Syria moving checmical weapons

[Guest Manny]

I see... we have to kill people in war so that they don't die.

[bush_cheney2004]

Admittedly the US government screwed the pooch on Iraq and the WMD's but this does not and should not define every subsequent situation and event that is in anyway similar to Iraq and the events leading up to the Iraq War mainly because the consequences would mean many people have to die.

OK...then let Canada take care of it. Everyone will believe Canada, right?

[Signals.Cpl]

I see... we have to kill people in war so that they don't die.

No, we have to consider it case by case rather than throwing everything under assumption that "they" are lying and thus no matter what is presented the assumption is they lied, just like you wouldn't assume that if "they" are right about Syria "they" must be right about every subsequent similar event.

[GostHacked]

And for you to see the proof, thousands or tens of thousands will have to die. I hope for the sake of the world that the Assad regime is not desperate/stupid enough to actually use those weapons or "donate" them to someone willing to use them.

Yeah, let's hope the evidence does not come in the form of a mushroom cloud. Yeah, where have I heard that before??

[Guest Manny]

No, we have to consider it case by case rather than throwing everything under assumption that "they" are lying and thus no matter what is presented the assumption is they lied, just like you wouldn't assume that if "they" are right about Syria "they" must be right about every subsequent similar event.

Just messin with you on that point. True that we should try to use reason to decide but for most people, when they are lied to by someone they tend to resent this and doubt that person forevermore.

But isn't it ironic how we sometimes so quickly see war as the solution to "help" people. Like Iraq, for instance. I suspect that most Iraqis don't see the benefit, by a long shot. The Iraq they have today is destroyed, compared to what they had before. Seems to me that what matters isn't the nice ideal sounding outcomes for places like Iraq, Afghanistan and maybe Syria. What matters more is, who is calling the shots in a given region, not how happy the people are who live there. And we see this happening over and over again.

[Moonlight Graham]

And for you to see the proof, thousands or tens of thousands will have to die.

Or send in UN/multi-nation crew of inspectors.

[Signals.Cpl]

Yeah, let's hope the evidence does not come in the form of a mushroom cloud. Yeah, where have I heard that before??

So are you one of those people who cannot view the evidence and make a decision based on the evidence, rather you base your decision on an event that happened 9 years ago?

Edited July 16, 2012 by Signals.Cpl

[Signals.Cpl]

Or send in UN/multi-nation crew of inspectors.

So they can sit in a hotel because its "too dangerous"? And who will authorize a. Authorize the inspectors seeing as Russia can and will block any such move and b. seeing as they will be at the mercy of the Syrian government what can we expect them to find?

Right now I think that the US will present the evidence and use it as a means to get Russia to take away their support for Syria and thus get some reaction from the UNSC rather than as a pretext for an introduction between the Syrian military and the US Navy.

[bush_cheney2004]

...Right now I think that the US will present the evidence and use it as a means to get Russia to take away their support for Syria and thus get some reaction from the UNSC rather than as a pretext for an introduction between the Syrian military and the US Navy.

No way, not less than four months from a presidential election. Time for Canada to lead and back up all that "Responsibility to Protect" and "peacekeeping" schtick.

[DogOnPorch]

I find it comforting to know that since Saddam had no chemical weapons program that the Allies could find that no nation on Earth now possesses chemical weapons. Can we try the same trick with the H-Bomb?

[bush_cheney2004]

Michael Moore has an important message for the Syrian government and rebels alike:

[bleeding heart]

I was about to ask how this man ever became so popular.

Then I remembered that, some years ago, I shelled out some money to rent Bowling for Columbine.

(That's how, bleeding heart, ya dummy! )

I will say in his defense that BFC is a good movie...not necessarily "accurate" or what have you, but a well-made, entertaining film.

Still, he's pretty tiresome, and long ago reached the point of diminishing returns......

He's most likely right that Assad is on his way out, though, and I agree with him that Assad probably knows it.

Edited July 16, 2012 by bleeding heart

[GostHacked]

So are you one of those people who cannot view the evidence and make a decision based on the evidence, rather you base your decision on an event that happened 9 years ago?

Actually it's 7 years ago Iraq was invaded (2006). Details are important, no?

[eyeball]

No way, not less than four months from a presidential election. Time for Canada to lead and back up all that "Responsibility to Protect" and "peacekeeping" schtick.

Yeah well, the best way to do this would be to outlaw any trade with any nation that is run by a dictatorship or helps to support a dictatorship but that isn't going to happen either.

Bring on the mushroom clouds and pass the popcorn as they say.

[DogOnPorch]

Actually it's 7 years ago Iraq was invaded (2006). Details are important, no?

Yes they are.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_invasion_of_Iraq

Nine years.

[GostHacked]

Yes they are.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_invasion_of_Iraq

Nine years.

Ah, you are correct. Details are important. Still can't prove the weapons moved to Syria.

[Signals.Cpl]

Actually it's 7 years ago Iraq was invaded (2006). Details are important, no?

2006? March 2003 was the invasion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_invasion_of_Iraq

[DogOnPorch]

Ah, you are correct. Details are important. Still can't prove the weapons moved to Syria.

Of course I'm correct.

YOU can't prove they have not. However, you also deny Syria's own Chem/Bio weapons program like it is something George Bush dreamed-up.

[bush_cheney2004]

Of course I'm correct.

Easy three pointer that was.

YOU can't prove they have not. However, you also deny Syria's own Chem/Bio weapons program like it is something George Bush dreamed-up.

No worries...we were all suppose to be dead from Fukushima by now anyway.

[Signals.Cpl]

Ah, you are correct. Details are important. Still can't prove the weapons moved to Syria.

They didnt have to come from Iraq, I am pretty sure Syria has a working relationship with Russia so they could have gotten their own stockpile of weapons.

[DogOnPorch]

They didnt have to come from Iraq, I am pretty sure Syria has a working relationship with Russia so they could have gotten their own stockpile of weapons.

Syria was a defacto Warsaw Pact state and enjoyed Soviet generosity to the tune of several attacks on Israel. In turn the Rooshins got a port-o-call + extras.

BC-2004: Easy three pointer that was.

The moose was just standing there. Dumb moose.

Kapow!

[GostHacked]

Of course I'm correct.

YOU can't prove they have not. However, you also deny Syria's own Chem/Bio weapons program like it is something George Bush dreamed-up.

So both of us cannot be 100% sure. I get it. I am not denying that Syria has a chemical weapons program. I deny that they have chemical weapons/materials from Iraq, which is the real point you are trying to make here.

[DogOnPorch]

So both of us cannot be 100% sure. I get it. I am not denying that Syria has a chemical weapons program. I deny that they have chemical weapons/materials from Iraq, which is the real point you are trying to make here.

Well thank goodness you're always right, eh?

[Signals.Cpl]

Syria was a defacto Warsaw Pact state and enjoyed Soviet generosity to the tune of several attacks on Israel. In turn the Rooshins got a port-o-call + extras.

I dotn think that is a fair assesment as the USSR would have gone to war in order to protect the Warsaw Pact as they were the buffer and would have threatened them, while if Syria collapses the Russians lose a customer for weapons but noone will shed a tear for them aside from lost income.

[DogOnPorch]

I dotn think that is a fair assesment as the USSR would have gone to war in order to protect the Warsaw Pact as they were the buffer and would have threatened them, while if Syria collapses the Russians lose a customer for weapons but noone will shed a tear for them aside from lost income.

Yes, Syria (and Egypt)...always the poor man. But, the Russians enjoyed arming the Arabs...and the rest of the 3rd World. A thorn in the West's side. Jordan was the exception enjoying certain British cross-cultural goodies.

Remember: 200 million AK-47s to 20 million M-16s. That says something and it isn't 'G'night Mrs Calabash'.