Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Chemical weapon used on civilians in Syria + Airstrikes

1235763

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,116 ✭✭✭archer22


    Happened 30 years ago so no relevance to the current situation. And certainly well before Trumps time.
    So ya, more whataboutery.

    "30 years ago" ehh....I could have sworn the protesters were shot last week!!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,116 ✭✭✭archer22


    Nope just trying to stop people derailing the thread and also trying to keep it relevant.

    As a reminder the thread topic is about Asssd gasing his own people. Maybe we could discuss that?

    Another guy after appointing himself Moderator....Wow!!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,133 ✭✭✭Shurimgreat


    archer22 wrote: »
    "30 years ago" ehh....I could have sworn the protesters were shot last week!!

    We were talking about chemical weapons used by Saddam againat the kurds.

    Not sure of the whataboutery you were referring to? Its hard to keep track of all the whataboutery.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Conspiracy forum that way >>

    Bring your tin foil hat with you.

    I think the difference between me and you is I look at all the evidence. While people like you will always believe the mainstream narrative. Anyone who doesn't follow your line of thinking is a conspiracy theorist. This is old age trick tactic politicians use to stop people asking questions. Some of the people just don't believe the Western media is incapable of lying and their government have always their best interests in mind when they do things. This is frankly a crock of ****.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,133 ✭✭✭Shurimgreat


    Rather than replying individually to the Assad fanboys and sycophants I will reply more generally.

    Assad has a history of gassing his people. Repeated UN investigations have found this to be the case.
    While they are not perfect I will believe them over an Assad fan boy hiding behind his computer somewhere in Ireland.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,091 ✭✭✭backspin.


    Was Assad not winning the war, why would he then bring international outrage upon himself with the use of chemical weapons?

    Maybe Trumps announcement that he intended to pull the troops out had something to do with it? Dark forces at play.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    archer22 wrote: »
    "..I could have sworn the protesters were shot last week!!

    There you go a gringo posted thread on the protest

    https://touch.boards.ie/thread/2057857599/1


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,912 ✭✭✭ArchXStanton


    Gringo180 wrote: »
    ****ing Americans dont give a **** because it will mostly be Europe again that will get hit with the refugee crisis if they do strike. Russia might strike back and this could lead to world war 3. People just dont realise how close we are to it.

    Russia have said there will be grave consequences if a strike on Syria occurs,about time the gloves came off its the only language the US terrorists understand,oh and puppet boy Macron has said if there was a chemical attack they would strike Syria aswell..he needs a slap across the tits


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,460 ✭✭✭Barry Badrinath


    Mohammed Alloush the leader called the AL Nusra front his brothers. They are very same as Al Qaeda an Islamic Salafist movement.

    They are both Sunni Islamists groups but thats it.....sure Ahrar al-Sham is a Sunni Islamist group...are they Al-Nusra too? No.

    Jaish al-Islam is not 'Al-Qaeda in Syria'.

    The group which started off as 'Al-Qaeda in Syria' is now Hayat Tahrir al-Sham.

    Jaish al-Islam has fought against Hayat Tahrir al-Sham...aka...Al-Nusra...aka...Al-Qaeda in Syria.

    They are seperate forces with similar revolutionary objectives but Jaish al-Islam is more moderate than Hayat Tahrir al-Sham. Whats worse is Hayat Tahrir al-Sham officially denied being part of Al-Qaeda. This has caused a huge level of infighting among the coalition group.

    Ultimately...Jaysh al-Islam is a completely seperate group to Al-Qaeda.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,133 ✭✭✭Shurimgreat


    The Syrian war is now 7 years old with 500,000 dead. Its likely to last another 4-5 years with another couple hundred thousand dying.

    Its the most shameful event of our era and the international community have done damn all to bring it to an end.

    Russia's veto at the UN is probably the main reason it has not been brought to an end and there has been so much bloodshed.

    History and historians will treat harshly Putin, Assad and all those including posters on here who took their side.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Rather than replying individually to the Assad fanboys and sycophants I will reply more generally.

    Assad has a history of gassing his people. Repeated UN investigations have found this to be the case.
    While they are not perfect I will believe them over an Assad fan boy hiding behind his computer somewhere in Ireland.

    All these chemical attacks are in cities and towns held by jihadists. I find it strange he never uses chemical weapons against Jihadists when fighting them on a battlefield, in an open field or on land. Why would Assad gas civilians they are just pawns in this battle Assad knows this they are not his enemy? Jihadists are not targetted strategically does make any sense to do this and winning a war right now Assad has to be losing his mind to want Trump to bomb his army. I fairly certain Assad does not want to end up like Saddam or Gaddafi.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,116 ✭✭✭archer22


    backspin. wrote: »
    Was Assad not winning the war, why would he then bring international outrage upon himself with the use of chemical weapons?

    Maybe Trumps announcement that he intended to pull the troops out had something to do with it? Dark forces at play.

    Even if we were to play along with the story..what military advantage would chemical weapons provide..absolutely none!!.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,133 ✭✭✭Shurimgreat


    Russia have said there will be grave consequences if a strike on Syria occurs,about time the gloves came off its the only language the US terrorists understand,oh and puppet boy Macron has said if there was a chemical attack they would strike Syria aswell..he needs a slap across the tits

    You are so far left you are beyond the horizon. Hopefully no-one takes you seriously but in my experience the more off the scale someones opinions are the more people believe them.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,912 ✭✭✭ArchXStanton


    The Syrian war is now 7 years old with 500,000 dead. Its likely to last another 4-5 years with another couple hundred thousand dying.

    Its the most shameful event of our era and the international community have done damn all to bring it to an end.

    Russia's veto at the UN is probably the main reason it has not been brought to an end and there has been so much bloodshed.

    History and historians will treat harshly Putin, Assad and all those including posters on here who took their side.

    Nothing to do with the US at all there meddling,you would think the biggest and supposedly most advanced military in the world would have seen all those head choppers in Toyota pick up truck convoys thundering across the desert and done something about it years ago...


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,116 ✭✭✭archer22


    Gatling wrote: »
    There you go a gringo posted thread on the protest

    https://touch.boards.ie/thread/2057857599/1

    Stop trolling me!!.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    All these chemical attacks are in cities and towns held by jihadists. I find it strange he never uses chemical weapons against Jihadists when fighting them on a battlefield, in an open field or on land.

    I fairly certain Assad does not want to end up like Saddam or Gaddafi.

    Is there open battlefields in Syria or is it mostly fighting fibua.
    assad will be dragged through the streets and celebration will follow


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Gatling wrote: »
    Is there open battlefields in Syria or is it mostly fighting fibua.
    assad will be dragged through the streets and celebration will follow

    I have watched videos of all sides fighting in Syria lot of the fighting is in the open with maybe a trench dug along a small hill or near a small village.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,133 ✭✭✭Shurimgreat


    All these chemical attacks are in cities and towns held by jihadists. I find it strange he never uses chemical weapons against Jihadists when fighting them on a battlefield, in an open field or on land. Why would Assad gas civilians they are just pawns in this battle Assad knows this they are not his enemy? Jihadists are not targetted strategically does make any sense to do this and winning a war right now Assad has to be losing his mind to want Trump to bomb his army. I fairly certain Assad does not want to end up like Saddam or Gaddafi.

    Yes I mean Assad would never indescriminately barrel bomb civilians.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,201 ✭✭✭Doltanian


    What is the difference if they are killed by Chemical Weapons? there are thousands being bombed, shot and maimed every single day. The weapon of choice makes no difference. Assad is right to defend his country and if the US attempts a strike on Syria then Putin could retaliate against the US with a hypersonic missile strike. We are moving closer than ever to the Third World War and large parts of the world are at war already.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    I have watched videos of all sides fighting in Syria lot of the fighting is in the open with maybe a trench dug along a small hill or near a small village.

    So dropping chemical weapons wouldn't be a good idea if your trying to get into the trenches especially as a simple wind can turn it back on you ,
    The majority of the fighting is fibua and centered around major population centers


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Yes I mean Assad would never indescriminately barrel bomb civilians.

    I don't disagree with you. Assad airforce has used barrel bombs to target militants in rebel-held areas. I don't think Assad is using chemical weapons there is no need when they are winning the war now.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,358 ✭✭✭✭jimmycrackcorm


    The decision is done Trump is pulling out. Russia saw this coming weeks ago there would be a false flag event in this region.

    More like the Russians have learned the lessons from the IRA to ring up a bomb warning first.

    Expect a false flag alert from them the next time a treacherous spy is to be eliminated.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    Doltanian wrote: »
    if the US attempts a strike on Syria then Putin could retaliate against the US with a hypersonic missile strike

    They only tested a relatively small rocket recently so don't think America will be worried on a weapon that doesn't exist yet .


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,116 ✭✭✭archer22


    Yes I mean Assad would never indescriminately barrel bomb civilians.

    You do realise a "barrel bomb" is just a conventional unguided bomb...and given that they had to manufacture them themselves why would they risk their lives flying them in at low altitude to drop them on targets of no value :rolleyes:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    archer22 wrote: »
    You do realise a "barrel bomb" is just a conventional unguided bomb...and given that they had to manufacture them themselves why would they risk their lives flying them in at low altitude to drop them on targets

    Where they won't risk getting shotdown and usually only on large civilian population centers


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,719 ✭✭✭Nermal


    They are seperate forces with similar revolutionary objectives but Jaish al-Islam is more moderate than Hayat Tahrir al-Sham.

    No such thing as a moderate head-hacker.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Hard to take you seriously with posts such as this.

    Actually, no Blair WMD dossier made reference to Saddam requiring nuclear materials to make a nuclear weapon. That evidence was debunked years later after the Iraqi invasion.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,133 ✭✭✭Shurimgreat


    I don't disagree with you. Assad airforce has used barrel bombs to target militants in rebel-held areas. I don't think Assad is using chemical weapons there is no need when they are winning the war now.

    Since March 2011 I have been hearing that Assad is winning the war so need to do this that or the other.

    He's "winning" precisely because he's more willing to use chemical weapons in urban areas than engage in costly house to house fighting where he could lose.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Gatling wrote: »
    So dropping chemical weapons wouldn't be a good idea if your trying to get into the trenches especially as a simple wind can turn it back on you ,
    The majority of the fighting is fibua and centered around major population centers

    Why would they care if the dropping chemical weapons from the air on jihadists?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    Why would they care if the dropping chemical weapons from the air on jihadists?

    According to you

    Not everyone that doesn't support assad and putin are jihadis ,

    Just another excuse to rant


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,133 ✭✭✭Shurimgreat


    Actually, no Blair WMD dossier made reference to Saddam requiring nuclear materials to make a nuclear weapon. That evidence was debunked years later after the Iraqi invasion.

    And again what has this got to do with the topic of this thread?
    Either stick to the current Syrian conflict or create a new thread about the Iraq war.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Since March 2011 I have been hearing that Assad is winning the war so need to do this that or the other.

    He's "winning" precisely because he's more willing to use chemical weapons in urban areas than engage in costly house to house fighting where he could lose.

    Sorry, that makes no sense because one attack every 6 months is now going to change the outcome of a fight in a city. Some of those cities in Syria stretch out ten miles or more.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,116 ✭✭✭archer22


    Gatling wrote: »
    Where they won't risk getting shotdown and usually only on large civilian population centers

    Stop trolling by altering my quotes....I just reported you for this.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Nermal wrote: »
    No such thing as a moderate head-hacker.

    I know it like they think one group of Islamist extremists is different to another. They all share the same goal.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,133 ✭✭✭Shurimgreat


    Doltanian wrote: »
    What is the difference if they are killed by Chemical Weapons? there are thousands being bombed, shot and maimed every single day. The weapon of choice makes no difference. Assad is right to defend his country and if the US attempts a strike on Syria then Putin could retaliate against the US with a hypersonic missile strike. We are moving closer than ever to the Third World War and large parts of the world are at war already.

    There will be no third world war. In a conventional face off with the US he would be crushed. The US has 20 nuclear powered aircraft carriers. Russia has one rickity diesel powered one that needs to refuel at a harbour every couple of days.
    Putin's strength has always been in bombing and poisoning unarmed civilians.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,133 ✭✭✭Shurimgreat


    I just find it amusing how we suddenly see these all these new accounts to defend mother Russia.

    Amusing is the word.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    archer22 wrote: »
    Stop trolling by altering my quotes....I just reported you for this.

    What exactly did I alter .

    I'm sure the report button has been worn out on this thread ,


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    I just find it amusing how we suddenly see these all these new accounts to defend mother Russia.

    America was attacking jihadists in Syria I would support them and Russia was siding with Jihadists I would say Russia deserves all the hate it got. I think Assad is better for Syria. Can you imagine Isis took Syria it would be so scary they have a hub to launch more attacks against us in the west.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,133 ✭✭✭Shurimgreat


    John5664 wrote: »
    I meant with airstrikes in Syria not Belfast, sorry if I wasn't clear.

    Maybe so but again the Brits didn't resort to airstrikes against nationalist areas to win the war. Imagine the international outcry if they did.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,116 ✭✭✭archer22


    There will be no third world war. In a conventional face off with the US he would be crushed. The US has 20 nuclear powered aircraft carriers. Russia has one rickity diesel powered one that needs to refuel at a harbour every couple of days.
    Putin's strength has always lied in bombing and poisoning unarmed civilians.

    Russia has Zircon and Sunburn ASM's ....Aircraft carriers are just 70 year old obsolete technology in today's world..going the same way as the Battleship has gone.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,070 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn


    Gatling wrote: »
    Is there open battlefields in Syria or is it mostly fighting fibua.
    assad will be dragged through the streets and celebration will follow

    The people huddled in Damascus are far too frightened of the inevitable holocaust if the US backed rebels get in. It’s not even hidden who these rebels are.

    No doubt Assad will be dragged through the streets though, by the islamists. As Ghaddaffi was. Maybe Hillary will raise a cackle.

    I don’t disagree though about the inevitability of Assad been overthrown.

    Given the level of US/Jihadhi propaganda the US (and allies) will eventually destroy Syria, as it has destroyed Iraq and Libya and will some day destroy Iran. Which is already, and absurdly, being blamed for this.

    On and on it will go until the Middle East and North Africa are total smouldering messes, and probably Europe too as the blowback will be immense.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    . I think Assad is better for Syria.

    Wonder what the majority of Syrians think is better for them,wonder if it's different to what putin assad decides


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,133 ✭✭✭Shurimgreat


    America was attacking jihadists in Syria I would support them and Russia was siding with Jihadists I would say Russia deserves all the hate it got. I think Assad is better for Syria. Can you imagine Isis took Syria it would be so scary they have a hub to launch more attacks against us in the west.

    FFS. ISIS controlled a third of Syria when Assad was supposed to be fighting them. Instead he largely ignored them. It was left to the Kurds to do most of the fighting against ISIS with US help.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,070 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn


    Maybe so but again the Brits didn't resort to airstrikes against nationalist areas to win the war. Imagine the international outcry if they did.

    The brits and the US are bombing all over the Middle East. You are only encouraged to see Russian or Syrian bombings as problematic, so you do.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Gatling wrote: »
    Wonder what the majority of Syrians think is better for them,wonder if it's different to what putin assad decides

    https://petapixel.com/2016/08/02/26-photos-show-war-changed-syria/


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    The people huddled in Damascus are far too frightened of the inevitable holocaust .

    I've noticed holocaust and genocide gets bandied about when it comes to Putins and assad they were preventing Genocide and another holocaust ....

    But not taking to anyone when you mention assad and genocide


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,299 ✭✭✭JenovaProject


    FFS. ISIS controlled a third of Syria when Assad was supposed to be fighting them. Instead he largely ignored them. It was left to the Kurds to do most of the fighting against ISIS with US help.

    Kurds and US missed kilometres long traffic jams of oil trucks waiting to get to Turkey.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,070 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn


    FFS. ISIS controlled a third of Syria when Assad was supposed to be fighting them. Instead he largely ignored them. It was left to the Kurds to do most of the fighting against ISIS with US help.

    They controlled a third of the Syria when the US was maintaining a no fly zone for Syria over that area. It was Russian intervention that stopped the spread of Isis.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    It was Russian intervention that stopped the spread of Isis.

    That's wrong


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,070 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn


    Gatling wrote: »
    I've noticed holocaust and genocide gets bandied about when it comes to Putins and assad they were preventing Genocide and another holocaust ....

    But not taking to anyone when you mention assad and genocide

    Can you put that in English?


  • Advertisement
Advertisement