War with Syria

Voyce

Shit Lord Supreme
<Donor>
7,094
22,224
No one else wants to help, why should we do more than we have? Unless Europe backs us why should we have a hand in this? It's not like China's going to back us, and we know where Russia stands.

No thanks. If the UN wants action than their constituents can step up, and they won't.
 

Quaid

Trump's Staff
11,538
7,842
Ugh just fucking occupy the whole region British Empire style and get it the fuck over with already
 

Quaid

Trump's Staff
11,538
7,842
No one else wants to help, why should we do more than we have? Unless Europe backs us why should we have a hand in this? It's not like China's going to back us, and we know where Russia stands.

No thanks. If the UN wants action than their constituents can step up, and they won't.
Just a guess... But I'm pretty sure the US' oil consumption is more than the entire EU combined... You guys kinda have a serious interest in what goes down in the Middle East...
 

Voyce

Shit Lord Supreme
<Donor>
7,094
22,224
Just a guess... But I'm pretty sure the US' oil consumption is more than the entire EU combined... You guys kinda have a serious interest in what goes down in the Middle East...
We do and Syria has always hated us, so the current situation changes nothing.
 

Voyce

Shit Lord Supreme
<Donor>
7,094
22,224
Alex Jones is the biggest Liar to exist. IFC followed him around for a day and recorded his bull shit nuttiness-he has 0 credibility and neither does his site. Regardless, we shouldn't engage Syria Militarily.
 

Running Dog_sl

shitlord
1,199
3
Ugh just fucking occupy the whole region British Empire style and get it the fuck over with already
Funnily enough, the last time a UK government was defeated in a Parliamentary vote over military involvement was around about the time that the United States achieved independence. This puts David Cameron in the same boat as Lord North.
 

fanaskin

Well known agitator
<Silver Donator>
55,850
137,944

EXCLUSIVE: Syrians In Ghouta Claim Saudi-Supplied Rebels Behind Chemical Attack
Rebels and local residents in Ghouta accuse Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan of providing chemical weapons to an al-Qaida linked rebel group.


This article is a collaboration between Dale Gavlak reporting for Mint Press News (also of the Associated Press) and Yahya Ababneh.

Ghouta, Syria - As the machinery for a U.S.-led military intervention in Syria gathers pace following last week's chemical weapons attack, the U.S. and its allies may be targeting the wrong culprit.

Interviews with people in Damascus and Ghouta, a suburb of the Syrian capital, where the humanitarian agency Doctors Without Borders said at least 355 people had died last week from what it believed to be a neurotoxic agent, appear to indicate as much.

The U.S., Britain, and France as well as the Arab League have accused the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad for carrying out the chemical weapons attack, which mainly targeted civilians. U.S. warships are stationed in the Mediterranean Sea to launch military strikes against Syria in punishment for carrying out a massive chemical weapons attack. The U.S. and others are not interested in examining any contrary evidence, with U.S Secretary of State John Kerry saying Monday that Assad's guilt was "a judgment . already clear to the world."

However, from numerous interviews with doctors, Ghouta residents, rebel fighters and their families, a different picture emerges. Many believe that certain rebels received chemical weapons via the Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, and were responsible for carrying out the dealing gas attack.

"My son came to me two weeks ago asking what I thought the weapons were that he had been asked to carry," said Abu Abdel-Moneim, the father of a rebel fighting to unseat Assad, who lives in Ghouta.

Abdel-Moneim said his son and 12 other rebels were killed inside of a tunnel used to store weapons provided by a Saudi militant, known as Abu Ayesha, who was leading a fighting battalion. The father described the weapons as having a "tube-like structure" while others were like a "huge gas bottle."

Ghouta townspeople said the rebels were using mosques and private houses to sleep while storing their weapons in tunnels.
 

fanaskin

Well known agitator
<Silver Donator>
55,850
137,944
Military escalation in Syria will worsen civilians' plight Red Cross

GENEVA, Aug 29 (Reuters) - Any escalation of the Syrian crisis following an apparent chemical weapons attack will aggravate civilian suffering, the International Committee of the Red Cross said on Thursday.

Areas plagued by heavy fighting, including the countryside around Damascus, eastern Aleppo and Deir Ezzor province, are already reeling from breakdowns of services such as water, electricity and garbage collection, it said in a statement.

The ICRC, an independent humanitarian agency, said it was appalled by reports of a poison gas attack on Aug. 21 and urged warring parties to respect the absolute ban on chemical weapons use under international law.

There are acute shortages of medical supplies, food and water in several areas in Syria cut off from aid supplies for months, according to the ICRC, which called for unconditional access to deliver relief supplies.

~
"Further escalation will likely trigger more displacement and add to humanitarian needs, which are already immense," said Magne Barth, head of the ICRC delegation in Syria.

"In large parts of rural Damascus for example, people are dying because they lack medical supplies and because there are not enough medical personnel to attend to them," he said, adding that some go hungry because food does not reach them regularly.

ICRC water engineers are trying to repair a damaged pipeline in Hama that serves some 1.3 million people, spokeswoman Dibeh Fakhr said. The pipeline in al-Waar, damaged in heavy clashes about two weeks ago, brings water from Homs to Hama.

The United Nations says that in the besieged areas of Damascus and Rural Damascus, 600,000 people are believed to be in a critical situation due to frequent power cuts, lack of water supplies and shortages of basic goods.
-----


I think it's quite clear that attacks on Syria would most likely kill more civilians than all the chemical weapons used in Syria so far.
 

Silence_sl

shitlord
2,459
4
I think it's quite clear that attacks on Syria would most likely kill more civilians than all the chemical weapons used in Syria so far.
No doubt, and that's just in the short term. Worst case scenario is that the US attacks on Syria topples the current government, which will hand the country over to Al-Qaeda...the long term effects of which will be disastrous for the citizens of Syria and the surrounding countries. Attacking Assad now actually increases the risk to our national security in time, assuming the regime falls due to our intervention.
 

Beef Supreme_sl

shitlord
1,207
0
No doubt, and that's just in the short term. Worst case scenario is that the US attacks on Syria topples the current government, which will hand the country over to Al-Qaeda...the long term effects of which will be disastrous for the citizens of Syria and the surrounding countries. Attacking Assad now actually increases the risk to our national security in time, assuming the regime falls due to our intervention.
That's the plan yo.

If the goal is to support the Al-Sauds in eradicating the Shia arm of Islam (and I'd argue it is), with the end goal to topple Iran, you first need to remove all the possible allies and trading partners and geographically isolate them. We're doing that right now. With Libya and Iraq gone, Syria was the last big that needed to be removed before mobilizing on Iran.

Once Assad falls, it will be Iraq 2.0 with fierce, unrelenting sectarian violence through out the country. Those "rebel" Al-Qaida fighters are in to win, and after Assad is tomahawked, they will destroy Syria.
 

zzeris

King Turd of Shit Hill
<Gold Donor>
18,858
73,596
So, if we do nothing because there is really no proof, they get to keep killing each other right? Like in Africa where we don't get involved? What's the issue here again?
 

iannis

Musty Nester
31,351
17,656
How could anyone?

Kerry is worse than Hillary, and when it comes to Syria I wouldn't believe a fucking thing that Hillary has to say about it either. Unless maybe she made an appeal for the plight of women.

I could actually believe that coming from Hillary. I could believe that Hillary would advocate action which could result in war because the treatment of women in those societies is abhorent to her. I can see how she would find that to be a responsibility of her power.

But Kerry and Obama? They don't give a fuck. It's about something else, and they're not willing to fess up exactly what it's about.
 

iannis

Musty Nester
31,351
17,656
If it's too complex to even form a credible lie to explain, maybe it's the type of thing that you shouldn't be requiring anyone to kill for or to die for.
 

Malakriss

Golden Baronet of the Realm
12,341
11,732
Anybody else not trust anything this report will say?
I will trust that it will be a completely watered down basic overview of "we know but we can't tell you how we know"

Doesn't matter though, any involvement for any reason is a clusterfuck waiting to happen. Has been since it started.
 

Arbitrary

Tranny Chaser
27,117
71,790
If it's too complex to even form a credible lie to explain, maybe it's the type of thing that you shouldn't be requiring anyone to kill for or to die for.
Exactly!

I want to be wined and dined before I get fucked by our miserable foreign policy. Take me somewhere. Tell me a story. I want to be told things like "the insurgency is in its last throes" or "we'll be greeted as liberators." You know, pillow talk. I want to see some effort. Don't think that because of the prolapsed anus we were given from the W. + Cheney double team that the American people areeasy.

Dolla' makes me holla' honey boo boo child.