Post: #1

Here we go, the chicken hawks just can't resist calling for air strikes (the start of war) with Syria:

Despite Sniper Fire, U.N. Team Reaches Syria Inspection Site
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/27/world/...assad.html

Assad warns failure awaits US military intervention in Syria
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/au...tervention

U.S. military options in Syria: A briefing
http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/...efing?lite

Post: #2

It's going to be interesting hearing their excuses for spending 1B+, just like A-stan and Iraq*. We all know how that turned out. If something is done, they will whine...like in Libya. If nothing is done, they will whine.

Also, one can only LOL at the UN. They're pretty naive to think Assad was going to let them inspect the site without any trouble.

Dave Chappele has some wise words for the UN:
"What are you gonna do? What a minute, you don't got an army. I guess that means you should STFU!"

Post: #3

The bigger fish is Iran.

The house of cards is coming to a collapse....

Post: #4

White House signals impending attack on Syrian forces

http://dailycaller.com/2013/08/26/white-...z2d6erUVMm

Post: #5

Anyone else reading that the chemical weapons might actually be used and held by the rebel forces rather than Assad's troops in the first place?

Post: #6

It's official: Obama's foreign policy has been an unmitigated disaster.

Post: #7

(08-26-2013 03:00 PM)LeBeau Wrote:  Anyone else reading that the chemical weapons might actually be used and held by the rebel forces rather than Assad's troops in the first place?

Doubt it man. Bunch of crooked dudes can't get hold of some chemical weapons let alone use it. Who gave it to them? the U.S? Pfft...

Post: #8

All the countries we're invading have been in the crosshairs for many years: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RC1Mepk_Sw, speech given in 2007. Weapons of mass destruction, then chemical weapons of mass destruction, all lies. They aren't even trying to pretend to tell the truth anymore.

Post: #9

(08-26-2013 03:07 PM)luggage Wrote:  Doubt it man. Bunch of crooked dudes can't get hold of some chemical weapons let alone use it. Who gave it to them? the U.S? Pfft...

If it was just a bunch of crooked dudes, I think Assad would've already won long ago.
You've got to look a bit deeper into that.
They've (the West, USA) been training opposition forces since 2011.
https://wikileaks.org/gifiles/docs/16714...rawal.html

A little quote:
"After a
couple hours of talking, they said without saying that SOF teams
(presumably from US, UK, France, Jordan, Turkey) are already on the ground
focused on recce missions and training opposition forces..."

Post: #10

heres a good article by a british journalist peter hitchens about Syria
http://t.co/t7me1lEF4X

Post: #11

I don't believe it's plausible that the Syrian government used chemical weapons.

All reports out of Syria indicate that the civil war has been a stalemate and that Assad's government was far from falling. The war has lasted for two years and looked set to continue for years into the future.

At the same time, the Syrian government knew that the use of chemical weapons - which aren't even very tactically effective as military ordinance in the first place - would simply make the likelihood of U.S. intervention far more likely.

Cui bono? Who benefits from this incident? Clearly not Assad's regime. This wasn't some great victory against one of the last remaining rebel strongholds. The cost-benefit analysis on this is wildly against using chemical weapons.

I don't believe states are normally suicidal. North Korea, apparently the most irrational of nations nevertheless has not and almost certainly will not use a nuke to bomb Seoul, because the regime knows it would be suicidal.

It's clear who benefits from this so-called chemical attack (I doubt it even is one). First and foremost the Syrian rebels including Al Qaeda. America, the UK, and France who want to topple Assad. And Israel who wants to remove another regional rival and who seems to enjoy getting the U.S. to fight its own wars.

Post: #12

(08-26-2013 03:17 PM)Branimir Wrote:  

(08-26-2013 03:07 PM)luggage Wrote:  Doubt it man. Bunch of crooked dudes can't get hold of some chemical weapons let alone use it. Who gave it to them? the U.S? Pfft...

If it was just a bunch of crooked dudes, I think Assad would've already won long ago.
You've got to look a bit deeper into that.
They've (the West, USA) been training opposition forces since 2011.
https://wikileaks.org/gifiles/docs/16714...rawal.html

A little quote:
"After a
couple hours of talking, they said without saying that SOF teams
(presumably from US, UK, France, Jordan, Turkey) are already on the ground
focused on recce missions and training opposition forces..."

Dude, these guys are a bunch of dudes with Ak-47's and a few RPG's which doesn't make them experienced. Assad at the end of the day has the planes so doesn't matter if they're crooked or not he still has the upper hand and cannot even finish these "terrorists".

Which probably means he can never win and should have resigned a long time ago and maybe the U.S wouldn't have considered entering.

Post: #13

Obama's been doing all this behind closed doors for quite some time (arming & use of force). Why wouldn't he, all other competing powers are doing the same (Russia, Iran, Israel). What's revolting though is the way we're being fed the back story to justify it. Assad is clearly winning at this point, he wouldn't resort to chemical weapons - usually a sign of desperation, and not a smart move when Obama's pants are down because of his "red line".

Honestly wondering if Snowden had something on it which is why the Feds panicked so much.

Post: #14

Right now, the Syrian conflict is Iran and their allies vs. Al-Qaeda and their allies.

The only US interest is in keeping this fight going. We don't want either side tipping the balance in their favor; we want both sides entrenching and annihilating (or at least thinning/weakening/bankrupting) each other.

Right now, with Hezbollah joining the fight and WMD in use, it may have tipped too far in favor of Assad. Any US intervention (if it even happens) would take the chemical weapons out of the equation, letting AQ get their feet under them.

Of course we always need to eye the endgame - if Assad collapses and AQ gets his WMD we have to take them (the weapons) out anyway.

No winner of this conflict will *ever* be a friend of the US, why should we hasten to bring it to a close when we can do nothing and let them go at each other?

Post: #15

Why would Assad use chemical weapons a few days after letting UN weapons inspectors in, a few miles from where said inspectors were staying?

The 'regime' has been the side making ground the last few months so the timing seems off. Wasn't it 'regime' forces bringing the inspectors to the site of the chemical attack when they came under sniper fire?

The US/UK don't give a fuck about their own citizens - see NSA/Prism, so does anyone think they give a fuck about Syrians?

This is not going to end well.

One more thing. Why are chemical weapons the 'red-line'? They've been blowing each other up for nearly two years. Mass-murder is mass-murder regardless of the weapons used.

Post: #16

I doubt Assad has used chemical weapons. Why would he? He said himself it would be idiotic to use chemical weapons where his own soldiers are present. Also, the people reporting the use of chemical weapons are the rebels, so of course they're going to say that Assad was being a bad boy.

It is clear that Syria is a proxy war, similar to the ones fought in the past between USA vs. USSR. The US is now supporting the rebels and the Russians Assad. Do you think Obama or Putin give a flying fuck about the Syrian people? Hell no. It is simply a geo-strategic move for these countries to gain more ground in the mideast.



Look at these countries. You'll notice Syria and Saudi Arabia are blue as there is no American military presence there. Is it a coincidence these are the two most likely targets of the American military... unlikely.

My prediction: The US will win out in Syria. Russia will back down and Assad will be booted. The US shall reign supreme. The reason for this is that now Russia is the major roadblock to US intervention. Russia will back down because they're not to worried about Syria, Iran is the big fish. With that said, since the US will get there way in Syria, they're going to have to let off on Iran. If you'll notice, after Ahmadinejad left, the US has cooled it with Iran and it will be that way for a few more years and then things will heat up again.

Should be interesting as to how this all plays out.

Post: #17

(08-26-2013 04:36 PM)3extra Wrote:  One more thing. Why are chemical weapons the 'red-line'?

Its an imaginary line bro.

Post: #18

(08-26-2013 04:45 PM)Seth_Rose Wrote:  I doubt Assad has used chemical weapons. Why would he? He said himself it would be idiotic to use chemical weapons where his own soldiers are present. Also, the people reporting the use of chemical weapons are the rebels, so of course they're going to say that Assad was being a bad boy.

It is clear that Syria is a proxy war, similar to the ones fought in the past between USA vs. USSR. The US is now supporting the rebels and the Russians Assad. Do you think Obama or Putin give a flying fuck about the Syrian people? Hell no. It is simply a geo-strategic move for these countries to gain more ground in the mideast.



Look at these countries. You'll notice Syria and Saudi Arabia are blue as there is no American military presence there. Is it a coincidence these are the two most likely targets of the American military... unlikely.

My prediction: The US will win out in Syria. Russia will back down and Assad will be booted. The US shall reign supreme. The reason for this is that now Russia is the major roadblock to US intervention. Russia will back down because they're not to worried about Syria, Iran is the big fish. With that said, since the US will get there way in Syria, they're going to have to let off on Iran. If you'll notice, after Ahmadinejad left, the US has cooled it with Iran and it will be that way for a few more years and then things will heat up again.

Should be interesting as to how this all plays out.

Saudi Arabia is red in that map mate. I think you may mean Iran? I certainly hope you do.

Post: #19

Does the U.S. government have a shred of credibility anymore? Who can seriously believe this farce? The idea that Assad would use chemical weapons defies all common sense.

Obama might go down as the most lawless President in the history of the Republic. I wouldn't have believed it possible that a former Constitutional law professor could so shamelessly shit all over the Constitution. He's able to get away with things that a Republican never could. I honestly believe that Bush would have been impeached for the NSA scandal. Hell, any President in the modern era would have been impeached for that, but Obama gets away with it. The media just shrug their shoulders and Congress sits on their hands.

We must come to terms with the fact that we are living under de facto tyrannical rule. The rule of law, the principle that underlies Western society in the modern era, is no longer the order of the day. We are ruled now by the whims of the powerful. They are no longer bound by law. Their decisions ARE law. If they do something, it is legal. That is the new reality. And while the elite have exercised outsized influence for centuries, they have rarely behaved with such naked contempt for the law, and would at least try to maintain the appearance of legality. Now they don't even bother anymore. That means they're either extremely desperate, or so confident in their power that they no longer feel the need to cloak it.

Neither case should comfort the average man. If the elite are so desperate they've become this reckless, that means that the global economic situation is far worse than is commonly understood, and that all the central banking hijinks they've been playing are at risk of coming unglued at any day now. They might see a major war, WW3 even, as the only way out, and the perfect cover for their crimes. Syria might become the modern day Serbia or Poland that draws in the U.S., Britain, France, Russia, Israel, Iran and China into a war that would have the potential to liquidate over half the global population if it went nuclear. There isn't even a word to describe a crime of such magnitude. Genocide fails. It would be more like "globacide".

If their recklessness is caused by confidence in their ability to control the masses, we should also be very afraid. The NSA scandal could be the tip of the iceberg in their ability to monitor the citizenry. Police forces are increasingly militarized. Drones are starting to be used over U.S. land. The precedent has already been set for U.S. citizens to be executed by drone strikes if they are decided to be "enemies of the state" by the President and his advisers. The internet as we know it, and the ability to speak freely and organize into communities like this, poses a threat to tyrannical governments. A false flag "cyberattack" is all it would take to give governments the power to take complete control of the internet, rendering free and anonymous speech a thing of the past. Dissent will no longer exist.

There are clouds gathering over the Republic. Everyone can feel that things aren't right, and that before long, something is going to give and all hell is going to break loose. I wonder if this is how people felt in the 1930s?

I hope I am wrong.

Post: #20

(08-26-2013 05:16 PM)scorpion Wrote:  There are clouds gathering over the Republic. Everyone can feel that things aren't right, and that before long, something is going to give and all hell is going to break loose. I wonder if this is how people felt in the 1930s?

I hope I am wrong.

Yes, this syria thing also makes me uneasy. I feel like Putin is just sitting in the Kremlin, watching the american news and cracking his knuckles.

Post: #21

Some of you guys need to unplug yourself from the rightwing media echo chamber.

I'm no fan of Obama, but the idea that what's happening in Syria is Obama's fault or that this administration is anymore lawless than what came before is absurd. The only reason to gig Obama is that he came in on a cloud of promises to be something different and then just continued all of Bush's policies.

The new boss is pretty much the same as the old boss.

Post: #22

(08-26-2013 06:58 PM)wiscanada Wrote:  Yes, this syria thing also makes me uneasy. I feel like Putin is just sitting in the Kremlin, watching the american news and cracking his knuckles.

Doesn't hurt that he has Snowden as his right hand man dropping data sheets on how to defeat America.

Post: #23

This chemical weapons thing is just the latest pretext in a long line of pretexts. The goal is to destroy any country, any government, that does not kowtow to the US and Israel. This has been the goal from the beginning and will remain so. Other regional flunkies like Saudi Arabia, Qatar, etc. do their bidding also. It will never change and it's just too depressing to watch.
The ideal endgame from the US/Israel perspective is to see Syria, Lebanon, and Iran destroyed to that the US can economically dominate the region in perpetuity, and Israel can carry out its goals of "Eretz Israel", Greater Israel. And the people here in the US could care less.
You pay a high, high price for independence. They seek you out, and then they target you.

Post: #24

I don't know about Israel invading other countries. That sounds far out there. It would be interesting to see since I haven't seen large scale imperialism in my life. I also don't think US and Israel are as tight as they used to be. A lot of my Israeli friends don't like Obama and a lot of America's actions. I wouldn't be surprised if a movement is in place to get rid of America's influence on Israel.

Post: #25

This is all smoke and mirrors. It's just an attempt to mask neo-colonialism.

The US has been involved from the start. They have been training mercenaries in Jordan and Turkey.
http://www.jpost.com/Special-Reports5/Re...012-317346
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jun/21/...a-20130621

Assad has been successful in holding them off and the west is getting impatient. So they are drumming up another bullshit excuse to provide air superiority. That should be enough to tip the scales. This is all about control of the middle east. It's much easier to control a bunch of fractured factions than strong independent nation states. Just like it's easier to control someone that has already been knocked on their ass.