Islamist. How do you think that will work out for us? We need to put aside our 'humanitarian, liberal idealism' and start using good old 'enlightened self interest' when making judgements about how we react to what happens in the middle east. For the last 3000 years blood thirsty butchers have been leading armies of blood thirsty butchers north and East from the middle east and sub Saharan Africa to enslave and slaughter all before them. FFS China built a wall to keep them out! And Europeans have spent the last 2700 years since the Battle of Thermopylae attempting to keep them out! Why would anyone be so naive as to think that because they suddenly get cars, planes, bombs and guns that they would change and stop being butchers! FFS WAKE UP TO THE REALITY OF WHAT ARABS ARE! | |||
| |||
"Some people think its ok helping a butcher like Assad.They are away with the fairies.That stain will never wash out if that happens. Some people fail to understand that you can't impose your ethics and morals onto people who have a different value system. All you can do is either isolate them completely or hold your nose and support the side that is least dangerous to you. They are all butchers, at least Assad was a secularist. If he falls he will be replaced by a radical Islamist. How do you think that will work out for us? We need to put aside our 'humanitarian, liberal idealism' and start using good old 'enlightened self interest' when making judgements about how we react to what happens in the middle east. For the last 3000 years blood thirsty butchers have been leading armies of blood thirsty butchers north and East from the middle east and sub Saharan Africa to enslave and slaughter all before them. FFS China built a wall to keep them out! And Europeans have spent the last 2700 years since the Battle of Thermopylae attempting to keep them out! Why would anyone be so naive as to think that because they suddenly get cars, planes, bombs and guns that they would change and stop being butchers! FFS WAKE UP TO THE REALITY OF WHAT ARABS ARE!" I don't often agree with what you say mate but on this one I think you are probably right  | |||
"Some people think its ok helping a butcher like Assad.They are away with the fairies.That stain will never wash out if that happens. Some people fail to understand that you can't impose your ethics and morals onto people who have a different value system. All you can do is either isolate them completely or hold your nose and support the side that is least dangerous to you. They are all butchers, at least Assad was a secularist. If he falls he will be replaced by a radical Islamist. How do you think that will work out for us? We need to put aside our 'humanitarian, liberal idealism' and start using good old 'enlightened self interest' when making judgements about how we react to what happens in the middle east. For the last 3000 years blood thirsty butchers have been leading armies of blood thirsty butchers north and East from the middle east and sub Saharan Africa to enslave and slaughter all before them. FFS China built a wall to keep them out! And Europeans have spent the last 2700 years since the Battle of Thermopylae attempting to keep them out! Why would anyone be so naive as to think that because they suddenly get cars, planes, bombs and guns that they would change and stop being butchers! FFS WAKE UP TO THE REALITY OF WHAT ARABS ARE!" Nice hate speech | |||
| |||
 | |||
| |||
"if you see all the trump tweets on syria over the last 3 years, they have all said "don't go into syria and get the us involved" obama actually put it to congress and it was rejected.... so to see the trump administration yesterday blame the obama administration for doing nothing smacks of revisionism.... " OOPS!! Obama actually bottled it. As CUC he didn't need any backing from congress. Syria crossed his "Red line" and he bottled it, leaving him looking weak and leading to more and more atrocities. Trump has simply done what Obama didn't have the guts for. And has upset Russia, which puts a lie to those who said he would spend his time sucking up to Putin. | |||
" Nice hate speech "Not a hate speech. And that you can so casually dismiss what I have said is very disturbing because I believe you are just voicing the opinion of the majority. Thousands of years of history mean nothing to you, there are no lessons there for you to learn. Syria's leader is barbaric so must be removed. Who will replace him is not an issue to you all that matters is that he must be removed. Of course when he is replaced by someone even worse who wants to kill us you will refuse to accept that you are in any way responsible for making all of us less safe, because how could you tell that was going to happen. You don't have a crystal ball and can't predict the future. It's not like there is thousands of years of history to look at or the modern experiences in neighbouring countries you could have used to make an educated guess on how things would turn out in Syria. And there has been no significant change in the patterns of migration or attacks across Europe or the UK because of our destabilisation of the middle east that we could use to extrapolate how destabilising Syria might work out for us.
Give me a break with your PC crap. | |||
"Just replace the word "arab " with the word "Jew" in the above rant and ask yourself do i sound like a fucking nazi. "And there you show how ignorant you are! By the way I call you ignorant because you ignore everything I said and then twist the last sentence to make something of it it is not. Let me point out to you that Arabs are a people, they are made up of many religions including Jews, Christians and Muslims. One of the things that separates Arab Jews, Christians and Muslims from the Jews, Christians and Muslims of the rest of the world is where in the rest of the world for the most part they all live in peace in the Arab world they don't, in fact Arabs consider any religious difference grounds to kill. As I have said there are thousands of years of recorded history, it is all depressingly similar. Arabs do not change, they are blood thirsty butchers. | |||
"Just replace the word "arab " with the word "Jew" in the above rant and ask yourself do i sound like a fucking nazi.
And there you show how ignorant you are!
By the way I call you ignorant because you ignore everything I said and then twist the last sentence to make something of it it is not.
Let me point out to you that Arabs are a people, they are made up of many religions including Jews, Christians and Muslims. One of the things that separates Arab Jews, Christians and Muslims from the Jews, Christians and Muslims of the rest of the world is where in the rest of the world for the most part they all live in peace in the Arab world they don't, in fact Arabs consider any religious difference grounds to kill.
As I have said there are thousands of years of recorded history, it is all depressingly similar. Arabs do not change, they are blood thirsty butchers." | |||
"Just replace the word "arab " with the word "Jew" in the above rant and ask yourself do i sound like a fucking nazi.
And there you show how ignorant you are!
By the way I call you ignorant because you ignore everything I said and then twist the last sentence to make something of it it is not.
Let me point out to you that Arabs are a people, they are made up of many religions including Jews, Christians and Muslims. One of the things that separates Arab Jews, Christians and Muslims from the Jews, Christians and Muslims of the rest of the world is where in the rest of the world for the most part they all live in peace in the Arab world they don't, in fact Arabs consider any religious difference grounds to kill.
As I have said there are thousands of years of recorded history, it is all depressingly similar. Arabs do not change, they are blood thirsty butchers."You would benefit from the words above the temple of Apollo ."Know thyself". My response still stands true . | |||
"Can anyone actually win there, or will it go on for decades without a solution? Yes, and the right people are winning. Assad and the Baathists are odious creatures, but the alternative is worse! I do not like Putin, he is a brutal senior KGB interrogation officer. But he is a pragmatist and understands some basic truths about the character of the Arab and is supporting the faction that will protect Russia from the worst excesses of the Arabs. It is a shame we refuse to do the same but instead help overthrow the men whose existence was protecting us. How can the 'right people be winning' when they have used sarin against their own citizens?" Going on another thread its rather a moot point whether a bomb of satin was dropped or whether a conventional weapon was dropped on a stolen cache of arms which happened to contain Sarin (most likely) I now await news reports of deaths from Sarin from the US airstrikes on the very place they say the attack originated from. I won't hold my breath and neither I suspect is anyone else in the attacked area. S | |||
"Just replace the word "arab " with the word "Jew" in the above rant and ask yourself do i sound like a fucking nazi.
And there you show how ignorant you are!
By the way I call you ignorant because you ignore everything I said and then twist the last sentence to make something of it it is not.
Let me point out to you that Arabs are a people, they are made up of many religions including Jews, Christians and Muslims. One of the things that separates Arab Jews, Christians and Muslims from the Jews, Christians and Muslims of the rest of the world is where in the rest of the world for the most part they all live in peace in the Arab world they don't, in fact Arabs consider any religious difference grounds to kill.
As I have said there are thousands of years of recorded history, it is all depressingly similar. Arabs do not change, they are blood thirsty butchers. You would benefit from the words above the temple of Apollo ."Know thyself". My response still stands true . "All history is full of bloodthirsty butchers from almost all races & religions. They just have a global playing field & "better" toys to do it with now. 
S | |||
"Well at least we can stop with this nonsense that trump was in putins pocket, trump wont cause wars, trump is a move away from old us foreign policy.. Etc etc Meet the new boss, same as the old boss unfortunately thats what it seems like. Was reading a RT article on trumps reaction to syria on face book last night and there was hundreds of posts from Americans (and other nations) that was behind trump and in suppprt of him right up until this point and think hes completely wrong and dont believe it was assad that even did this chemical attack. He is gonna lose support of his followers if he carrys on.Good news then.
Good news if you've never liked trump sure...no so good news for any kind of peace any time soon ". Neo liberals love a good moral war, didnt you know that. Sure they dont like that nasty Assad dropping sarin but there all in favour of the West bombing the fuck out of the dictators with depleted uranium, i mean we just killed a million civilians in Iraq, surely we should do the same in Syria in the name of freedom and democracy | |||
"Well at least we can stop with this nonsense that trump was in putins pocket, trump wont cause wars, trump is a move away from old us foreign policy.. Etc etc Meet the new boss, same as the old boss unfortunately thats what it seems like. Was reading a RT article on trumps reaction to syria on face book last night and there was hundreds of posts from Americans (and other nations) that was behind trump and in suppprt of him right up until this point and think hes completely wrong and dont believe it was assad that even did this chemical attack. He is gonna lose support of his followers if he carrys on.Good news then.
Good news if you've never liked trump sure...no so good news for any kind of peace any time soon .
Neo liberals love a good moral war, didnt you know that.
Sure they dont like that nasty Assad dropping sarin but there all in favour of the West bombing the fuck out of the dictators with depleted uranium, i mean we just killed a million civilians in Iraq, surely we should do the same in Syria in the name of freedom and democracy"......now we have good old war mongering John macaine praising trump...so this is how you win over the liberals. | |||
"Well at least we can stop with this nonsense that trump was in putins pocket, trump wont cause wars, trump is a move away from old us foreign policy.. Etc etc Meet the new boss, same as the old boss unfortunately thats what it seems like. Was reading a RT article on trumps reaction to syria on face book last night and there was hundreds of posts from Americans (and other nations) that was behind trump and in suppprt of him right up until this point and think hes completely wrong and dont believe it was assad that even did this chemical attack. He is gonna lose support of his followers if he carrys on.Good news then.
Good news if you've never liked trump sure...no so good news for any kind of peace any time soon .
Neo liberals love a good moral war, didnt you know that.
Sure they dont like that nasty Assad dropping sarin but there all in favour of the West bombing the fuck out of the dictators with depleted uranium, i mean we just killed a million civilians in Iraq, surely we should do the same in Syria in the name of freedom and democracy"Depleted uranium isn't used in bombs. | |||
"Well at least we can stop with this nonsense that trump was in putins pocket, trump wont cause wars, trump is a move away from old us foreign policy.. Etc etc Meet the new boss, same as the old boss unfortunately thats what it seems like. Was reading a RT article on trumps reaction to syria on face book last night and there was hundreds of posts from Americans (and other nations) that was behind trump and in suppprt of him right up until this point and think hes completely wrong and dont believe it was assad that even did this chemical attack. He is gonna lose support of his followers if he carrys on.Good news then.
Good news if you've never liked trump sure...no so good news for any kind of peace any time soon .
Neo liberals love a good moral war, didnt you know that.
Sure they dont like that nasty Assad dropping sarin but there all in favour of the West bombing the fuck out of the dictators with depleted uranium, i mean we just killed a million civilians in Iraq, surely we should do the same in Syria in the name of freedom and democracy
Depleted uranium isn't used in bombs. "Fuck me, a bomb expert now | |||
"Some people think its ok helping a butcher like Assad.They are away with the fairies.That stain will never wash out if that happens. Some people fail to understand that you can't impose your ethics and morals onto people who have a different value system. All you can do is either isolate them completely or hold your nose and support the side that is least dangerous to you. They are all butchers, at least Assad was a secularist. If he falls he will be replaced by a radical Islamist. How do you think that will work out for us? We need to put aside our 'humanitarian, liberal idealism' and start using good old 'enlightened self interest' when making judgements about how we react to what happens in the middle east. For the last 3000 years blood thirsty butchers have been leading armies of blood thirsty butchers north and East from the middle east and sub Saharan Africa to enslave and slaughter all before them. FFS China built a wall to keep them out! And Europeans have spent the last 2700 years since the Battle of Thermopylae attempting to keep them out! Why would anyone be so naive as to think that because they suddenly get cars, planes, bombs and guns that they would change and stop being butchers! FFS WAKE UP TO THE REALITY OF WHAT ARABS ARE!" That is a racist crook of shit. Arab culture allowed tolerance of different faiths and even secularism upto the end of the 60's. Failure of Western and Soviet backed miltary dictatorships in the 70's led to a search for a new poltical identity. For some where national wealth was stolen by corrupt elites Islam became a useful totem for the extremist to exploit. | |||
"Just replace the word "arab " with the word "Jew" in the above rant and ask yourself do i sound like a fucking nazi.
And there you show how ignorant you are!
By the way I call you ignorant because you ignore everything I said and then twist the last sentence to make something of it it is not.
Let me point out to you that Arabs are a people, they are made up of many religions including Jews, Christians and Muslims. One of the things that separates Arab Jews, Christians and Muslims from the Jews, Christians and Muslims of the rest of the world is where in the rest of the world for the most part they all live in peace in the Arab world they don't, in fact Arabs consider any religious difference grounds to kill.
As I have said there are thousands of years of recorded history, it is all depressingly similar. Arabs do not change, they are blood thirsty butchers."You can't just lump them all together like that anymore than you could lump all "whites" or all "blacks" together. | |||
" Depleted uranium isn't used in bombs. Fuck me, a bomb expert now "It is in fact general knowledge that DU is used in armour piercing projectiles, not bombs. | |||
"Well at least we can stop with this nonsense that trump was in putins pocket, trump wont cause wars, trump is a move away from old us foreign policy.. Etc etc Meet the new boss, same as the old boss" Trumps venture into Syria as the good guy against the bad hombre has little to do with doing the right thing and more about deflection from his ongoing issues with Russian influence and contacts before and during the election.. Knee jerk military action usually doesn't end well.. | |||
" Depleted uranium isn't used in bombs. Fuck me, a bomb expert now
It is in fact general knowledge that DU is used in armour piercing projectiles, not bombs. "Ok a hair splitting expert then | |||
" Depleted uranium isn't used in bombs. Fuck me, a bomb expert now
It is in fact general knowledge that DU is used in armour piercing projectiles, not bombs.
Ok a hair splitting expert then"Bloody experts and their love of facts and precise language | |||
" Depleted uranium isn't used in bombs. Fuck me, a bomb expert now
It is in fact general knowledge that DU is used in armour piercing projectiles, not bombs. "It is indeed, my mate was responsible for the disposal of any surplus when he worked for Royal Ordnance. He stood still when everyone else took a step back when they asked for a volunteer to be H&S manager when the previous incumbent left! | |||
"Well at least we can stop with this nonsense that trump was in putins pocket, trump wont cause wars, trump is a move away from old us foreign policy.. Etc etc Meet the new boss, same as the old boss unfortunately thats what it seems like. Was reading a RT article on trumps reaction to syria on face book last night and there was hundreds of posts from Americans (and other nations) that was behind trump and in suppprt of him right up until this point and think hes completely wrong and dont believe it was assad that even did this chemical attack. He is gonna lose support of his followers if he carrys on.Good news then.
Good news if you've never liked trump sure...no so good news for any kind of peace any time soon .
Neo liberals love a good moral war, didnt you know that.
Sure they dont like that nasty Assad dropping sarin but there all in favour of the West bombing the fuck out of the dictators with depleted uranium, i mean we just killed a million civilians in Iraq, surely we should do the same in Syria in the name of freedom and democracy
Depleted uranium isn't used in bombs. ". Well whatever it's used in, its now all over Iraq followed by a huge rise in birth abnormalities?but have no fear its shelf life is like what a mere billon years so not that longa wait to get back to normality hey?. Oh yes, how is Iraq going since we removed that butcher Saddam who used chemical weapons in his war with Iran? It must be one giant utopia by now!. | |||
| |||
"Well at least we can stop with this nonsense that trump was in putins pocket, trump wont cause wars, trump is a move away from old us foreign policy.. Etc etc Meet the new boss, same as the old boss unfortunately thats what it seems like. Was reading a RT article on trumps reaction to syria on face book last night and there was hundreds of posts from Americans (and other nations) that was behind trump and in suppprt of him right up until this point and think hes completely wrong and dont believe it was assad that even did this chemical attack. He is gonna lose support of his followers if he carrys on.Good news then.
Good news if you've never liked trump sure...no so good news for any kind of peace any time soon .
Neo liberals love a good moral war, didnt you know that.
Sure they dont like that nasty Assad dropping sarin but there all in favour of the West bombing the fuck out of the dictators with depleted uranium, i mean we just killed a million civilians in Iraq, surely we should do the same in Syria in the name of freedom and democracy
Depleted uranium isn't used in bombs. .
Well whatever it's used in, its now all over Iraq followed by a huge rise in birth abnormalities?but have no fear its shelf life is like what a mere billon years so not that longa wait to get back to normality hey?.
Oh yes, how is Iraq going since we removed that butcher Saddam who used chemical weapons in his war with Iran? It must be one giant utopia by now!.
"Do you mean shelf life or half life? | |||
| |||
"Funny how we never see all the pictures and sob stories on the front page of those kids in Iraq dying horrible deaths from DU?" You and I obviously find humour in different things. I dont find dying children funny in the slightest. | |||
"Just replace the word "arab " with the word "Jew" in the above rant and ask yourself do i sound like a fucking nazi.
And there you show how ignorant you are!
By the way I call you ignorant because you ignore everything I said and then twist the last sentence to make something of it it is not.
Let me point out to you that Arabs are a people, they are made up of many religions including Jews, Christians and Muslims. One of the things that separates Arab Jews, Christians and Muslims from the Jews, Christians and Muslims of the rest of the world is where in the rest of the world for the most part they all live in peace in the Arab world they don't, in fact Arabs consider any religious difference grounds to kill.
As I have said there are thousands of years of recorded history, it is all depressingly similar. Arabs do not change, they are blood thirsty butchers."Ask anyone who fought there during the 2nd WW very untrustworthy and as you say bloodthirsty, it is their culture and it wont change in a hurry | |||
"Funny how we never see all the pictures and sob stories on the front page of those kids in Iraq dying horrible deaths from DU? You and I obviously find humour in different things. I dont find dying children funny in the slightest. " . No not funny haha , funny weird, have you never watched goodfellas? | |||
 | |||
"Funny how we never see all the pictures and sob stories on the front page of those kids in Iraq dying horrible deaths from DU? You and I obviously find humour in different things. I dont find dying children funny in the slightest. . No not funny haha , funny weird, have you never watched goodfellas? "Or that classic film Badgerboy | |||
"Funny how we never see all the pictures and sob stories on the front page of those kids in Iraq dying horrible deaths from DU?" Dead children aren't as popular in the news when its our bombs doing the killing.Funny that. | |||
"first it seems that the original report I heard exaggerated the number of missiles fired, now the reports say 59. I really hope this does not turn out to be another damp squib. What does Russia gain by supporting Syria? Everyone in the West is being sold a crock when they are led to believe that Russia are backing Assad to gain a strategic advantage in the Middle East. Look at a map, and see where Syria and Iraq are relative to other countries! You will note that firstly Syria does not control access to the Mediterranean from the black sea (that is via the Bosphorus and is totally controlled by Turkey. However Syria and Iraq were a strong secular cork blocking the land route for the spread of radical Islam out of Saudi. Since the start of the latest Salafist expansion in the 70's first the USSR and now the Russians have been backing any secular regime that opposes Salafism and especially those who located between Saudi and the Russian borders. We (the West) in our turn have supported any group that destabilised the countries that the USSR and Russia support because we see Russia as our enemy and an enemy of our enemy is our friend. This has been a catastrophic mistake! And like most dicks (and we are dicks) we have dug ourselves a big hole and refuse to stop digging even when the walls are starting to collapse and as a result we will bury ourselves rather than admit we picked the wrong side and should be helping Russia and the secularists put down the Salafists." I agree on whole. That said assad has broken international law. I believe the right thing would be to use him to bring stability back to the area before trying to remove him from influence. God knows how you do that though. Itd be the age old issueof westerners deposing a strong man without having a way to fill the power space. | |||
| |||
| |||
"Funny how we never see all the pictures and sob stories on the front page of those kids in Iraq dying horrible deaths from DU? You and I obviously find humour in different things. I dont find dying children funny in the slightest. . No not funny haha , funny weird, have you never watched goodfellas? Or that classic film Badgerboy "I liked the sequel more. Badgerboy 2, stuck in a hole | |||
"first it seems that the original report I heard exaggerated the number of missiles fired, now the reports say 59. I really hope this does not turn out to be another damp squib. What does Russia gain by supporting Syria? Everyone in the West is being sold a crock when they are led to believe that Russia are backing Assad to gain a strategic advantage in the Middle East. Look at a map, and see where Syria and Iraq are relative to other countries! You will note that firstly Syria does not control access to the Mediterranean from the black sea (that is via the Bosphorus and is totally controlled by Turkey. However Syria and Iraq were a strong secular cork blocking the land route for the spread of radical Islam out of Saudi. Since the start of the latest Salafist expansion in the 70's first the USSR and now the Russians have been backing any secular regime that opposes Salafism and especially those who located between Saudi and the Russian borders. We (the West) in our turn have supported any group that destabilised the countries that the USSR and Russia support because we see Russia as our enemy and an enemy of our enemy is our friend. This has been a catastrophic mistake! And like most dicks (and we are dicks) we have dug ourselves a big hole and refuse to stop digging even when the walls are starting to collapse and as a result we will bury ourselves rather than admit we picked the wrong side and should be helping Russia and the secularists put down the Salafists." I need a sit down. I'd struggle to agree more with everything you've said on this thread | |||
"The west won't "go in" as Russia is already there. There is no ISIS in Idlib Provence so it isn't that either. Why he would use such weapons is anyone's guess....but it isn't "western media" that have broken the story.....the facts are there for all to see. Total cluster duck of a situation. Civil war between a despotic dictator.....and a disparate group of a few dozen "rebel" groups some of which are relatively moderate...others allied to Al-Qaeda etc. There isn't a "goodies" and "baddies" in this situation....just different degrees of baddies.....I wish I knew the answer...I wish anyone did. But eventually, like all wars...it has to have some kind of diplomatic solution." . Theres a certain amount of dishonestly and double standards applied to all conflicts. Assad is actually well supported by a large majority of Syrians, however theres a large minority who dont want him, Assad uses violence to control this large minority who dont want him, this is bad. The large minority use violence against him and the large majority to remove him, this we say is good because its good violence, good violence is acceptable, its violence used for the "right reasons", like killing a million Iraqis in the name of freedom and democracy, ruining the entire country of Libya, including making every Libyan desperately? poor for the sake of removing gadafi , removing the Taliban from Afghanistan while turning it from a Shithole to a hellhole is always worth a good moralistic fight because sure were all morally offended by gassed children.. But we never really see the consequences of our moral fights on the front page of the news years later This isnt about morals, trump doesnt actually give a rats arse about Syrians, its never been about morals, its about regime change, power and money, the West couldnt give a shit if the next Assad brutalised the majority or minority of Syrians just that he agrees with us because lord help the sovereign state that doesnt agree with western philosophy. Have you never noticed how Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Iran the three bedrocks of crazy fucked up politics and religious ideology never get into trouble with the West?? Oh yes, its because theyve got leaders who say yes sir no sir three bags full sir dictators to the respected powers that be. Lots of people talk about sovereign states and treaty obligations and the breaking of like the West never do it, the entire history of treatys is littered with broken promises by western states, Israel never complies with any UN mandates, its always breaking international law, so is the UK and the US, France, Canada, Australia, when did we start to bomb Australia with cruise missiles for breaking international law on its treatment of refugees held on remote islands, wheres the cruise missile attacks on Israel for its breaking of international law on building on other people's land. Firing 100 million dollars worth of cruise missiles seems to be the answer for everything if a dying child that bruises our morals is involved, well dont fucking look to hard elsewhere is my answer as dying children are everywhere and if you follow the money in most cases it leads back to the wealthy, so cruise missile bomb Manhattan or Chelsea or Monaco or even better the virgin isles if you must be morally upset at dying children | |||
"first it seems that the original report I heard exaggerated the number of missiles fired, now the reports say 59. I really hope this does not turn out to be another damp squib. What does Russia gain by supporting Syria? Everyone in the West is being sold a crock when they are led to believe that Russia are backing Assad to gain a strategic advantage in the Middle East. Look at a map, and see where Syria and Iraq are relative to other countries! You will note that firstly Syria does not control access to the Mediterranean from the black sea (that is via the Bosphorus and is totally controlled by Turkey. However Syria and Iraq were a strong secular cork blocking the land route for the spread of radical Islam out of Saudi. Since the start of the latest Salafist expansion in the 70's first the USSR and now the Russians have been backing any secular regime that opposes Salafism and especially those who located between Saudi and the Russian borders. We (the West) in our turn have supported any group that destabilised the countries that the USSR and Russia support because we see Russia as our enemy and an enemy of our enemy is our friend. This has been a catastrophic mistake! And like most dicks (and we are dicks) we have dug ourselves a big hole and refuse to stop digging even when the walls are starting to collapse and as a result we will bury ourselves rather than admit we picked the wrong side and should be helping Russia and the secularists put down the Salafists. I agree on whole. That said assad has broken international law. I believe the right thing would be to use him to bring stability back to the area before trying to remove him from influence. God knows how you do that though. Itd be the age old issueof westerners deposing a strong man without having a way to fill the power space." And your evidence that he dropped Sarin rather than dropped coventional bombs hitting Sarin comes from who exactly? S | |||
"first it seems that the original report I heard exaggerated the number of missiles fired, now the reports say 59. I really hope this does not turn out to be another damp squib. What does Russia gain by supporting Syria? Everyone in the West is being sold a crock when they are led to believe that Russia are backing Assad to gain a strategic advantage in the Middle East. Look at a map, and see where Syria and Iraq are relative to other countries! You will note that firstly Syria does not control access to the Mediterranean from the black sea (that is via the Bosphorus and is totally controlled by Turkey. However Syria and Iraq were a strong secular cork blocking the land route for the spread of radical Islam out of Saudi. Since the start of the latest Salafist expansion in the 70's first the USSR and now the Russians have been backing any secular regime that opposes Salafism and especially those who located between Saudi and the Russian borders. We (the West) in our turn have supported any group that destabilised the countries that the USSR and Russia support because we see Russia as our enemy and an enemy of our enemy is our friend. This has been a catastrophic mistake! And like most dicks (and we are dicks) we have dug ourselves a big hole and refuse to stop digging even when the walls are starting to collapse and as a result we will bury ourselves rather than admit we picked the wrong side and should be helping Russia and the secularists put down the Salafists. I agree on whole. That said assad has broken international law. I believe the right thing would be to use him to bring stability back to the area before trying to remove him from influence. God knows how you do that though. Itd be the age old issueof westerners deposing a strong man without having a way to fill the power space. And your evidence that he dropped Sarin rather than dropped coventional bombs hitting Sarin comes from who exactly? S" Hamish de Bretton-Gordon (how could you fail to get commission with a name like that) who was the former Commanding Officer of the UK CBRN (chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear) Regiment, as well as being the Commanding Officer of NATO's Rapid Reaction CBRN battalion says "No I think this [claim] is pretty fanciful, no doubt the Russians trying to protect their allies,” he said. “Axiomatically, if you blow up sarin, you destroy it.” “It’s very clear it’s a sarin attack,” he added. “The view that it’s an al-Qaida or rebel stockpile of sarin that’s been blown up in an explosion, I think is completely unsustainable and completely untrue.” | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
" Sorry if this came out insulting but I really urge people to think, why in Earth would Assad bomb his own people using sarin gas for no reason when he's coming close to winning the war." If you're sorry to be insulting, it's actually quite easy to avoid calling people retarded. It's also nowhere near as simple as 'Assad wouldn't bomb his own people'. You are aware there are plenty of rebels opposing him? https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/07/syria-nerve-agent-attack-why-it-made-sense-to-assad http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/sad-syria-chemical-attack-idlib-khan-sheikhoun-bashar-al-assad-regime-israel-mossad-intelligence-a7670291.html | |||
"Can anyone actually win there, or will it go on for decades without a solution? Yes, and the right people are winning. Assad and the Baathists are odious creatures, but the alternative is worse! I do not like Putin, he is a brutal senior KGB interrogation officer. But he is a pragmatist and understands some basic truths about the character of the Arab and is supporting the faction that will protect Russia from the worst excesses of the Arabs. It is a shame we refuse to do the same but instead help overthrow the men whose existence was protecting us. How can the 'right people be winning' when they have used sarin against their own citizens? Going on another thread its rather a moot point whether a bomb of satin was dropped or whether a conventional weapon was dropped on a stolen cache of arms which happened to contain Sarin (most likely) I now await news reports of deaths from Sarin from the US airstrikes on the very place they say the attack originated from. I won't hold my breath and neither I suspect is anyone else in the attacked area. S " Sarin and other chemical weapons are unstable until weaponised, any explosions will incinerate most of anything stored there... although personally if I carried out attacks I wouldn't leave a "smoking gun", evidence of chemicals would be moved. | |||
"Think logically people. The Syrian government was coming close to winning the war. Why would they compromise that by bombing its own people with "sarin" gas. The US tracked the Syrian jet that bombed the the terrorists in idlib to have launched from that airfield, but that's all they tracked. There was a known chemical weapons depot in that neighbourhood, the bomb was dropped close by to it, and caused a leak in the chemical munitions which resulted in them exploding. The terrorists are KNOWN for using chemical weapons on innocent civilians, and yet, some retards still believe assad bombed his own people with chemical weapons. Whoever believes this shit is a special kind of stupid. I've been following the news of this since it happened via multiple sources (such as Al Masdar news and other news outlets) in order for me to not get biased news like from CNN. Sorry if this came out insulting but I really urge people to think, why in Earth would Assad bomb his own people using sarin gas for no reason when he's coming close to winning the war. The US didn't even investigate. They just decided to fire missiles. The cunts" "...caused a leak in the chemical munitions which resulted in them exploding" Nope, cant happen, modern weapons that can be used to deliver chemical weapons don't just leak and blow up. | |||
| |||
"Can anyone actually win there, or will it go on for decades without a solution? Yes, and the right people are winning. Assad and the Baathists are odious creatures, but the alternative is worse! I do not like Putin, he is a brutal senior KGB interrogation officer. But he is a pragmatist and understands some basic truths about the character of the Arab and is supporting the faction that will protect Russia from the worst excesses of the Arabs. It is a shame we refuse to do the same but instead help overthrow the men whose existence was protecting us. How can the 'right people be winning' when they have used sarin against their own citizens? Going on another thread its rather a moot point whether a bomb of satin was dropped or whether a conventional weapon was dropped on a stolen cache of arms which happened to contain Sarin (most likely) I now await news reports of deaths from Sarin from the US airstrikes on the very place they say the attack originated from. I won't hold my breath and neither I suspect is anyone else in the attacked area. S Sarin and other chemical weapons are unstable until weaponised, any explosions will incinerate most of anything stored there... although personally if I carried out attacks I wouldn't leave a "smoking gun", evidence of chemicals would be moved." Actually ...its the other way round !
Most of these chemical weapons are stable until weaponised !
They are mostly binary compounds that are stored separately , and only become active when mixed prior to deployment !
They have a variable shelf life , depending on type and and storage method !
While preprepared shells do exist , most store their binary chemicals in barrels and only load them mixed or not into the chosen vector prior to use !
In this case , it seems to me that Assad is only responsible for bombing a storage site , no actually using it !
And lets not forget that Isis and other rebel groups have Chemical weapons too !
If it had been a proper Sarin attack the victim count would have been much much higher !
| |||
" It's also nowhere near as simple as 'Assad wouldn't bomb his own people'. You are aware there are plenty of rebels opposing him? " They're not rebels. There never were rebels. Watch this congress-womans experience when she went to Syria, she says the Syrian people told her that they were never rebels, they were foreign rapists and murderers. https://youtu.be/NRVcLS-EHJU | |||
"first it seems that the original report I heard exaggerated the number of missiles fired, now the reports say 59. I really hope this does not turn out to be another damp squib. What does Russia gain by supporting Syria? Everyone in the West is being sold a crock when they are led to believe that Russia are backing Assad to gain a strategic advantage in the Middle East. Look at a map, and see where Syria and Iraq are relative to other countries! You will note that firstly Syria does not control access to the Mediterranean from the black sea (that is via the Bosphorus and is totally controlled by Turkey. However Syria and Iraq were a strong secular cork blocking the land route for the spread of radical Islam out of Saudi. Since the start of the latest Salafist expansion in the 70's first the USSR and now the Russians have been backing any secular regime that opposes Salafism and especially those who located between Saudi and the Russian borders. We (the West) in our turn have supported any group that destabilised the countries that the USSR and Russia support because we see Russia as our enemy and an enemy of our enemy is our friend. This has been a catastrophic mistake! And like most dicks (and we are dicks) we have dug ourselves a big hole and refuse to stop digging even when the walls are starting to collapse and as a result we will bury ourselves rather than admit we picked the wrong side and should be helping Russia and the secularists put down the Salafists. I agree on whole. That said assad has broken international law. I believe the right thing would be to use him to bring stability back to the area before trying to remove him from influence. God knows how you do that though. Itd be the age old issueof westerners deposing a strong man without having a way to fill the power space. And your evidence that he dropped Sarin rather than dropped coventional bombs hitting Sarin comes from who exactly? S Hamish de Bretton-Gordon (how could you fail to get commission with a name like that) who was the former Commanding Officer of the UK CBRN (chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear) Regiment, as well as being the Commanding Officer of NATO's Rapid Reaction CBRN battalion says "No I think this [claim] is pretty fanciful, no doubt the Russians trying to protect their allies,” he said. “Axiomatically, if you blow up sarin, you destroy it.” “It’s very clear it’s a sarin attack,” he added. “The view that it’s an al-Qaida or rebel stockpile of sarin that’s been blown up in an explosion, I think is completely unsustainable and completely untrue.”" . So your in favour of the trump bombing then?. Hes got no congressional approval for it and no UN approval for it, no real evidence, not even waited around for "experts" to examine the evidence and come to a conclusion. | |||
"first it seems that the original report I heard exaggerated the number of missiles fired, now the reports say 59. I really hope this does not turn out to be another damp squib. What does Russia gain by supporting Syria? Everyone in the West is being sold a crock when they are led to believe that Russia are backing Assad to gain a strategic advantage in the Middle East. Look at a map, and see where Syria and Iraq are relative to other countries! You will note that firstly Syria does not control access to the Mediterranean from the black sea (that is via the Bosphorus and is totally controlled by Turkey. However Syria and Iraq were a strong secular cork blocking the land route for the spread of radical Islam out of Saudi. Since the start of the latest Salafist expansion in the 70's first the USSR and now the Russians have been backing any secular regime that opposes Salafism and especially those who located between Saudi and the Russian borders. We (the West) in our turn have supported any group that destabilised the countries that the USSR and Russia support because we see Russia as our enemy and an enemy of our enemy is our friend. This has been a catastrophic mistake! And like most dicks (and we are dicks) we have dug ourselves a big hole and refuse to stop digging even when the walls are starting to collapse and as a result we will bury ourselves rather than admit we picked the wrong side and should be helping Russia and the secularists put down the Salafists. I agree on whole. That said assad has broken international law. I believe the right thing would be to use him to bring stability back to the area before trying to remove him from influence. God knows how you do that though. Itd be the age old issueof westerners deposing a strong man without having a way to fill the power space. And your evidence that he dropped Sarin rather than dropped coventional bombs hitting Sarin comes from who exactly? S Hamish de Bretton-Gordon (how could you fail to get commission with a name like that) who was the former Commanding Officer of the UK CBRN (chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear) Regiment, as well as being the Commanding Officer of NATO's Rapid Reaction CBRN battalion says "No I think this [claim] is pretty fanciful, no doubt the Russians trying to protect their allies,” he said. “Axiomatically, if you blow up sarin, you destroy it.” “It’s very clear it’s a sarin attack,” he added. “The view that it’s an al-Qaida or rebel stockpile of sarin that’s been blown up in an explosion, I think is completely unsustainable and completely untrue.”. So your in favour of the trump bombing then?. Hes got no congressional approval for it and no UN approval for it, no real evidence, not even waited around for "experts" to examine the evidence and come to a conclusion. " Actually this is a very skilful play by Trump !
He has achieved several objectives with this , and the only weak point is him alleging that it was because of a Sarin attack by Assad ! but that in its self can be put to good use !
In this case , as the saying goes "killing two birds with one stone" , he has done more that two !
Another master stroke from the Donald ! | |||
"Funny how we never see all the pictures and sob stories on the front page of those kids in Iraq dying horrible deaths from DU?Dead children aren't as popular in the news when its our bombs doing the killing.Funny that. " ... | |||
"What does Russia gain by supporting Syria? " Air bases on NATO's southern flank and an all year round massive naval base on the Mediterranean. | |||
"The west won't "go in" as Russia is already there. There is no ISIS in Idlib Provence so it isn't that either. Why he would use such weapons is anyone's guess....but it isn't "western media" that have broken the story.....the facts are there for all to see. Total cluster duck of a situation. Civil war between a despotic dictator.....and a disparate group of a few dozen "rebel" groups some of which are relatively moderate...others allied to Al-Qaeda etc. There isn't a "goodies" and "baddies" in this situation....just different degrees of baddies.....I wish I knew the answer...I wish anyone did. But eventually, like all wars...it has to have some kind of diplomatic solution.. Theres a certain amount of dishonestly and double standards applied to all conflicts. Assad is actually well supported by a large majority of Syrians, however theres a large minority who dont want him, Assad uses violence to control this large minority who dont want him, this is bad. The large minority use violence against him and the large majority to remove him, this we say is good because its good violence, good violence is acceptable, its violence used for the "right reasons", like killing a million Iraqis in the name of freedom and democracy, ruining the entire country of Libya, including making every Libyan desperately? poor for the sake of removing gadafi , removing the Taliban from Afghanistan while turning it from a Shithole to a hellhole is always worth a good moralistic fight because sure were all morally offended by gassed children.. But we never really see the consequences of our moral fights on the front page of the news years later This isnt about morals, trump doesnt actually give a rats arse about Syrians, its never been about morals, its about regime change, power and money, the West couldnt give a shit if the next Assad brutalised the majority or minority of Syrians just that he agrees with us because lord help the sovereign state that doesnt agree with western philosophy. Have you never noticed how Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Iran the three bedrocks of crazy fucked up politics and religious ideology never get into trouble with the West?? Oh yes, its because theyve got leaders who say yes sir no sir three bags full sir dictators to the respected powers that be. Lots of people talk about sovereign states and treaty obligations and the breaking of like the West never do it, the entire history of treatys is littered with broken promises by western states, Israel never complies with any UN mandates, its always breaking international law, so is the UK and the US, France, Canada, Australia, when did we start to bomb Australia with cruise missiles for breaking international law on its treatment of refugees held on remote islands, wheres the cruise missile attacks on Israel for its breaking of international law on building on other people's land. Firing 100 million dollars worth of cruise missiles seems to be the answer for everything if a dying child that bruises our morals is involved, well dont fucking look to hard elsewhere is my answer as dying children are everywhere and if you follow the money in most cases it leads back to the wealthy, so cruise missile bomb Manhattan or Chelsea or Monaco or even better the virgin isles if you must be morally upset at dying children" Bang on sickboy. The world is full of hypocrites. | |||
"Just replace the word "arab " with the word "Jew" in the above rant and ask yourself do i sound like a fucking nazi.
And there you show how ignorant you are!
By the way I call you ignorant because you ignore everything I said and then twist the last sentence to make something of it it is not.
Let me point out to you that Arabs are a people, they are made up of many religions including Jews, Christians and Muslims. One of the things that separates Arab Jews, Christians and Muslims from the Jews, Christians and Muslims of the rest of the world is where in the rest of the world for the most part they all live in peace in the Arab world they don't, in fact Arabs consider any religious difference grounds to kill.
As I have said there are thousands of years of recorded history, it is all depressingly similar. Arabs do not change, they are blood thirsty butchers."That's an extremely distorted view of history. The reason why there are Christian Arabs, Shia Muslim Arabs, Sunni Muslims and even Guebers (worshipers of fire, light and enlightenment) Arabs is because, traditionally, throughout history, Islam has adopted are far more tolerant approach to various believes and faiths the Christianity, especially Western Christianity, traditionally did. I'd really like to know where you source you information from with regard to Arab history because, wherever it's from, it seems totally contradictory to the reality of the facts. The reason why there are so many indigenous faiths in the mostly Muslim Arab world is because people of those faiths where aloud to live there in relative peace. The reason why throughout most of Christian Europe the indigenous people in any one area tend to be all of onw faith is because if you weren't you tended to be horribly killed. | |||
"Can anyone actually win there, or will it go on for decades without a solution? Yes, and the right people are winning. Assad and the Baathists are odious creatures, but the alternative is worse! I do not like Putin, he is a brutal senior KGB interrogation officer. But he is a pragmatist and understands some basic truths about the character of the Arab and is supporting the faction that will protect Russia from the worst excesses of the Arabs. It is a shame we refuse to do the same but instead help overthrow the men whose existence was protecting us. How can the 'right people be winning' when they have used sarin against their own citizens? Going on another thread its rather a moot point whether a bomb of satin was dropped or whether a conventional weapon was dropped on a stolen cache of arms which happened to contain Sarin (most likely) I now await news reports of deaths from Sarin from the US airstrikes on the very place they say the attack originated from. I won't hold my breath and neither I suspect is anyone else in the attacked area. S Sarin and other chemical weapons are unstable until weaponised, any explosions will incinerate most of anything stored there... although personally if I carried out attacks I wouldn't leave a "smoking gun", evidence of chemicals would be moved. Actually ...its the other way round !
Most of these chemical weapons are stable until weaponised !
They are mostly binary compounds that are stored separately , and only become active when mixed prior to deployment !
They have a variable shelf life , depending on type and and storage method !
While preprepared shells do exist , most store their binary chemicals in barrels and only load them mixed or not into the chosen vector prior to use !
In this case , it seems to me that Assad is only responsible for bombing a storage site , no actually using it !
And lets not forget that Isis and other rebel groups have Chemical weapons too !
If it had been a proper Sarin attack the victim count would have been much much higher !
"So, we have the Russians and Syrians saying "Let the inspectors go in and check"... bearing in mind they would have cleared away any evidence... not forgetting that the Russians were warned BEFORE the airstrike in order for them to evacuate their personnel.. then we have this guy, who knows exactly what he is talking about... "Hamish de Bretton-Gordon (how could you fail to get commission with a name like that) who was the former Commanding Officer of the UK CBRN (chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear) Regiment, as well as being the Commanding Officer of NATO's Rapid Reaction CBRN battalion says "No I think this [claim] is pretty fanciful, no doubt the Russians trying to protect their allies,” he said. “Axiomatically, if you blow up sarin, you destroy it.” “It’s very clear it’s a sarin attack,” he added. “The view that it’s an al-Qaida or rebel stockpile of sarin that’s been blown up in an explosion, I think is completely unsustainable and completely untrue.”" ... well, I know who I believe. | |||
"Can anyone actually win there, or will it go on for decades without a solution? Yes, and the right people are winning. Assad and the Baathists are odious creatures, but the alternative is worse! I do not like Putin, he is a brutal senior KGB interrogation officer. But he is a pragmatist and understands some basic truths about the character of the Arab and is supporting the faction that will protect Russia from the worst excesses of the Arabs. It is a shame we refuse to do the same but instead help overthrow the men whose existence was protecting us. How can the 'right people be winning' when they have used sarin against their own citizens? Going on another thread its rather a moot point whether a bomb of satin was dropped or whether a conventional weapon was dropped on a stolen cache of arms which happened to contain Sarin (most likely) I now await news reports of deaths from Sarin from the US airstrikes on the very place they say the attack originated from. I won't hold my breath and neither I suspect is anyone else in the attacked area. S Sarin and other chemical weapons are unstable until weaponised, any explosions will incinerate most of anything stored there... although personally if I carried out attacks I wouldn't leave a "smoking gun", evidence of chemicals would be moved. Actually ...its the other way round !
Most of these chemical weapons are stable until weaponised !
They are mostly binary compounds that are stored separately , and only become active when mixed prior to deployment !
They have a variable shelf life , depending on type and and storage method !
While preprepared shells do exist , most store their binary chemicals in barrels and only load them mixed or not into the chosen vector prior to use !
In this case , it seems to me that Assad is only responsible for bombing a storage site , no actually using it !
And lets not forget that Isis and other rebel groups have Chemical weapons too !
If it had been a proper Sarin attack the victim count would have been much much higher !
So, we have the Russians and Syrians saying "Let the inspectors go in and check"... bearing in mind they would have cleared away any evidence... not forgetting that the Russians were warned BEFORE the airstrike in order for them to evacuate their personnel.. then we have this guy, who knows exactly what he is talking about...
"Hamish de Bretton-Gordon (how could you fail to get commission with a name like that) who was the former Commanding Officer of the UK CBRN (chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear) Regiment, as well as being the Commanding Officer of NATO's Rapid Reaction CBRN battalion says "No I think this [claim] is pretty fanciful, no doubt the Russians trying to protect their allies,” he said. “Axiomatically, if you blow up sarin, you destroy it.”
“It’s very clear it’s a sarin attack,” he added. “The view that it’s an al-Qaida or rebel stockpile of sarin that’s been blown up in an explosion, I think is completely unsustainable and completely untrue.”"
... well, I know who I believe."Of course you do ! 
That statement you quote was tailored for people like you !
For people , or general public who wont bother to check issues because of their technical nature !
In my case , my miltary CBRN training may be a bit rusty since it was back in the 80ties ,but these days with the Internet , it takes little effort to brush up on the subject | |||
| |||
| |||
"Can anyone actually win there, or will it go on for decades without a solution? Yes, and the right people are winning. Assad and the Baathists are odious creatures, but the alternative is worse! I do not like Putin, he is a brutal senior KGB interrogation officer. But he is a pragmatist and understands some basic truths about the character of the Arab and is supporting the faction that will protect Russia from the worst excesses of the Arabs. It is a shame we refuse to do the same but instead help overthrow the men whose existence was protecting us. How can the 'right people be winning' when they have used sarin against their own citizens? Going on another thread its rather a moot point whether a bomb of satin was dropped or whether a conventional weapon was dropped on a stolen cache of arms which happened to contain Sarin (most likely) I now await news reports of deaths from Sarin from the US airstrikes on the very place they say the attack originated from. I won't hold my breath and neither I suspect is anyone else in the attacked area. S Sarin and other chemical weapons are unstable until weaponised, any explosions will incinerate most of anything stored there... although personally if I carried out attacks I wouldn't leave a "smoking gun", evidence of chemicals would be moved. Actually ...its the other way round !
Most of these chemical weapons are stable until weaponised !
They are mostly binary compounds that are stored separately , and only become active when mixed prior to deployment !
They have a variable shelf life , depending on type and and storage method !
While preprepared shells do exist , most store their binary chemicals in barrels and only load them mixed or not into the chosen vector prior to use !
In this case , it seems to me that Assad is only responsible for bombing a storage site , no actually using it !
And lets not forget that Isis and other rebel groups have Chemical weapons too !
If it had been a proper Sarin attack the victim count would have been much much higher !
So, we have the Russians and Syrians saying "Let the inspectors go in and check"... bearing in mind they would have cleared away any evidence... not forgetting that the Russians were warned BEFORE the airstrike in order for them to evacuate their personnel.. then we have this guy, who knows exactly what he is talking about...
"Hamish de Bretton-Gordon (how could you fail to get commission with a name like that) who was the former Commanding Officer of the UK CBRN (chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear) Regiment, as well as being the Commanding Officer of NATO's Rapid Reaction CBRN battalion says "No I think this [claim] is pretty fanciful, no doubt the Russians trying to protect their allies,” he said. “Axiomatically, if you blow up sarin, you destroy it.”
“It’s very clear it’s a sarin attack,” he added. “The view that it’s an al-Qaida or rebel stockpile of sarin that’s been blown up in an explosion, I think is completely unsustainable and completely untrue.”"
... well, I know who I believe.
Of course you do !
That statement you quote was tailored for people like you !
For people , or general public who wont bother to check issues because of their technical nature !
In my case , my miltary CBRN training may be a bit rusty since it was back in the 80ties ,but these days with the Internet , it takes little effort to brush up on the subject "Be careful making assumptions! I did my full CBRN instructors course only a few years ago, so I'm rather more up to date than you. | |||
| |||
"I think abit of common sense is need if the Russians wanted to gas Syria alot more then a few kids would die " No-one is claiming that the Russians took any part in the use of chemical weapons. | |||
| |||
"Can anyone actually win there, or will it go on for decades without a solution? Yes, and the right people are winning. Assad and the Baathists are odious creatures, but the alternative is worse! I do not like Putin, he is a brutal senior KGB interrogation officer. But he is a pragmatist and understands some basic truths about the character of the Arab and is supporting the faction that will protect Russia from the worst excesses of the Arabs. It is a shame we refuse to do the same but instead help overthrow the men whose existence was protecting us. How can the 'right people be winning' when they have used sarin against their own citizens? Going on another thread its rather a moot point whether a bomb of satin was dropped or whether a conventional weapon was dropped on a stolen cache of arms which happened to contain Sarin (most likely) I now await news reports of deaths from Sarin from the US airstrikes on the very place they say the attack originated from. I won't hold my breath and neither I suspect is anyone else in the attacked area. S Sarin and other chemical weapons are unstable until weaponised, any explosions will incinerate most of anything stored there... although personally if I carried out attacks I wouldn't leave a "smoking gun", evidence of chemicals would be moved. Actually ...its the other way round !
Most of these chemical weapons are stable until weaponised !
They are mostly binary compounds that are stored separately , and only become active when mixed prior to deployment !
They have a variable shelf life , depending on type and and storage method !
While preprepared shells do exist , most store their binary chemicals in barrels and only load them mixed or not into the chosen vector prior to use !
In this case , it seems to me that Assad is only responsible for bombing a storage site , no actually using it !
And lets not forget that Isis and other rebel groups have Chemical weapons too !
If it had been a proper Sarin attack the victim count would have been much much higher !
So, we have the Russians and Syrians saying "Let the inspectors go in and check"... bearing in mind they would have cleared away any evidence... not forgetting that the Russians were warned BEFORE the airstrike in order for them to evacuate their personnel.. then we have this guy, who knows exactly what he is talking about...
"Hamish de Bretton-Gordon (how could you fail to get commission with a name like that) who was the former Commanding Officer of the UK CBRN (chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear) Regiment, as well as being the Commanding Officer of NATO's Rapid Reaction CBRN battalion says "No I think this [claim] is pretty fanciful, no doubt the Russians trying to protect their allies,” he said. “Axiomatically, if you blow up sarin, you destroy it.”
“It’s very clear it’s a sarin attack,” he added. “The view that it’s an al-Qaida or rebel stockpile of sarin that’s been blown up in an explosion, I think is completely unsustainable and completely untrue.”"
... well, I know who I believe.
Of course you do !
That statement you quote was tailored for people like you !
For people , or general public who wont bother to check issues because of their technical nature !
In my case , my miltary CBRN training may be a bit rusty since it was back in the 80ties ,but these days with the Internet , it takes little effort to brush up on the subject
Be careful making assumptions!
I did my full CBRN instructors course only a few years ago, so I'm rather more up to date than you."If.... that is the case , then you should be in a better position to evaluate the situation from a purely technical point of view ..... but you havnt or have chosen not to , for some reason ! Here is the problem : According to the statement by Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, wich you defend and believe : " "No I think this [claim] is pretty fanciful, no doubt the Russians trying to protect their allies,” he said. “Axiomatically, if you blow up sarin, you destroy it.” BS ! That is not necessarily the case ! Why ? Because if the explosion that blows up the place where the Sarin is stored either in drums , or in ready to use shells , is not powerful enough , it might just spread the stuff all over the place ! Some might be destroyed , but some might just be damaged and leak ! Also , depending on the type and quantity of the explosive involved might not generate enough heat to destroy the chemical in question , be it Sarin or other ! If you have the training you claim , then you should also know that the safest way to safely eliminate these weapons is mainly by incineration , or neutralisation, by water and/or other chemicals ! Blowing them up is an extreme field expedient only used as a last resort and in very special conditions. " It’s very clear it’s a sarin attack,” he added. “The view that it’s an al-Qaida or rebel stockpile of sarin that’s been blown up in an explosion, I think is completely unsustainable and completely untrue.”" BS again , but I can understand why he would say something stupid like that ! Its purely for public consumption, and its called "covering your ass" after you fucked up ! But if you choose to believe it .... its your right !
And.... as we have learned the hard way these people always.... tell you the truth... Dont they ? | |||
"Why not just Stop all Bombing of civilians ? Any place ? Anytime ? Anywhere ? By All Sides !!!!!" Yes... in an ideal world , with civilised people, or that at least adhere to international conventions !
Not the cse here is it ? | |||
"Can anyone actually win there, or will it go on for decades without a solution? Yes, and the right people are winning. Assad and the Baathists are odious creatures, but the alternative is worse! I do not like Putin, he is a brutal senior KGB interrogation officer. But he is a pragmatist and understands some basic truths about the character of the Arab and is supporting the faction that will protect Russia from the worst excesses of the Arabs. It is a shame we refuse to do the same but instead help overthrow the men whose existence was protecting us. How can the 'right people be winning' when they have used sarin against their own citizens? Going on another thread its rather a moot point whether a bomb of satin was dropped or whether a conventional weapon was dropped on a stolen cache of arms which happened to contain Sarin (most likely) I now await news reports of deaths from Sarin from the US airstrikes on the very place they say the attack originated from. I won't hold my breath and neither I suspect is anyone else in the attacked area. S Sarin and other chemical weapons are unstable until weaponised, any explosions will incinerate most of anything stored there... although personally if I carried out attacks I wouldn't leave a "smoking gun", evidence of chemicals would be moved. Actually ...its the other way round !
Most of these chemical weapons are stable until weaponised !
They are mostly binary compounds that are stored separately , and only become active when mixed prior to deployment !
They have a variable shelf life , depending on type and and storage method !
While preprepared shells do exist , most store their binary chemicals in barrels and only load them mixed or not into the chosen vector prior to use !
In this case , it seems to me that Assad is only responsible for bombing a storage site , no actually using it !
And lets not forget that Isis and other rebel groups have Chemical weapons too !
If it had been a proper Sarin attack the victim count would have been much much higher !
So, we have the Russians and Syrians saying "Let the inspectors go in and check"... bearing in mind they would have cleared away any evidence... not forgetting that the Russians were warned BEFORE the airstrike in order for them to evacuate their personnel.. then we have this guy, who knows exactly what he is talking about...
"Hamish de Bretton-Gordon (how could you fail to get commission with a name like that) who was the former Commanding Officer of the UK CBRN (chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear) Regiment, as well as being the Commanding Officer of NATO's Rapid Reaction CBRN battalion says "No I think this [claim] is pretty fanciful, no doubt the Russians trying to protect their allies,” he said. “Axiomatically, if you blow up sarin, you destroy it.”
“It’s very clear it’s a sarin attack,” he added. “The view that it’s an al-Qaida or rebel stockpile of sarin that’s been blown up in an explosion, I think is completely unsustainable and completely untrue.”"
... well, I know who I believe.
Of course you do !
That statement you quote was tailored for people like you !
For people , or general public who wont bother to check issues because of their technical nature !
In my case , my miltary CBRN training may be a bit rusty since it was back in the 80ties ,but these days with the Internet , it takes little effort to brush up on the subject
Be careful making assumptions!
I did my full CBRN instructors course only a few years ago, so I'm rather more up to date than you.
If.... that is the case , then you should be in a better position to evaluate the situation from a purely technical point of view ..... but you havnt or have chosen not to , for some reason !
Here is the problem : According to the statement by Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, wich you defend and believe :
" "No I think this [claim] is pretty fanciful, no doubt the Russians trying to protect their allies,” he said. “Axiomatically, if you blow up sarin, you destroy it.” BS !
That is not necessarily the case ! Why ?
Because if the explosion that blows up the place where the Sarin is stored either in drums , or in ready to use shells , is not powerful enough , it might just spread the stuff all over the place ! Some might be destroyed , but some might just be damaged and leak !
Also , depending on the type and quantity of the explosive involved might not generate enough heat to destroy the chemical in question , be it Sarin or other !
If you have the training you claim , then you should also know that the safest way to safely eliminate these weapons is mainly by incineration , or neutralisation, by water and/or other chemicals ! Blowing them up is an extreme field expedient only used as a last resort and in very special conditions.
" It’s very clear it’s a sarin attack,” he added. “The view that it’s an al-Qaida or rebel stockpile of sarin that’s been blown up in an explosion, I think is completely unsustainable and completely untrue.”"
BS again , but I can understand why he would say something stupid like that !
Its purely for public consumption, and its called "covering your ass" after you fucked up !
But if you choose to believe it .... its your right !
And.... as we have learned the hard way these people always.... tell you the truth... Dont they ? "Given the fact that the Russians were warned about the impending attack, don't you think its feasible that the remaining evidence was removed? Of the two scenarios, the first being that it was the Syrian Airforce who carried out a small scale targeted chemical attack, and the second being that the rebels had somehow gotten hold of some chemical weapons (in this case Sarin) and their munitions got hit by an airstrike which also disseminated viable chemicals, given Assads history of using chemical weapons, and the complete refusal to admit to it even after it has been proven, I think the first scenario is the most likely. Assad probably felt that after the Obama "red line" failure, and the fact that Trump was distracted by North Korea and had virtually said that he wasn't that interested in Syria, that he could test the waters with impunity. If the rebels did get hold of, or manufacture chemical weapons, my feeling is that it would be one of the easier to use/deliver, more robust and less complicated/unstable types. Forgive me for not spelling it out further for you, I've no wish to turn this into a blueprint for someone to try it... nor do I want SO19 accessing my front door with a big red key! | |||
"Can anyone actually win there, or will it go on for decades without a solution? Yes, and the right people are winning. Assad and the Baathists are odious creatures, but the alternative is worse! I do not like Putin, he is a brutal senior KGB interrogation officer. But he is a pragmatist and understands some basic truths about the character of the Arab and is supporting the faction that will protect Russia from the worst excesses of the Arabs. It is a shame we refuse to do the same but instead help overthrow the men whose existence was protecting us. How can the 'right people be winning' when they have used sarin against their own citizens? Going on another thread its rather a moot point whether a bomb of satin was dropped or whether a conventional weapon was dropped on a stolen cache of arms which happened to contain Sarin (most likely) I now await news reports of deaths from Sarin from the US airstrikes on the very place they say the attack originated from. I won't hold my breath and neither I suspect is anyone else in the attacked area. S Sarin and other chemical weapons are unstable until weaponised, any explosions will incinerate most of anything stored there... although personally if I carried out attacks I wouldn't leave a "smoking gun", evidence of chemicals would be moved. Actually ...its the other way round !
Most of these chemical weapons are stable until weaponised !
They are mostly binary compounds that are stored separately , and only become active when mixed prior to deployment !
They have a variable shelf life , depending on type and and storage method !
While preprepared shells do exist , most store their binary chemicals in barrels and only load them mixed or not into the chosen vector prior to use !
In this case , it seems to me that Assad is only responsible for bombing a storage site , no actually using it !
And lets not forget that Isis and other rebel groups have Chemical weapons too !
If it had been a proper Sarin attack the victim count would have been much much higher !
So, we have the Russians and Syrians saying "Let the inspectors go in and check"... bearing in mind they would have cleared away any evidence... not forgetting that the Russians were warned BEFORE the airstrike in order for them to evacuate their personnel.. then we have this guy, who knows exactly what he is talking about...
"Hamish de Bretton-Gordon (how could you fail to get commission with a name like that) who was the former Commanding Officer of the UK CBRN (chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear) Regiment, as well as being the Commanding Officer of NATO's Rapid Reaction CBRN battalion says "No I think this [claim] is pretty fanciful, no doubt the Russians trying to protect their allies,” he said. “Axiomatically, if you blow up sarin, you destroy it.”
“It’s very clear it’s a sarin attack,” he added. “The view that it’s an al-Qaida or rebel stockpile of sarin that’s been blown up in an explosion, I think is completely unsustainable and completely untrue.”"
... well, I know who I believe.
Of course you do !
That statement you quote was tailored for people like you !
For people , or general public who wont bother to check issues because of their technical nature !
In my case , my miltary CBRN training may be a bit rusty since it was back in the 80ties ,but these days with the Internet , it takes little effort to brush up on the subject
Be careful making assumptions!
I did my full CBRN instructors course only a few years ago, so I'm rather more up to date than you.
If.... that is the case , then you should be in a better position to evaluate the situation from a purely technical point of view ..... but you havnt or have chosen not to , for some reason !
Here is the problem : According to the statement by Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, wich you defend and believe :
" "No I think this [claim] is pretty fanciful, no doubt the Russians trying to protect their allies,” he said. “Axiomatically, if you blow up sarin, you destroy it.” BS !
That is not necessarily the case ! Why ?
Because if the explosion that blows up the place where the Sarin is stored either in drums , or in ready to use shells , is not powerful enough , it might just spread the stuff all over the place ! Some might be destroyed , but some might just be damaged and leak !
Also , depending on the type and quantity of the explosive involved might not generate enough heat to destroy the chemical in question , be it Sarin or other !
If you have the training you claim , then you should also know that the safest way to safely eliminate these weapons is mainly by incineration , or neutralisation, by water and/or other chemicals ! Blowing them up is an extreme field expedient only used as a last resort and in very special conditions.
" It’s very clear it’s a sarin attack,” he added. “The view that it’s an al-Qaida or rebel stockpile of sarin that’s been blown up in an explosion, I think is completely unsustainable and completely untrue.”"
BS again , but I can understand why he would say something stupid like that !
Its purely for public consumption, and its called "covering your ass" after you fucked up !
But if you choose to believe it .... its your right !
And.... as we have learned the hard way these people always.... tell you the truth... Dont they ?
Given the fact that the Russians were warned about the impending attack, don't you think its feasible that the remaining evidence was removed?
Of the two scenarios, the first being that it was the Syrian Airforce who carried out a small scale targeted chemical attack, and the second being that the rebels had somehow gotten hold of some chemical weapons (in this case Sarin) and their munitions got hit by an airstrike which also disseminated viable chemicals, given Assads history of using chemical weapons, and the complete refusal to admit to it even after it has been proven, I think the first scenario is the most likely.
Assad probably felt that after the Obama "red line" failure, and the fact that Trump was distracted by North Korea and had virtually said that he wasn't that interested in Syria, that he could test the waters with impunity.
If the rebels did get hold of, or manufacture chemical weapons, my feeling is that it would be one of the easier to use/deliver, more robust and less complicated/unstable types.
Forgive me for not spelling it out further for you, I've no wish to turn this into a blueprint for someone to try it... nor do I want SO19 accessing my front door with a big red key! "Lol..... wouldn't want you to get into trouble !
I think they now called CO 19 , in my case they wont be knocking on my door lol....I´m in Portugal !
But back to the subject !
Of the two scenarios you mentioned , you prefer the first , I favour the second , and..... even propose a third !
What if it was a deliberate "controlled leak/release" by one of the factions fighting Assad , to capitalise on his record , at a time where he, Assad seems to be having the upper hand ?
This would explain why the victim count was so low !
"If the rebels did get hold of, or manufacture chemical weapons, my feeling is that it would be one of the easier to use/deliver, more robust and less complicated/unstable types."
What do you mean If!
Its a known fact that they have Chemical weapon ! So where did they come from ?
Libya ! remember the Arab "spring" and how Obama , Nato and some other western Naive asses helped depose Gaddafi !
That is what, and why everybody now prefers to believe its Assad !
And people like Hamish de Bretton-Gordon are spinning it ! They fucked up !
By the time those different factions took over and divided Libya turning it into an extremist stronghold The stockpiles of Gaddafis Chemical arsenal had not been completely destroyed , and some found its way to Syria !
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/afp/2016/07/libya-conflict-chemical-britain-opcw.html
https://sputniknews.com/africa/201512181031939999-libya-extremists-chemical-weapons/
Now , besides this , as long as you can get hold of the right supplies , Sarin is not that difficult to make ! Remember that one of the sources of income from Isis and other islamic groups is synthetic drugs like meth ! so, the know how and labs are there !
And again, Sarin is not that complicated as binary Cw´s go , as long as you keep the two elements separate!
To sum it up , Assad may be a lot of things... but stupid is not one of them !  | |||
" Given the fact that the Russians were warned about the impending attack, don't you think its feasible that the remaining evidence was removed? " The ground where the alleged attack took place is in rebel control, so that area could be examined, despite moving any from the airbase. But... Any technical data, logistics etc being discussed here, Why would assad use chemical weapons in the first place with the world watching, such a small puny advantage militarily, for such heavy consequences it just doesn't add up. Assad is no saint but i don't tbink he is stuoid | |||
| |||
| |||
"Can anyone actually win there, or will it go on for decades without a solution? Yes, and the right people are winning. Assad and the Baathists are odious creatures, but the alternative is worse! I do not like Putin, he is a brutal senior KGB interrogation officer. But he is a pragmatist and understands some basic truths about the character of the Arab and is supporting the faction that will protect Russia from the worst excesses of the Arabs. It is a shame we refuse to do the same but instead help overthrow the men whose existence was protecting us. How can the 'right people be winning' when they have used sarin against their own citizens? Going on another thread its rather a moot point whether a bomb of satin was dropped or whether a conventional weapon was dropped on a stolen cache of arms which happened to contain Sarin (most likely) I now await news reports of deaths from Sarin from the US airstrikes on the very place they say the attack originated from. I won't hold my breath and neither I suspect is anyone else in the attacked area. S Sarin and other chemical weapons are unstable until weaponised, any explosions will incinerate most of anything stored there... although personally if I carried out attacks I wouldn't leave a "smoking gun", evidence of chemicals would be moved. Actually ...its the other way round !
Most of these chemical weapons are stable until weaponised !
They are mostly binary compounds that are stored separately , and only become active when mixed prior to deployment !
They have a variable shelf life , depending on type and and storage method !
While preprepared shells do exist , most store their binary chemicals in barrels and only load them mixed or not into the chosen vector prior to use !
In this case , it seems to me that Assad is only responsible for bombing a storage site , no actually using it !
And lets not forget that Isis and other rebel groups have Chemical weapons too !
If it had been a proper Sarin attack the victim count would have been much much higher !
So, we have the Russians and Syrians saying "Let the inspectors go in and check"... bearing in mind they would have cleared away any evidence... not forgetting that the Russians were warned BEFORE the airstrike in order for them to evacuate their personnel.. then we have this guy, who knows exactly what he is talking about...
"Hamish de Bretton-Gordon (how could you fail to get commission with a name like that) who was the former Commanding Officer of the UK CBRN (chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear) Regiment, as well as being the Commanding Officer of NATO's Rapid Reaction CBRN battalion says "No I think this [claim] is pretty fanciful, no doubt the Russians trying to protect their allies,” he said. “Axiomatically, if you blow up sarin, you destroy it.”
“It’s very clear it’s a sarin attack,” he added. “The view that it’s an al-Qaida or rebel stockpile of sarin that’s been blown up in an explosion, I think is completely unsustainable and completely untrue.”"
... well, I know who I believe.
Of course you do !
That statement you quote was tailored for people like you !
For people , or general public who wont bother to check issues because of their technical nature !
In my case , my miltary CBRN training may be a bit rusty since it was back in the 80ties ,but these days with the Internet , it takes little effort to brush up on the subject
Be careful making assumptions!
I did my full CBRN instructors course only a few years ago, so I'm rather more up to date than you.
If.... that is the case , then you should be in a better position to evaluate the situation from a purely technical point of view ..... but you havnt or have chosen not to , for some reason !
Here is the problem : According to the statement by Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, wich you defend and believe :
" "No I think this [claim] is pretty fanciful, no doubt the Russians trying to protect their allies,” he said. “Axiomatically, if you blow up sarin, you destroy it.” BS !
That is not necessarily the case ! Why ?
Because if the explosion that blows up the place where the Sarin is stored either in drums , or in ready to use shells , is not powerful enough , it might just spread the stuff all over the place ! Some might be destroyed , but some might just be damaged and leak !
Also , depending on the type and quantity of the explosive involved might not generate enough heat to destroy the chemical in question , be it Sarin or other !
If you have the training you claim , then you should also know that the safest way to safely eliminate these weapons is mainly by incineration , or neutralisation, by water and/or other chemicals ! Blowing them up is an extreme field expedient only used as a last resort and in very special conditions.
" It’s very clear it’s a sarin attack,” he added. “The view that it’s an al-Qaida or rebel stockpile of sarin that’s been blown up in an explosion, I think is completely unsustainable and completely untrue.”"
BS again , but I can understand why he would say something stupid like that !
Its purely for public consumption, and its called "covering your ass" after you fucked up !
But if you choose to believe it .... its your right !
And.... as we have learned the hard way these people always.... tell you the truth... Dont they ?
Given the fact that the Russians were warned about the impending attack, don't you think its feasible that the remaining evidence was removed?
Of the two scenarios, the first being that it was the Syrian Airforce who carried out a small scale targeted chemical attack, and the second being that the rebels had somehow gotten hold of some chemical weapons (in this case Sarin) and their munitions got hit by an airstrike which also disseminated viable chemicals, given Assads history of using chemical weapons, and the complete refusal to admit to it even after it has been proven, I think the first scenario is the most likely.
Assad probably felt that after the Obama "red line" failure, and the fact that Trump was distracted by North Korea and had virtually said that he wasn't that interested in Syria, that he could test the waters with impunity.
If the rebels did get hold of, or manufacture chemical weapons, my feeling is that it would be one of the easier to use/deliver, more robust and less complicated/unstable types.
Forgive me for not spelling it out further for you, I've no wish to turn this into a blueprint for someone to try it... nor do I want SO19 accessing my front door with a big red key!
Lol..... wouldn't want you to get into trouble !
I think they now called CO 19 , in my case they wont be knocking on my door lol....I´m in Portugal !
But back to the subject !
Of the two scenarios you mentioned , you prefer the first , I favour the second , and..... even propose a third !
What if it was a deliberate "controlled leak/release" by one of the factions fighting Assad , to capitalise on his record , at a time where he, Assad seems to be having the upper hand ?
This would explain why the victim count was so low !
"If the rebels did get hold of, or manufacture chemical weapons, my feeling is that it would be one of the easier to use/deliver, more robust and less complicated/unstable types."
What do you mean If!
Its a known fact that they have Chemical weapon ! So where did they come from ?
Libya ! remember the Arab "spring" and how Obama , Nato and some other western Naive asses helped depose Gaddafi !
That is what, and why everybody now prefers to believe its Assad !
And people like Hamish de Bretton-Gordon are spinning it ! They fucked up !
By the time those different factions took over and divided Libya turning it into an extremist stronghold The stockpiles of Gaddafis Chemical arsenal had not been completely destroyed , and some found its way to Syria !
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/afp/2016/07/libya-conflict-chemical-britain-opcw.html
https://sputniknews.com/africa/201512181031939999-libya-extremists-chemical-weapons/
Now , besides this , as long as you can get hold of the right supplies , Sarin is not that difficult to make ! Remember that one of the sources of income from Isis and other islamic groups is synthetic drugs like meth ! so, the know how and labs are there !
And again, Sarin is not that complicated as binary Cw´s go , as long as you keep the two elements separate!
To sum it up , Assad may be a lot of things... but stupid is not one of them ! "Thats exactly what he wants you to think.Its not the false flag you want to see. He can use chemical weapons because he has plausibly deniability. | |||
"Can anyone actually win there, or will it go on for decades without a solution? Yes, and the right people are winning. Assad and the Baathists are odious creatures, but the alternative is worse! I do not like Putin, he is a brutal senior KGB interrogation officer. But he is a pragmatist and understands some basic truths about the character of the Arab and is supporting the faction that will protect Russia from the worst excesses of the Arabs. It is a shame we refuse to do the same but instead help overthrow the men whose existence was protecting us. How can the 'right people be winning' when they have used sarin against their own citizens? Going on another thread its rather a moot point whether a bomb of satin was dropped or whether a conventional weapon was dropped on a stolen cache of arms which happened to contain Sarin (most likely) I now await news reports of deaths from Sarin from the US airstrikes on the very place they say the attack originated from. I won't hold my breath and neither I suspect is anyone else in the attacked area. S Sarin and other chemical weapons are unstable until weaponised, any explosions will incinerate most of anything stored there... although personally if I carried out attacks I wouldn't leave a "smoking gun", evidence of chemicals would be moved. Actually ...its the other way round !
Most of these chemical weapons are stable until weaponised !
They are mostly binary compounds that are stored separately , and only become active when mixed prior to deployment !
They have a variable shelf life , depending on type and and storage method !
While preprepared shells do exist , most store their binary chemicals in barrels and only load them mixed or not into the chosen vector prior to use !
In this case , it seems to me that Assad is only responsible for bombing a storage site , no actually using it !
And lets not forget that Isis and other rebel groups have Chemical weapons too !
If it had been a proper Sarin attack the victim count would have been much much higher !
So, we have the Russians and Syrians saying "Let the inspectors go in and check"... bearing in mind they would have cleared away any evidence... not forgetting that the Russians were warned BEFORE the airstrike in order for them to evacuate their personnel.. then we have this guy, who knows exactly what he is talking about...
"Hamish de Bretton-Gordon (how could you fail to get commission with a name like that) who was the former Commanding Officer of the UK CBRN (chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear) Regiment, as well as being the Commanding Officer of NATO's Rapid Reaction CBRN battalion says "No I think this [claim] is pretty fanciful, no doubt the Russians trying to protect their allies,” he said. “Axiomatically, if you blow up sarin, you destroy it.”
“It’s very clear it’s a sarin attack,” he added. “The view that it’s an al-Qaida or rebel stockpile of sarin that’s been blown up in an explosion, I think is completely unsustainable and completely untrue.”"
... well, I know who I believe.
Of course you do !
That statement you quote was tailored for people like you !
For people , or general public who wont bother to check issues because of their technical nature !
In my case , my miltary CBRN training may be a bit rusty since it was back in the 80ties ,but these days with the Internet , it takes little effort to brush up on the subject
Be careful making assumptions!
I did my full CBRN instructors course only a few years ago, so I'm rather more up to date than you.
If.... that is the case , then you should be in a better position to evaluate the situation from a purely technical point of view ..... but you havnt or have chosen not to , for some reason !
Here is the problem : According to the statement by Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, wich you defend and believe :
" "No I think this [claim] is pretty fanciful, no doubt the Russians trying to protect their allies,” he said. “Axiomatically, if you blow up sarin, you destroy it.” BS !
That is not necessarily the case ! Why ?
Because if the explosion that blows up the place where the Sarin is stored either in drums , or in ready to use shells , is not powerful enough , it might just spread the stuff all over the place ! Some might be destroyed , but some might just be damaged and leak !
Also , depending on the type and quantity of the explosive involved might not generate enough heat to destroy the chemical in question , be it Sarin or other !
If you have the training you claim , then you should also know that the safest way to safely eliminate these weapons is mainly by incineration , or neutralisation, by water and/or other chemicals ! Blowing them up is an extreme field expedient only used as a last resort and in very special conditions.
" It’s very clear it’s a sarin attack,” he added. “The view that it’s an al-Qaida or rebel stockpile of sarin that’s been blown up in an explosion, I think is completely unsustainable and completely untrue.”"
BS again , but I can understand why he would say something stupid like that !
Its purely for public consumption, and its called "covering your ass" after you fucked up !
But if you choose to believe it .... its your right !
And.... as we have learned the hard way these people always.... tell you the truth... Dont they ?
Given the fact that the Russians were warned about the impending attack, don't you think its feasible that the remaining evidence was removed?
Of the two scenarios, the first being that it was the Syrian Airforce who carried out a small scale targeted chemical attack, and the second being that the rebels had somehow gotten hold of some chemical weapons (in this case Sarin) and their munitions got hit by an airstrike which also disseminated viable chemicals, given Assads history of using chemical weapons, and the complete refusal to admit to it even after it has been proven, I think the first scenario is the most likely.
Assad probably felt that after the Obama "red line" failure, and the fact that Trump was distracted by North Korea and had virtually said that he wasn't that interested in Syria, that he could test the waters with impunity.
If the rebels did get hold of, or manufacture chemical weapons, my feeling is that it would be one of the easier to use/deliver, more robust and less complicated/unstable types.
Forgive me for not spelling it out further for you, I've no wish to turn this into a blueprint for someone to try it... nor do I want SO19 accessing my front door with a big red key!
Lol..... wouldn't want you to get into trouble !
I think they now called CO 19 , in my case they wont be knocking on my door lol....I´m in Portugal !
But back to the subject !
Of the two scenarios you mentioned , you prefer the first , I favour the second , and..... even propose a third !
What if it was a deliberate "controlled leak/release" by one of the factions fighting Assad , to capitalise on his record , at a time where he, Assad seems to be having the upper hand ?
This would explain why the victim count was so low !
"If the rebels did get hold of, or manufacture chemical weapons, my feeling is that it would be one of the easier to use/deliver, more robust and less complicated/unstable types."
What do you mean If!
Its a known fact that they have Chemical weapon ! So where did they come from ?
Libya ! remember the Arab "spring" and how Obama , Nato and some other western Naive asses helped depose Gaddafi !
That is what, and why everybody now prefers to believe its Assad !
And people like Hamish de Bretton-Gordon are spinning it ! They fucked up !
By the time those different factions took over and divided Libya turning it into an extremist stronghold The stockpiles of Gaddafis Chemical arsenal had not been completely destroyed , and some found its way to Syria !
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/afp/2016/07/libya-conflict-chemical-britain-opcw.html
https://sputniknews.com/africa/201512181031939999-libya-extremists-chemical-weapons/
Now , besides this , as long as you can get hold of the right supplies , Sarin is not that difficult to make ! Remember that one of the sources of income from Isis and other islamic groups is synthetic drugs like meth ! so, the know how and labs are there !
And again, Sarin is not that complicated as binary Cw´s go , as long as you keep the two elements separate!
To sum it up , Assad may be a lot of things... but stupid is not one of them ! Thats exactly what he wants you to think.Its not the false flag you want to see.
He can use chemical weapons because he has plausibly deniability."absolute nonsense. Hes doesn't even have chemical weapons they was disposed of under the UN's watch. This is another iraq and WMD fiasco...we are being led into another conflict under a lie | |||
"Can anyone actually win there, or will it go on for decades without a solution? Yes, and the right people are winning. Assad and the Baathists are odious creatures, but the alternative is worse! I do not like Putin, he is a brutal senior KGB interrogation officer. But he is a pragmatist and understands some basic truths about the character of the Arab and is supporting the faction that will protect Russia from the worst excesses of the Arabs. It is a shame we refuse to do the same but instead help overthrow the men whose existence was protecting us. How can the 'right people be winning' when they have used sarin against their own citizens? Going on another thread its rather a moot point whether a bomb of satin was dropped or whether a conventional weapon was dropped on a stolen cache of arms which happened to contain Sarin (most likely) I now await news reports of deaths from Sarin from the US airstrikes on the very place they say the attack originated from. I won't hold my breath and neither I suspect is anyone else in the attacked area. S Sarin and other chemical weapons are unstable until weaponised, any explosions will incinerate most of anything stored there... although personally if I carried out attacks I wouldn't leave a "smoking gun", evidence of chemicals would be moved. Actually ...its the other way round !
Most of these chemical weapons are stable until weaponised !
They are mostly binary compounds that are stored separately , and only become active when mixed prior to deployment !
They have a variable shelf life , depending on type and and storage method !
While preprepared shells do exist , most store their binary chemicals in barrels and only load them mixed or not into the chosen vector prior to use !
In this case , it seems to me that Assad is only responsible for bombing a storage site , no actually using it !
And lets not forget that Isis and other rebel groups have Chemical weapons too !
If it had been a proper Sarin attack the victim count would have been much much higher !
So, we have the Russians and Syrians saying "Let the inspectors go in and check"... bearing in mind they would have cleared away any evidence... not forgetting that the Russians were warned BEFORE the airstrike in order for them to evacuate their personnel.. then we have this guy, who knows exactly what he is talking about...
"Hamish de Bretton-Gordon (how could you fail to get commission with a name like that) who was the former Commanding Officer of the UK CBRN (chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear) Regiment, as well as being the Commanding Officer of NATO's Rapid Reaction CBRN battalion says "No I think this [claim] is pretty fanciful, no doubt the Russians trying to protect their allies,” he said. “Axiomatically, if you blow up sarin, you destroy it.”
“It’s very clear it’s a sarin attack,” he added. “The view that it’s an al-Qaida or rebel stockpile of sarin that’s been blown up in an explosion, I think is completely unsustainable and completely untrue.”"
... well, I know who I believe.
Of course you do !
That statement you quote was tailored for people like you !
For people , or general public who wont bother to check issues because of their technical nature !
In my case , my miltary CBRN training may be a bit rusty since it was back in the 80ties ,but these days with the Internet , it takes little effort to brush up on the subject
Be careful making assumptions!
I did my full CBRN instructors course only a few years ago, so I'm rather more up to date than you.
If.... that is the case , then you should be in a better position to evaluate the situation from a purely technical point of view ..... but you havnt or have chosen not to , for some reason !
Here is the problem : According to the statement by Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, wich you defend and believe :
" "No I think this [claim] is pretty fanciful, no doubt the Russians trying to protect their allies,” he said. “Axiomatically, if you blow up sarin, you destroy it.” BS !
That is not necessarily the case ! Why ?
Because if the explosion that blows up the place where the Sarin is stored either in drums , or in ready to use shells , is not powerful enough , it might just spread the stuff all over the place ! Some might be destroyed , but some might just be damaged and leak !
Also , depending on the type and quantity of the explosive involved might not generate enough heat to destroy the chemical in question , be it Sarin or other !
If you have the training you claim , then you should also know that the safest way to safely eliminate these weapons is mainly by incineration , or neutralisation, by water and/or other chemicals ! Blowing them up is an extreme field expedient only used as a last resort and in very special conditions.
" It’s very clear it’s a sarin attack,” he added. “The view that it’s an al-Qaida or rebel stockpile of sarin that’s been blown up in an explosion, I think is completely unsustainable and completely untrue.”"
BS again , but I can understand why he would say something stupid like that !
Its purely for public consumption, and its called "covering your ass" after you fucked up !
But if you choose to believe it .... its your right !
And.... as we have learned the hard way these people always.... tell you the truth... Dont they ?
Given the fact that the Russians were warned about the impending attack, don't you think its feasible that the remaining evidence was removed?
Of the two scenarios, the first being that it was the Syrian Airforce who carried out a small scale targeted chemical attack, and the second being that the rebels had somehow gotten hold of some chemical weapons (in this case Sarin) and their munitions got hit by an airstrike which also disseminated viable chemicals, given Assads history of using chemical weapons, and the complete refusal to admit to it even after it has been proven, I think the first scenario is the most likely.
Assad probably felt that after the Obama "red line" failure, and the fact that Trump was distracted by North Korea and had virtually said that he wasn't that interested in Syria, that he could test the waters with impunity.
If the rebels did get hold of, or manufacture chemical weapons, my feeling is that it would be one of the easier to use/deliver, more robust and less complicated/unstable types.
Forgive me for not spelling it out further for you, I've no wish to turn this into a blueprint for someone to try it... nor do I want SO19 accessing my front door with a big red key!
Lol..... wouldn't want you to get into trouble !
I think they now called CO 19 , in my case they wont be knocking on my door lol....I´m in Portugal !
But back to the subject !
Of the two scenarios you mentioned , you prefer the first , I favour the second , and..... even propose a third !
What if it was a deliberate "controlled leak/release" by one of the factions fighting Assad , to capitalise on his record , at a time where he, Assad seems to be having the upper hand ?
This would explain why the victim count was so low !
"If the rebels did get hold of, or manufacture chemical weapons, my feeling is that it would be one of the easier to use/deliver, more robust and less complicated/unstable types."
What do you mean If!
Its a known fact that they have Chemical weapon ! So where did they come from ?
Libya ! remember the Arab "spring" and how Obama , Nato and some other western Naive asses helped depose Gaddafi !
That is what, and why everybody now prefers to believe its Assad !
And people like Hamish de Bretton-Gordon are spinning it ! They fucked up !
By the time those different factions took over and divided Libya turning it into an extremist stronghold The stockpiles of Gaddafis Chemical arsenal had not been completely destroyed , and some found its way to Syria !
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/afp/2016/07/libya-conflict-chemical-britain-opcw.html
https://sputniknews.com/africa/201512181031939999-libya-extremists-chemical-weapons/
Now , besides this , as long as you can get hold of the right supplies , Sarin is not that difficult to make ! Remember that one of the sources of income from Isis and other islamic groups is synthetic drugs like meth ! so, the know how and labs are there !
And again, Sarin is not that complicated as binary Cw´s go , as long as you keep the two elements separate!
To sum it up , Assad may be a lot of things... but stupid is not one of them ! Thats exactly what he wants you to think.Its not the false flag you want to see.
He can use chemical weapons because he has plausibly deniability.
absolute nonsense.
Hes doesn't even have chemical weapons they was disposed of under the UN's watch.
This is another iraq and WMD fiasco...we are being led into another conflict under a lie". Youve been had off by trump, i understand why you thought he might be different but you failed to grasp that US foreign policy is maintained and has been for 60 years unflinchingly no matter whether its democrats or republicans whether its Kennedy or carter or Nixon or bush. Theres people that look like they run administrations and presidents and then theres people you dont see who ACTUALLY run policy, thats why its never changed and never will regardless of which puppet is in or out. Puppet governments arent just the preserve of the third world | |||
| |||
"If the rebels have chemical weapons, then why aren't they using them to attack Assad's forces? Or if they are not going to use them because it would be bad PR and hurt their cause, why would they be stockpiling them in civilian areas? " Aren't the USA in favour of the rebels, since they're trying to overthrow Assad? The missiles are the first time they are hitting the target they want to. | |||
"If the rebels have chemical weapons, then why aren't they using them to attack Assad's forces? Or if they are not going to use them because it would be bad PR and hurt their cause, why would they be stockpiling them in civilian areas? " That is an easy one ! why stockpiling in civilian Areas ? Its called a win win situation !
1- If your enemy knows its there , and is civilised and humane , he will not attack it to prevent civilian casualties! So you win because you keep your goodies by using human shields!
2- If your enemy doesn't care and bombs it , killing civilians in the process , you loose the goodies but win anyway , by claiming that you were attacked, with CW´s, thus winning the propaganda war and the "moral high ground"
So this is a old well documented tactic used in most conflicts .... unfortunately
Now , the greatest difficulty in using CW´s by the rebels against Assad is down to adequate vectors (delivery means) .
Also if they did , they probably would not be very effective on the troops , as they are probably equipped with protective gear, something that most of the rebels themselves are not !
So... if deployed they would again affect civilians ....which would then always be blamed on Assad anyway , because of his track record . So again its more probable that they would use them to stage attacks to blame Assad for propaganda purposes !
What I mentioned is actually old news !
http://www.globalresearch.ca/pentagon-trained-syrias-al-qaeda-rebels-in-the-use-of-chemical-weapons/5583784
Believe it or not , its plausible and one more lovely Obama blunder ! | |||
"You know what causes terrorism and wars? Pissed off, unemployed people. Just wait until the oil money dries up and then the middle east is really going to explode." Religion has caused more terrorism than any amount of unemployment | |||
"You know what causes terrorism and wars? Pissed off, unemployed people. Just wait until the oil money dries up and then the middle east is really going to explode. Religion has caused more terrorism than any amount of unemployment " Fully employed people with a good standard of living? Or pissed off unemployed people who just happened to be of a certain religion? | |||
"You know what causes terrorism and wars? Pissed off, unemployed people. Just wait until the oil money dries up and then the middle east is really going to explode. Religion has caused more terrorism than any amount of unemployment Fully employed people with a good standard of living? Or pissed off unemployed people who just happened to be of a certain religion? " I'm sure you will be an expert on this subject matter, so I will be guiding by your expert knowledge | |||
"If the rebels have chemical weapons, then why aren't they using them to attack Assad's forces? Or if they are not going to use them because it would be bad PR and hurt their cause, why would they be stockpiling them in civilian areas? " You probably already know the answer to that I reckon? 1) They acquired munitions in their land grab but have no means of delivery. 2) They have manufactured a chemical weapon system but again have no effective means of delivery. By the same logic. If Assad has chemical weapons - why is he not using them to wipe out solely military targets? Who would really care if a few head choppers (moderate or otherwise) got killed by chlorine, mustard gas or sarin? | |||
"If the rebels have chemical weapons, then why aren't they using them to attack Assad's forces? Or if they are not going to use them because it would be bad PR and hurt their cause, why would they be stockpiling them in civilian areas? You probably already know the answer to that I reckon? 1) They acquired munitions in their land grab but have no means of delivery. 2) They have manufactured a chemical weapon system but again have no effective means of delivery. By the same logic. If Assad has chemical weapons - why is he not using them to wipe out solely military targets? Who would really care if a few head choppers (moderate or otherwise) got killed by chlorine, mustard gas or sarin?" So if they acquired the weapons in a land grab, that would mean they were Assad's chemical weapons that they captured, right? | |||
"If the rebels have chemical weapons, then why aren't they using them to attack Assad's forces? Or if they are not going to use them because it would be bad PR and hurt their cause, why would they be stockpiling them in civilian areas? You probably already know the answer to that I reckon? 1) They acquired munitions in their land grab but have no means of delivery. 2) They have manufactured a chemical weapon system but again have no effective means of delivery. By the same logic. If Assad has chemical weapons - why is he not using them to wipe out solely military targets? Who would really care if a few head choppers (moderate or otherwise) got killed by chlorine, mustard gas or sarin?" It's Muslims killing Muslims, it's like Ireland all over again. We just need to play containment, keep them in the Middle East. And at least Assad knows how to deal with the problem and we in the west know who we are dealing with. Better the guy who we know rather than some mad Mullah and his henchmen | |||
"If the rebels have chemical weapons, then why aren't they using them to attack Assad's forces? Or if they are not going to use them because it would be bad PR and hurt their cause, why would they be stockpiling them in civilian areas? You probably already know the answer to that I reckon? 1) They acquired munitions in their land grab but have no means of delivery. 2) They have manufactured a chemical weapon system but again have no effective means of delivery. By the same logic. If Assad has chemical weapons - why is he not using them to wipe out solely military targets? Who would really care if a few head choppers (moderate or otherwise) got killed by chlorine, mustard gas or sarin? It's Muslims killing Muslims, it's like Ireland all over again. We just need to play containment, keep them in the Middle East. And at least Assad knows how to deal with the problem and we in the west know who we are dealing with. Better the guy who we know rather than some mad Mullah and his henchmen" | |||
"If the rebels have chemical weapons, then why aren't they using them to attack Assad's forces? Or if they are not going to use them because it would be bad PR and hurt their cause, why would they be stockpiling them in civilian areas? You probably already know the answer to that I reckon? 1) They acquired munitions in their land grab but have no means of delivery. 2) They have manufactured a chemical weapon system but again have no effective means of delivery. By the same logic. If Assad has chemical weapons - why is he not using them to wipe out solely military targets? Who would really care if a few head choppers (moderate or otherwise) got killed by chlorine, mustard gas or sarin? So if they acquired the weapons in a land grab, that would mean they were Assad's chemical weapons that they captured, right? " Yes. But make sure: 1) You get your timings right. 2) don't judge people by your own standards. | |||
"You know what causes terrorism and wars? Pissed off, unemployed people. Just wait until the oil money dries up and then the middle east is really going to explode. Religion has caused more terrorism than any amount of unemployment Fully employed people with a good standard of living? Or pissed off unemployed people who just happened to be of a certain religion? " Which country has or or has had long term full employment?... Which country that has a well paid populace, does not suffer with dissent from its populace. | |||
"If the rebels have chemical weapons, then why aren't they using them to attack Assad's forces? Or if they are not going to use them because it would be bad PR and hurt their cause, why would they be stockpiling them in civilian areas? You probably already know the answer to that I reckon? 1) They acquired munitions in their land grab but have no means of delivery. 2) They have manufactured a chemical weapon system but again have no effective means of delivery. By the same logic. If Assad has chemical weapons - why is he not using them to wipe out solely military targets? Who would really care if a few head choppers (moderate or otherwise) got killed by chlorine, mustard gas or sarin? So if they acquired the weapons in a land grab, that would mean they were Assad's chemical weapons that they captured, right? Yes. But make sure: 1) You get your timings right. 2) don't judge people by your own standards. " Wrong ! Assad was not the only one in the area with CW`s ! At least Al Nusra had them too ! | |||
"You know what causes terrorism and wars? Pissed off, unemployed people. Just wait until the oil money dries up and then the middle east is really going to explode. Religion has caused more terrorism than any amount of unemployment Fully employed people with a good standard of living? Or pissed off unemployed people who just happened to be of a certain religion? Which country has or or has had long term full employment?... Which country that has a well paid populace, does not suffer with dissent from its populace. " None ! That is pure Utopia ! A common left staple argument !
| |||
"If the rebels have chemical weapons, then why aren't they using them to attack Assad's forces? Or if they are not going to use them because it would be bad PR and hurt their cause, why would they be stockpiling them in civilian areas? You probably already know the answer to that I reckon? 1) They acquired munitions in their land grab but have no means of delivery. 2) They have manufactured a chemical weapon system but again have no effective means of delivery. By the same logic. If Assad has chemical weapons - why is he not using them to wipe out solely military targets? Who would really care if a few head choppers (moderate or otherwise) got killed by chlorine, mustard gas or sarin? So if they acquired the weapons in a land grab, that would mean they were Assad's chemical weapons that they captured, right? Yes. But make sure: 1) You get your timings right. 2) don't judge people by your own standards. Wrong ! Assad was not the only one in the area with CW`s ! At least Al Nusra had them too ! "Read the whole thread. | |||
"You know what causes terrorism and wars? Pissed off, unemployed people. Just wait until the oil money dries up and then the middle east is really going to explode. Religion has caused more terrorism than any amount of unemployment Fully employed people with a good standard of living? Or pissed off unemployed people who just happened to be of a certain religion? Which country has or or has had long term full employment?... Which country that has a well paid populace, does not suffer with dissent from its populace. " So you do accept the link between the two then? It's nice to see you agreeing with me for a change. | |||
| |||
"According to Spicer, Trump is now going to attack Assad if he continues to use barrel bombs too, not just chemical weapons." We all knew Trump was a disaster in the making and the best we can hope is that he gets somewhat nuetered. Dear Donald - America First - remember. Stop worrying your tiny little head about the rest of the world. Mar el Largo is safe (for now): | |||
"According to Spicer, Trump is now going to attack Assad if he continues to use barrel bombs too, not just chemical weapons. We all knew Trump was a disaster in the making and the best we can hope is that he gets somewhat nuetered. Dear Donald - America First - remember. Stop worrying your tiny little head about the rest of the world. Mar el Largo is safe (for now):" It seems according to the latest CBS poll 69% of US citizens disagree with you ! Besides this is more about America that you think...or see , or want to see! Look at the big picture ! But obviously.... you know better ! | |||
| |||
"Trump's view on NATO has changed too. I like a guy who changed his mind when he learns something new. Is this fishy?" What is fishy ?
How do you mean his view on NATO has changed ? | |||
"Trump's view on NATO has changed too. I like a guy who changed his mind when he learns something new. Is this fishy?" in the last week, Don juan has rolled back and taken a directly opposite stance on just about everything he was spoutng off about prior to march ..... but then all the sensible money was on him doing this in the first few months of taking office so no surprise really it's begining to leave his legions of monkeys that support him high and dry when it comes to credibility | |||
"Trump's view on NATO has changed too. I like a guy who changed his mind when he learns something new. Is this fishy? in the last week, Don juan has rolled back and taken a directly opposite stance on just about everything he was spoutng off about prior to march ..... but then all the sensible money was on him doing this in the first few months of taking office so no surprise really it's begining to leave his legions of monkeys that support him high and dry when it comes to credibility" You are deflecting there ! He has not changed his position on NATO , but I do see that in a lot of the media headlines ! Problem is... its a distortion you apparently believe ! So tell me , what do you see him change in regards to NATO ? | |||
"Trump's view on NATO has changed too. I like a guy who changed his mind when he learns something new. Is this fishy? in the last week, Don juan has rolled back and taken a directly opposite stance on just about everything he was spoutng off about prior to march ..... but then all the sensible money was on him doing this in the first few months of taking office so no surprise really it's begining to leave his legions of monkeys that support him high and dry when it comes to credibility You are deflecting there ! He has not changed his position on NATO , but I do see that in a lot of the media headlines ! Problem is... its a distortion you apparently believe ! So tell me , what do you see him change in regards to NATO ? "his mind | |||
"Trump's view on NATO has changed too. I like a guy who changed his mind when he learns something new. Is this fishy? in the last week, Don juan has rolled back and taken a directly opposite stance on just about everything he was spoutng off about prior to march ..... but then all the sensible money was on him doing this in the first few months of taking office so no surprise really it's begining to leave his legions of monkeys that support him high and dry when it comes to credibility You are deflecting there ! He has not changed his position on NATO , but I do see that in a lot of the media headlines ! Problem is... its a distortion you apparently believe ! So tell me , what do you see him change in regards to NATO ?
his mind "No ! he hasn't ! Just because you keep repeating it doesn't make it true !
So care to spell it out!
Or are you just making Fake news ? | |||
| |||
"you almost have to admire just how ballsy al-assad is getting... denying you committed the act is one thing..... trying to deny the attack ever happened and saying the footage may be have been faked is taking it up a level..... "Well .... it wouldn't be the first time a propaganda op was launched !
But I see it more as a dare !
By exaggerating it , he is making people look deeper into it , and thus exposing very obvious holes in the narrative that blames him !
Its not Balls....its brains in this case, like him or not! | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
