SYRIA

Posts

What the what?


Also I love how a topic about Syria obviously became a topic about the United States of America.
author=Shinan
What the what?


Also I love how a topic about Syria obviously became a topic about the United States of America.
In the USA, international news means it's about the USA.
That's a little cruel don't you think? I'd imagine it's natural for someone to relate news to their country's involvement in it. And it's not uncommon for one subject to beget a similar one's consideration.
Solitayre
Circumstance penalty for being the bard.
18257
author=bulmabriefs144
Insanity


An awful lot of people got hurt during that shooting, there's no doubt that it happened. Similarly, many people lost their lives in Syria, and I don't doubt that a chemical attack happened, what I doubt is that they're as sure of who did it as they claim.

Claiming that an incident where people lost their lives was made up is pretty insensitive.
I tend to avoid participating in such discussions in non-political forums, but just two things:

Don't you think it makes no sense whatsoever what president Al-Assad allegedly did? Attacking his own people with a forbidden weapon had no benefits, and he basically commited suicide since international community will not let this go unpunished.

There were also leaked Britam (PMC) documents suggesting that sarin attack might have been a false flag operation but I don't know how credible this evidence is so yeah, not going to point fingers.

US and other nations should really think twice before doing anything, the strongest opposition in Syria is directly related to terrorist groups.
author=Solitayre
author=bulmabriefs144
Insanity

An awful lot of people got hurt during that shooting, there's no doubt that it happened. Similarly, many people lost their lives in Syria, and I don't doubt that a chemical attack happened, what I doubt is that they're as sure of who did it as they claim.

Claiming that an incident where people lost their lives was made up is pretty insensitive.

Do you personally know anyone who was hurt or died there? Do you know anyone who knows anyone there? Because I don't, and regardless of "sensitivity" (I'm sick of that word in regard to politics), I call BS.

...Back on topic, regardless of whether people lost their lives in Syria or not (btw, somewhere in the world at any given second, someone is mistreated or dying, sorry to be "insensitive" but this is how life actually is), the point is, while Islamic types were killing people, he largely did nothing. Assad on the other hand, is more in line with US sympathies, so now because there are supposed chemical weapons, we attack?

You know, this scenario sounds awfully familiar.

Obama's changed his tune and is now pushing for a Syrian intervention.
Considering that the language of the bill gives him unacceptably broad strike powers, it might be a deliberately repugnant bill so he can stall for time, pretending to be a hero, while the Free Syrian Army continues on it's way to extermination. Then he can blame the Republicans for not letting the dogs of war loose in time.
If Obama did that, I'd actually be pretty :D
On the other hand, maybe he's just a stupid idiot caving in, destroying the last of the loyal Obamapologist base he has, and baiting himself for impeachment.

author=Mr_Detective
I don't think this could lead to WW3, the same thing was said about North Korea, and that eventually became a joke. :D

Actually, this can lead to WW3. If you destroy all semblances of civilization in the middle east, it becomes a perfect staging area for cold war and proxy battles like Vietnam.
If Bush isn't going to get impeached, Obama won't.
Isrieri
"My father told me this would happen."
6155
author=Dyhalto
Considering that the language of the bill gives him unacceptably broad strike powers, it might be a deliberately repugnant bill so he can stall for time, pretending to be a hero, while the Free Syrian Army continues on it's way to extermination. Then he can blame the Republicans for not letting the dogs of war loose in time.
If Obama did that, I'd actually be pretty :D

Remember how he handled the Republicans a few summers ago when they made that debacle about the debt ceiling? Offered up Social Security and Medicare on the debating table because he knew they wouldn't be able to make a move on them. Shocked everybody, but it worked. I'm pretty sure he knows what he's doing.
If Bush didn't get impeached for waging 2 false wars then Obama isn't going to get impeached for getting involved in an civil war where the government is using chemical weapons on civilians. (Where technically according to U.N. laws the members are meant to do anyways..)
author=soniX
^^^
You’re so off. -_-

For the last time. The government did NOT use chemical weapons. You people keep repeating the same garbage without any proof. If you read my post as “F8tal” a few posts back, you’ll know who most likely used chemical weapons and who has used chemical weapons in the past.

But then again that also applies for the rebels as well. Maybe you should wait untill the UN report comes through before declaring alternative news sources as fact?

I'm actually getting sick and tired of seeing Syria on the news 24/7 for the last two years and to be honest I'm glad something is being done. Remember the keywords here are limited airstrikes, not fullblown invasion.
Do you personally know anyone who was hurt or died there? Do you know anyone who knows anyone there? Because I don't, and regardless of "sensitivity" (I'm sick of that word in regard to politics), I call BS.

This is the stupidest argument I've ever heard.
Please don't be the next obsorber, bulmabriefs144. If you're asked to write an argumentative essay on this topic, you're going to fail, no offence.

When you discuss a topic of this nature, Youtube is never a reliable source. The "awfully familiar" link is not reliable either. The true, reliable sources are those that you find via "Google Scholar"; articles that have references.
It doesn't matter.

Virtually all news is staged (and here is "proof"). Just sometimes it's more obvious.

The bottom line is, if you weren't there, and didn't know anyone, so far as you know nothing at all happened. You can see all the photos in the world, but in this age where someone can photoshop a boy into a girl, how can you trust anything you haven't seen with your own eyes?

Here's an object lesson:

Costa Concondia sinks and dead bodies found.

Really...? Actually, none of that happened. Nobody died (not from the wreck itself anyway).

(I'm not gonna tell which one is right, because frankly, I wasn't there.)

Who decides what is "reliable" eplip? Those in power, who determine source credibility. That is, if you're not liked by those in power, you don't get things like funding or esteem from reputable types. You get marginalized.

Like this guy pretty much did.

I have a beef with references too. I can cite 20+ dead people out of context, and say anything I want. References aren't proof, proof is proof. Anyway, since you will have to find out firsthand that news is crap, I'm not going to convince you, so...

Moving on. Syria.

Do we know there are chemical weapons? Really? Or is Obama and co. just saying there are weapons?
author=bulmabriefs144
Who decides what is "reliable" eplip? Those in power, who determine source credibility. That is, if you're not liked by those in power, you don't get things like funding or esteem from reputable types. You get marginalized.

Like this guy pretty much did.

No, no, that's not exactly what I mean by reliable. This is what I mean by a reliable source. Another example. But granted, reliable sources are hard to find. You have to read several of them and then decide for yourself. But first off, Youtube is never a reliable source to begin with.
So, you're telling me this isn't reliable?


(Hint: rhetorical question)
author=bulmabriefs144
The bottom line is, if you weren't there, and didn't know anyone, so far as you know nothing at all happened. You can see all the photos in the world, but in this age where someone can photoshop a boy into a girl, how can you trust anything you haven't seen with your own eyes?

Haha! Before too long, you'll believe that only you are real, and everything else is just a complex figment of your imagination. =P
No, I've gone way past that. I no longer believe I'm real.

Nah, other people and myself are definitely real. But I've definitely suspected our govt has been lying to us, at least since the 80s or 90s. And if you can control the press, and control what is/isn't published, people live in a scary world. Hence, SOPA and Syria are really the same issue (because I say it is, since I didn't get to talk enough about SOPA).

For instance, do you remember voting on whether to invade Syria? No? It's because in both cases, control was taken out of your hands. Enough of that.

Let's talk about something else. Why Syria after we seemed all focused on Egypt? Surely (alleged) chemical weapons isn't such a pressing issue that we just drop everything? Did I miss something?