Syria: What should the US do/not do?

CS Hasuki

nagilum2 wrote: »

what grounds are similar??

(note: I do NOT think the US should get involved in Syria)

Israel have chemical weapons and have used white phosphorus on palestinian civilians. - Multiple human rights groups.
Also who the hell are the US to judge anyone. Agent orange vietnam, White phosphorus Iraq war. Not even mentioning depleted uranium they use.

Jonny7

CS Hasuki wrote: »

Israel have chemical weapons and have used white phosphorus on palestinian civilians. - Multiple human rights groups.
Also who the hell are the US to judge anyone. Agent orange vietnam, White phosphorus Iraq war. Not even mentioning depleted uranium they use.

So by that logic Assad shouldn't receive any criticism from any of the major powers for gassing 1400 people.

dublinbhoy88

Jonny7 wrote: »

So by that logic Assad shouldn't receive any criticism from any of the major powers for gassing 1400 people.

any proof yet assad gassed 1400 people?

dublinbhoy88

Jonny7 wrote: »

Don't presume my position and secondly you are grossly over simplifying a situation based on your own views and beliefs.

you just cant answer the question, the USA wants to attack Syria for its own benefit, nothing humanitarian about it, not forgetting they are in bed with al queda in all this which makes it even more perverse and disgusting

Jonny7

dublinbhoy88 wrote: »

any proof yet assad gassed 1400 people?

There's plenty of evidence, unfortunately it's nigh impossible to fully prove.

I'd say forces under his control probably did it. Then again forces under his control and responsibility have been massacring protesters in the first few months labelling any and all as "terrorists", basically killing people who opposed him, including shelling neighbouring and entire cities.

I don't need to mention any other countries, nor vent my (over) criticism of other countries to make this point. That's because the point isn't based on my personal beliefs - rather it's based on grim events and facts

Jonny7

dublinbhoy88 wrote: »

you just cant answer the question, the USA wants to attack Syria for its own benefit, nothing humanitarian about it, not forgetting they are in bed with al queda in all this which makes it even more perverse and disgusting

That's your own personal belief, I'm certainly not going to change your mind. The US is not "gaining" much from it's current position, neither are France, Germany, UK, Turkey and so on. If they wanted an easier ride they'd support Assad - whom they were courting before the violence - as dictatorships go he was relatively popular and didn't display any of the current penchant for gripping onto power regardless of how much blood would be spilled in the process.

As for the US (again the culprit) being in bed with Al Qaeda - a bit strange considering they just took out Anas al-Liby, struck Al-Shabab in Somalia, and don't support any of the foreign jihadist groups that have arrived in Syria.

dublinbhoy88

Jonny7 wrote: »

There's plenty of evidence, unfortunately it's nigh impossible to fully prove.

I'd say forces under his control probably did it. Then again forces under his control and responsibility have been massacring protesters in the first few months labelling any and all as "terrorists", basically killing people who opposed him, including shelling neighbouring and entire cities.

I don't need to mention any other countries, nor vent my (over) criticism of other countries to make this point. That's because the point isn't based on my personal beliefs - rather it's based on grim events and facts

so where is this evidence?

Jonny7

dublinbhoy88 wrote: »

so where is this evidence?

It's been presented - the weapons were apparently fired from government held areas into rebel held areas. The munitions were in line with the weapons that the Syrian military is known to have for delivering chemical weapons. Radio chatter was picked up (which indicated that the parts of the regime knew of the attack). The areas afterward were heavily shelled.

dublinbhoy88

Jonny7 wrote: »

It's been presented - the weapons were apparently fired from government held areas into rebel held areas. The munitions were in line with the weapons that the Syrian military is known to have for delivering chemical weapons. Radio chatter was picked up (which indicated that the parts of the regime knew of the attack). The areas afterward were heavily shelled.

that's propaganda not evidence FFS:pac:

Jonny7

dublinbhoy88 wrote: »

that's propaganda not evidence FFS:pac:

So what evidence would suffice then?

I'm predicting a "I don't know"

dublinbhoy88

Jonny7 wrote: »

So what evidence would suffice then?

I'm predicting a "I don't know"

terrorists fired the chemical weapons, what side they were on you will never know

InTheTrees

CS Hasuki wrote: »

Last time I checked, Israel were bombing Syria

And why wouldn't they after being threatened with anialiation? Go for it and hit 'em when they're down.

Today is actually the anniversary of Syria's last invaision attempt of Israel in '73

Jonny7

dublinbhoy88 wrote: »

terrorists fired the chemical weapons, what side they were on you will never know

Fair enough, what evidence are you basing that on?

(edit in your own words please, don't go pasting RT videos and the like)

dublinbhoy88

InTheTrees wrote: »

And why wouldn't they after being threatened with anialiation? Go for it and hit 'em when they're down.

Today is actually the anniversary of Syria's last invaision attempt of Israel in '73

of course you wouldn see the Zionist trying to anialate other people would you, I few years back Obama told Israel It must return to pre 1967 borders, has Israel done so yet, have they stopped stealing land from Palestinians yet?

InTheTrees

dublinbhoy88 wrote: »

of course you wouldn see the Zionist trying to anialate other people would you, I few years back Obama told Israel It must return to pre 1967 borders, has Israel done so yet, have they stopped stealing land from Palestinians yet?

Well its a tit for tat thing really tbh and has been going on since Israeli independance 60 odd years ago.

And no, Israel isn't an innocent party in the mess at all, they're playing the game just like the other side plays it. They've been invaded twice by Syria after all.

And they're probably responsible for fermenting discontent in Syria too. Why not? Id do the same thing. A civil war in Syria diverts attention from them.

InTheTrees

dublinbhoy88 wrote: »

of course you wouldn see the Zionist trying to anialate other people would you,

"The Zionist"? Seriously? Isnt that a newspaper?

BuilderPlumber

InTheTrees wrote: »

Well its a tit for tat thing really tbh and has been going on since Israeli independance 60 odd years ago.

And no, Israel isn't an innocent party in the mess at all, they're playing the game just like the other side plays it. They've been invaded twice by Syria after all.

And they're probably responsible for fermenting discontent in Syria too. Why not? Id do the same thing. A civil war in Syria diverts attention from them.

The mess we currently see in the Middle East, ranging from Israel to Syria to Iraq, stems from a combination of interference, warmongering and dictators on ego trips. Most of these states have been artificially created after British and Turkish empires crumbled. The new states then soon became fair game for the US and USSR to try and get new allies. Israel was a staunch Western ally whereas Arab nationalists turned to the Soviets for help.

What is needed today is serious negotiations between ally parties involved in the Middle East. Israel should respect its neighbours, come up with a 2-state solution, and stop controversial settlements. Arab countries should in turn recognise Israel, refrain from funding or otherwise aiding terrorism, and give more rights/recognition to their Jewish minorities. Until this is done, the animosity and mistrust between both sides will continue. Unfortunately, this suits the arms industry which predominates in a lot of the countries involved.

dublinbhoy88

Jonny7 wrote: »

Fair enough, what evidence are you basing that on?

(edit in your own words please, don't go pasting RT videos and the like)

it was either assad terrorists anti assad terrorists CIA terrorists or Mossad terrorists or similar, the question is which terrorists had more to gain by this attack?

Jonny7

dublinbhoy88 wrote: »

it was either assad terrorists anti assad terrorists CIA terrorists or Mossad terrorists or similar, the question is which terrorists had more to gain by this attack?

Evidence?

dublinbhoy88

Jonny7 wrote: »

Evidence?

Theses is no evidence only speculation

CS Hasuki

dublinbhoy88 wrote: »

Theses is no evidence only speculation

WRONG. Obama has top secret evidence Assad did it. TOP TOP SECRET. Nobody is allowed to see it.

Jonny7

dublinbhoy88 wrote: »

Theses is no evidence only speculation

So you aren't interested in evidence - therefore it's belief based?

sin_city

Jonny7 wrote: »

Evidence?

I'd ask the same from the war mongering US politicians.

It's all a conspiracy Jonny. :rolleyes:

Thank God we have people like you so a million or so Iraqis died in the name of evidence from the US and the UK on WMAs.

CS Hasuki

sin_city wrote: »

I'd ask the same from the war mongering US politicians.

It's all a conspiracy Jonny. :rolleyes:

Thank God we have people like you so a million or so Iraqis died in the name of evidence from the US and the UK on WMAs.

I believe its about 4.5 million in total now. Similar to the jews in WW2. But hey whats a few rag heads. :rolleyes:

CS Hasuki

Jonny7 wrote: »

So you aren't interested in evidence - therefore it's belief based?

Can I ask you a question Jonny? Did you vote "yes for jobs"?

Jonny7

CS Hasuki wrote: »

I believe its about 4.5 million in total now. Similar to the jews in WW2. But hey whats a few rag heads. :rolleyes:

I've never heard that figure, what's the source on that?

Jonny7

sin_city wrote: »

I'd ask the same from the war mongering US politicians.

If you've made up your mind then there is little I can say to change it

Thank God we have people like you so a million or so Iraqis died in the name of evidence from the US and the UK on WMAs.

I marched against the war in Iraq but thanks

CS Hasuki

Jonny7 wrote: »

I've never heard that figure, what's the source on that?

2012 source @ 3.3
http://www.globalresearch.ca/us-sponsored-genocide-against-iraq-1990-2012-killed-3-3-million-including-750000-children/5314461

This week:
RT.COM - Don't watch if you have a weak stomack.

Jonny7

CS Hasuki wrote: »

2012 source @ 3.3
http://www.globalresearch.ca/us-sponsored-genocide-against-iraq-1990-2012-killed-3-3-million-including-750000-children/5314461

This week:
RT.COM - Don't watch if you have a weak stomack.

Credible sources please

CS Hasuki

Jonny7 wrote: »

Credible sources please

LOL WHATS A CREDIBLE SOURCE JONNY? If you watch the video all sources are listed within.