The U.S. Launched 59 Cruise Missiles against an airfield in Syria .

[Argus]

53 minutes ago, Topaz said:

One thing we also should talk about are the chemical weapons the  rebels or any other group has,

There's no evidence the rebels have chemical weapons.

[eyeball]

4 hours ago, bcsapper said:

Yeah, but whereas I might disagree with the killing, while you agree with it, we both deserve the protection of our armed forces.  Bless them.

 

Sure, as if you misunderstood me... I entirely disagree with our killing people in the name of our and our allies foreign policies, mostly in the ME and surrounding region. I don't want to die as a result of blowback from these and if anyone from my family is killed I'll be holding Canada and our allies every bit as responsible as the killer.

To me the deliberately vague position you have toward our foreign policies resembles Justin Trudeau's which is probably one of the leading causes behind the perpetuity of the endless conflict we're mired in.  The fog of conflict is just a little too deliberate. 

I don't think our armed forces are capable of doing anything whatsoever to protect us from what's happening - especially when they're part of what's endangering us in the first place. 

[Guest]

Just now, eyeball said:

Sure, as if you misunderstood me... I entirely disagree with our killing people in the name of our and our allies foreign policies, mostly in the ME and surrounding region. I don't want to die as a result of blowback from these and if anyone from my family is killed I'll be holding Canada and our allies every bit as responsible as the killer.

To me the deliberately vague position you have toward our foreign policies resembles Justin Trudeau's which is probably one of the leading causes behind the perpetuity of the endless conflict we're mired in.  The fog of conflict is just a little too deliberate. 

I don't think our armed forces are capable of doing anything whatsoever to protect us from what's happening - especially when they're part of what's endangering us in the first place. 

I didn't misunderstand you, I just disagree with you.  I have no problem with killing loads of people who deserve it, and if we kill any who don't, I have no problem with killing anyone who is hell bent on revenge for that, no matter how much I regret their deaths.

[eyeball]

Just now, bcsapper said:

I have no problem with killing loads of people who deserve it

I suspect most of the other terrorists we're engaged with feel exactly the same way for much the same reason.

[Guest]

Just now, eyeball said:

I suspect most of the other terrorists we're engaged with feel exactly the same way for much the same reason.

I'm sure they do.  I'm sure the Axis and the Allies felt the same way about each other during WWII.  I'm still glad we won.

[eyeball]

A phyrrhic victory as evidenced by the present conflagration.  I'm a lot less glad about why and would be much happier if both sides would just blow each other to kingdom come.

[GostHacked]

It seems that people have a short term memory when it comes to some of the events and how they tie into each other. All while ranting that I have no idea wtf I am talking about. 

Rue, Dog, did you two put up a fuss when Iraq attacked Iran with chemical and conventional weapons? No? Why the hell not? Hell you SHOULD be pissed that your own governments are complicit in with handing them those weapons in the first place. Did you two put up a fuss about how the US and their BFF Islamic dictatorship Saudi Arabia helped fund the Jihad in Afghanistan against the Soviets? Oh right, forget that those actions long ago are still causing pain. Evolved from the Muhajedeen, to Al-Qaeda, To ISIS and various other offshoots of stupid radical Muslims. Connect the dots for once. It's not that damn hard. I may be stupid and dumb but I am no Forrest Gump.

NOW we have seen the rebels (aka terrorists by TRUE definition of the word) admittedly without a doubt that the US and NATO, yet again are supporting terrorism in other sovereign nations.  All this complaining about Russia hacking the elections really shows hypocritical this all really is compared to directly supporting terrorism on another nation that is not considered 'friendly', but had yet to directly attack the US. While their own Bin Laden did.  Total facepalm.

This whole thing about Assad using the chemical weapons on his own people does NOT make any sense at all. Assad had absolutely nothing to gain by using chemical weapons on his own people. The other problem is now, it's hard to go in and verify what took place via independent entities. The US bombed the crap out of that same town this chemical weapons attack took place. That also seems counter productive in order to gain proper evidence against Assad.

None of the rhetoric put forth makes sense at all.  Again I called it and told you all Trump will eventually be told what to do. He's not the real power in the US. Obama proved that, and so did Bush. Now he's risking something even bigger by blowing 300 mill on missiles that went into the town of the attack and around one airbase. However, my response might have been harsher if I was presented with irrefutable proof that Assad ordered this attack.

NATO is right on Russia's doorstep with deploying a very large number of anti-missile batteries in nations that once were part of the Soviet Union behind the Iron Curtain. All this garbage is not about Assad or Syria. The war in Syria has never been a civil war by any definition, it is again another proxy war between bigger powers. The US is also moving a lot in the South China Sea. Something is up, and someone has an itchy trigger finger.

Do you believe the lies or argue for them just for the sake of argument? That seems to be counter productive as well.

Again, so as to not confuse any of you, I do not support Russia or Assad either.  Hell I can't even support the pretty boy Trudeau. Total lapdog. I had faith in Trump, but I knew he'd eventually find out who really runs the show. Even with all his money and power, he did not seem to be one of them. Or he has been one of them all along, and yet again, we've been collectively duped. And I do not support any kind of terrorism no matter the brand. I don't want to have to tell you again.

[Argus]

1 hour ago, GostHacked said:

It seems that people have a short term memory when it comes to some of the events and how they tie into each other. All while ranting that I have no idea wtf I am talking about.  of terrorism no matter the brand.

Because you don't. You make up reasons for why Muslims kill people because you have this bizarre fringe left ideology which has a hate on for the West. And it seems to be combined with this really kind of racist belief that non-white people are never responsible for their own actions, and are nothing but the playtoys of those nefarious, much superior white people. To this end you completely ignore the reasons given by terrorists and terrorist groups, assigning them the reasons you prefer they would use so you can, in turn, use it to condemn the West.

They have told you repeatedly why they are killing and committing terrorist acts, and you blithely ignore them so you can drone on about blowback and wag your finger at how horrible we are for having provoked all this nastiness. Sorry, not buying it.

As for Russia, that poverty stricken kleptocracy, it's run by a man even more narcissistic, dishonest and self-serving than Trump. And he's probably just as ignorant, but no media in Russia will dare report his screwups because it would cost them their lives. The entire motivation for all Russia's breast beating and strutting is to make little man Putin be able to feel like a big man. So what if it costs billions while most Russians live in poverty. What they don't know won't hurt him.

But you go ahead and blame the West for all Russia's aggressiveness. It's certainly in line with your self-hating ideology.

Edited April 11, 2017 by Argus

[Wilber]

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

A phyrrhic victory as evidenced by the present conflagration.  I'm a lot less glad about why and would be much happier if both sides would just blow each other to kingdom come.

Really, you got to live in a period of over 70 years without your country fighting a major war and probably won't in your lifetime. Phyrrhric indeed.

[kactus]

13 hours ago, Rue said:

 

The cold reality? Iran, Iraq used them. So has Al Quaeda, Daesh, Syria.

I stated on this board before, much of what we read about "nuclear" Iran could very well be a cover story for another fear, and that is that Iran, Syria, Iraq, the whole bloody lot of them including Daesh and Al Quaeda have their hands on toxic chemicals and gas and that is the real fear not nukes.

You and I will never know the truth. The best we can do is follow up with declassified info years after the fact.

The fact is the West, in particular Britain, Germany, France, Belgium and the US have sold chemicals to ME countries as have China and Russia and you and I do not know at what quantities and who has them. I can tell you this, certain chemicals can sit for centuries and not break down. Viruses in air tight containers don't expire.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Absolute BS and you are so full of it....Iran did not use did not use any chemical weapons against any other country. But it doesn't stop some people spreading the fear....

Your incoherent arguments to throw in the name of Iran every time you mention the western backed terrorist organisations like Daesh, Al Qaeda, etc, speaks a volume about your propaganda machine on this forum to exonerate the actions of the apartheit state of Israel and wash it off with Iran...

Yah! Do carry on with the cover story for the fear of Iran...The real fear...Jog on msn! Finish off what you started. Israel doesn't have the balls and the West should deal with this imaginary fear in your head by confronting Iran....  

The problem with zionists like you (and yes I am referring to you rue) is that you sometimes talk from your backside without ever thinking through the consequences for spreading such lies...It just creates a bad smell that throws a spell on a bunch of gullible/ sheepish individulas to buy into these stories and take it as a gospel truth....

I have encountered many people with your views spreading the same horse cr@p to make sure the mud sticks to the wall....Ironically, people expressing such views support a kind of government that is either complicit or actively supporting such savage actions against other nations yet they have the audacity to blame other countries....(Israel's government springs to mind) 

It is your corrupted government in Israel that has long been spreading fear about Iran and fearing the nuke. Now that the program has stopped ppl like you are still winging and moaning that oh there might be a justification that not a nuclear armed Iran will attack the West (but what you actually mean to say Israel...) The argument for Iran acquiring nuclear capability has always been about the balance of influence in the ME may shift in favour of Iran. Iran despite having the chemicals has never attacked another country but has been subjected to attacks such as Halabja (which for once you have rightfully talked about...Haleluja) 

It just takes a bit of decency, sanity and common sense to realise why would a chemically armed Iran (as you put it) wants to attack a nuclear armed Israel in possession of  200-400 nuclear warheads according to your own whistleblower 20 years ago Link

That is why some apologists for Israel like yourselves don't have the balls to tell the truth. They make up things to provoke Iran to initiate an attack. Just like the baiting you are used to...

[Topaz]

14 hours ago, Argus said:

There's no evidence the rebels have chemical weapons.

Perhaps u should read this.....                                                          http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/09/yes-the-syrian-rebels-do-have-access-to-chemical-weapons.html      

[eyeball]

15 hours ago, Wilber said:

Really, you got to live in a period of over 70 years without your country fighting a major war and probably won't in your lifetime. Phyrrhric indeed.

It's our planet that's in a state of constant war Wilber and it won't be ending anytime soon despite the War to End All Wars that you're celebrating.

[Wilber]

4 minutes ago, eyeball said:

It's our planet that's in a state of constant war Wilber and it won't be ending anytime soon despite the War to End All Wars that you're celebrating.

Always has been but you and I have been blessed. Who is celebrating? When I visit someones grave I am not celebrating, I am paying my respects.

[GostHacked]

15 hours ago, Argus said:

1  Because you don't. You make up reasons for why Muslims kill people because you have this bizarre fringe left ideology which has a hate on for the West. And it seems to be combined with this really kind of racist belief that non-white people are never responsible for their own actions, and are nothing but the playtoys of those nefarious, much superior white people. To this end you completely ignore the reasons given by terrorists and terrorist groups, assigning them the reasons you prefer they would use so you can, in turn, use it to condemn the West.

2  They have told you repeatedly why they are killing and committing terrorist acts, and you blithely ignore them so you can drone on about blowback and wag your finger at how horrible we are for having provoked all this nastiness. Sorry, not buying it.

3  As for Russia, that poverty stricken kleptocracy, it's run by a man even more narcissistic, dishonest and self-serving than Trump. And he's probably just as ignorant, but no media in Russia will dare report his screwups because it would cost them their lives. The entire motivation for all Russia's breast beating and strutting is to make little man Putin be able to feel like a big man. So what if it costs billions while most Russians live in poverty. What they don't know won't hurt him.

4 But you go ahead and blame the West for all Russia's aggressiveness. It's certainly in line with your self-hating ideology.

1 - Screw you, I am not left or right. I find idiots on both sides of this spectrum while I am in the middle having to put up with the idiotic rhetoric on BOTH sides.  Sure they are responsible for their actions.  HOWEVER...  if I provoke you into doing something, in your view I would be absolved of all responsibility because I was not the one doing the attack.

2 - Our foreign policy via the avenue of Turkey has been direct evidence of the West's complicity in supporting terrorism against Assad and Syria. Remember the FSA was housed out of Turkey and trained by US special forces. That's not disputed. I've proved that before in those other Syria threads.  Who's making stuff up now?

3 - As I said, no where did I support Russia or Putin. I did not want to have to tell you people again, but I keep having to clarify my stance.  However I look at it like the way the US made the Soviet Union spend lots of money upgrading their military knowing in the end they'd never be able to pay for it. One of the main reasons the Soviet Union collapsed. The Soviets spent themselves to death. I see a similar action here. Getting Russia to spend itself into oblivion.

4  No where am I blaming the West for ALL of Russia's aggressiveness. I made my views clear regarding Crimea and the Ukraine. I did not support that either. 

Things like BRICS and Gadaffi's Gold Dinar, and Iraq's attempt to move off the petrodollar is the main reason these nations are being thrown to the ground. Syria was most likely going to do their trading in a new currency other than the petrodollar.  When no one needs the petrodollar the US implodes.

[DogOnPorch]

17 hours ago, GostHacked said:

 

Rue, Dog, did you two put up a fuss when Iraq attacked Iran with chemical and conventional weapons? No? Why the hell not? Hell you SHOULD be pissed that your own governments are complicit in with handing them those weapons in the first place. Did you two put up a fuss about how the US and their BFF Islamic dictatorship Saudi Arabia helped fund the Jihad in Afghanistan against the Soviets? Oh right, forget that those actions long ago are still causing pain. Evolved from the Muhajedeen, to Al-Qaeda, To ISIS and various other offshoots of stupid radical Muslims. Connect the dots for once. It's not that damn hard. I may be stupid and dumb but I am no Forrest Gump.

 

 

First...I wasn't on MLW in the 1980s and NEITHER were you.

Second...I make a fuss anytime nerve gas is deployed by the enemy.

Third...you have zero clue as to how sarin functions and is deployed.

Forth...Canada and the USA have never supplied nerve agents to Iran or Iraq.

[Argus]

4 hours ago, Topaz said:

Perhaps u should read this.....                                                          http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/09/yes-the-syrian-rebels-do-have-access-to-chemical-weapons.html      

Because a blogger says so? The plain and simple logic that says they don't is that they haven't used them on the Syrian government, haven't used them in Western cities, haven't used them against the Syrian military. Nor is there any sign the Syrian or Russians are making any preparations in case they do.

[DogOnPorch]

Just now, Argus said:

Because a blogger says so? The plain and simple logic that says they don't is that they haven't used them on the Syrian government, haven't used them in Western cities, haven't used them against the Syrian military. Nor is there any sign the Syrian or Russians are making any preparations in case they do.

 

I think the so-called...lol..."rebels"...do have some old rockets loaded with ancient binary sarin that is probably jus' plain old deadly poisonous rather than actual sarin ...plus they were reported capturing 'Saddam era bunkers' filled with precursors. Now...if they have a proper facility and a few skilled chemists...perhaps they can produce sarin. But the stuff isn't just sitting around waiting to be captured and used...that's not how she works.

Turkish labs "confirm" that sarin was used (hah)...but again, I have issues with that story...generally in regards to the manner which the supposed sarin victims were handled w/o affecting the poorly equipped rescuers. Sarin kills...

[GostHacked]

48 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

First...I wasn't on MLW in the 1980s and NEITHER were you.

Second...I make a fuss anytime nerve gas is deployed by the enemy.

Third...you have zero clue as to how sarin functions and is deployed.

Forth...Canada and the USA have never supplied nerve agents to Iran or Iraq.

 

Now I know you won't accept certain sources ...  Sorry warning FAKE NEWS !!!!!

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/dec/31/iraq.politics

Quote

On August 18, 2002, the New York Times carried a front-page story headlined, “Officers say U.S. aided Iraq despite the use of gas”. Quoting anonymous US “senior military officers”, the NYT “revealed” that in the 1980s, the administration of US President Ronald Reagan covertly provided “critical battle planning assistance at a time when American intelligence knew that Iraqi commanders would employ chemical weapons in waging the decisive battles of the Iran-Iraq war”. The story made a brief splash in the international media, then died.

While the August 18 NYT article added new details about the extent of US military collaboration with Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein during Iraq’s 1980-88 war with Iran, it omitted the most outrageous aspect of the scandal: not only did Ronald Reagan’s Washington turn a blind-eye to the Hussein regime’s repeated use of chemical weapons against Iranian soldiers and Iraq’s Kurdish minority, but the US helped Iraq develop its chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programs.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/08/26/exclusive-cia-files-prove-america-helped-saddam-as-he-gassed-iran/

Quote

U.S. officials have long denied acquiescing to Iraqi chemical attacks, insisting that Hussein’s government never announced he was going to use the weapons. But retired Air Force Col. Rick Francona, who was a military attaché in Baghdad during the 1988 strikes, paints a different picture.

"The Iraqis never told us that they intended to use nerve gas. They didn’t have to. We already knew," he told Foreign Policy.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/longroad/etc/arming.html

Quote

Officially, most Western nations participated in a total arms embargo against Iraq during the 1980s, but as we shall see in this broadcast, Western companies, primarily in Germany and Great Britain, but also in the United States, sold Iraq the key technology for its chemical, missile, and nuclear programs. As we shall also see, many Western governments seemed remarkably indifferent, if not enthusiastic, about those deals. And here in Washington, the government consistently followed a policy which allowed and perhaps encouraged the extraordinary growth of Saddam Hussein's arsenal and his power.

This is a complicated story of miscalculation, deceit and greed, and it leads inevitably to the conclusion that the most dangerous weapons Western forces face today in the desert are in many ways our own creation.

Giver your best Dog!

[Topaz]

There's so much fake news out there that THAT alone could start WW3. Is it time to start talking about those bomb shelter like they did in the late 50's and 60's?

[DogOnPorch]

1 hour ago, GostHacked said:

 

Now I know you won't accept certain sources ...  Sorry warning FAKE NEWS !!!!!

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/dec/31/iraq.politics

http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/08/26/exclusive-cia-files-prove-america-helped-saddam-as-he-gassed-iran/

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/longroad/etc/arming.html

Giver your best Dog!

 

Oh noes...GH doesn't share my POV...whatever shall I do??

What is thiodiglycol? Google it...chop chop.

[DogOnPorch]

Re: Islamic State and nerve agents...nobody knows.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/10913275/Isis-storms-Saddam-era-chemical-weapons-complex-in-Iraq.html

http://www.ibtimes.com/saddam-era-chemical-weapons-now-under-isis-control-reports-1705144

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2793731/will-rusting-chemical-weapons-cache-ignored-americans-fall-isis-hands-iraq-claims-2-500-rockets-containing-deadly-sarin-hands-terrorists.html

[GostHacked]

2 hours ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

Oh noes...GH doesn't share my POV...whatever shall I do??

What is thiodiglycol? Google it...chop chop.

Mainly because your POV has been proven wrong time and time again.  But you are free to think whatever you want.

[eyeball]

Yes its been pretty hilarious listening to Tillerson lecture Russia about complicity in the murder of innocents.

[kactus]

1 hour ago, GostHacked said:

Mainly because your POV has been proven wrong time and time again.  But you are free to think whatever you want.

They never bloody give an answer on who supplied in the first place all these chemicals in the eighties to Saddam Hussein but quick to jump on the bandwagon and falsely accuse Iran of using it. Oh never mind the Saudi king and israeli government. They are our lap dogs and will dance to any tune we want them to play...

[DogOnPorch]

2 hours ago, GostHacked said:

Mainly because your POV has been proven wrong time and time again.  But you are free to think whatever you want.

 

You're free to think Canada gave Iraq nerve gas...or the USA...or Israel...etc. Those folks are too stupid to make these things without our assistance...am I right???