Remember to use this logic in arguments people!

To save lives from chemical attacks we need to kill them through conventional means. If it means killing men, women and children as collateral so be it!

Meanwhile the people in Yemen are wondering when the US, UK and Franco alliance is going to pay a visit to Saudi.

We had to destroy the village to save it!

So many games being played here. This was just a microcosm of the larger one.

People with nuclear weapons (or rather States/Countries) are dangerous entities. States/Countries who are about to acquire nuclear weapons are almost as dangerous as they threaten to shift the power balance of 'might is right' and who can bully who in the school yard without teacher intervening.

You are right about the hypocrisy of SA and what is happening in Yemen. That's another microcosmic game. Bigger games afoot are Iran developing nuclear weapons and Israel maintaining nuclear superiority in the region with their estimated 200 weapons (that they won't either deny or confirm iirc). Just keep Iran on the back foot. Keep them in pariah status. Cut them off. Keep an eye on them. Repeat, rinse, simmer...

As for Syria and this quite frankly ludicrous proxy war that I may not understand but can tell has got totally out of hand? Well, it'll keep going a bit longer. Russia had their hand forced here and as I predicted (as one option) Putin would be the bigger man and let things play out. Be certain he didn't enjoy his little dose of humble pie though. He'll be quietly raging and scheming over this. At least he didn't release the SS-400's or wtf they are called.

If he had shot down an allied plane he would have been accused of escalation, while in fact the opposite would be true. It's been a clever gambit and it's payed off. Maybe there even were chemical weapons used by this regime. A lot of very credible people seem to think so. We are deep in to the fog of war on this one.

I still don't claim to know the facts, just looking at the alternatives. Putin took this like a man. I'm no great fan of him, but he's no more of a monster than many other world leaders. I think maybe he didn't really have a choice but to take it like a man, either. The 'allies' spotted a window of weakness in a war they were losing. Again, these people are clever and have a lot of stuff worked out.

Forums like this help to gauge popular opinion, if not even maybe forge it a little. Our thoughts are being harvested, fed through the machine and regurgitated out the other side in the form of bombs sometimes, propaganda pieces the next.

If Trump has limited power to change the world for the better (and I believe he would if he could), then what chance do us little men have?

Iran/Russia/Syria is the long game being played. No need to go through it all again. You know the drill. Saudi Arabia is just a very useful idiot. They don't have the culture and higher-purpose of Iran/Russia/Syria. Not that I overly romanticize those nations. But Saudi? Come off it! But they are our buddies. We are deep in bed with them for the largest oil reserves left on the planet in the Gawhar fields or wherever. We court them and 'wine and dine' them and are beholden to them for buying Billions in arms (both US/UK). So what if they want to kill a few other camel jockeys down the road?

We can't go selling them weapons and then telling them they can't use them or even worse, sanction them if they do. And they know that. So mini-genocides occur and US/UK turn a blind eye. No one cares about Yemen. This is geopolitics.

We all know Israel is knee-deep in all of this quagmire. US/UK/France not just their enablers, but active participants in the greater game. SA also gets to benefit by a crippled Iran, crippled Russia.

Iran/Russia is a frightening alliance.

And let us not forget the great internecine war fought among the muslims themselves: Sunni vs. Shia. Yes, there are other factions, but those are the big boys. Alawites, Druze, Christians etc. aren't really PLAYERS in the GAME. But Syria is majority Sunni by a large extent, with Shia being a very small minority. But they are a very potent minority, being allied with Iran.

It's a similar scenario in Bahrain where it's 70 percent Shia and 30 percent Sunni. I should say similar but reverse of course. Perhaps you get my drift? The ruling leaders come from the minority Sunni demographic.

Then there's SA with its Wahabism. All the other countries in the ME with their ever-changing mish-mash religious demographics? It's one un-holy cluster-fuck and we are caught right in the middle of it. Hell, we want to be in the middle of it. We are molding and shaping the region to our liking.

But this is not a Holy War. As Leonard has pointed out, the Christians in the UK and the US don't really give a shit about the very small Christian population in Syria. They probably don't even send them Christmas cards in solidarity: "Sorry ur cuntry's gettting bombed back tot eh stone age, have faith, merry xmass!".

This is about natural resources, yes. But more than that it is geopolitics - who gets to control those resources. Throw in to the mix a bit of dick-waving and macho egotism, and it's a heady dry powder mixture that just needs one spark to set the whole lot off 2000 ft. in to the air.

We dodged a bullet on this one. The spark didn't set off a chain-reaction of unintended consequences. But Putin won't play elder statesman for much longer if he is taunted like this. And the West should not be too emboldened to take this line of reasoning much further.

It seems to me this is actually where the game of 5D Chess is indeed being played. At the center of the Grand Chessboard. As I mentioned earlier. This is the center of the biggest landmass on the planet. It has to be dominated and controlled. America want it. Russia want it. UK/France want what scraps they can get.

And again what makes this so dangerous is that this isn't just about fighting for future projection and dominance, this is about survival and self-protection for some (Iran, say).

Anyone who has been in a street-fight will know that a cornered or weaker opponent can be a far more dangerous person to fight. Because they will fight to the death, tooth and nail, literally. Their blows from their smaller fists don't register as much impact, but they aren't meant to, they are only meant to take your eyes out.

I think there are many things wrong with Russia and Iran and its people and their leaders. But they aren't monsters. Any more than we are. I also love my country, as much as I criticize it. But this whole ME thing is starting to get out of control and get really silly.

Isn't there something Biblical about the end of days starting in the Middle East? It's a good a place as any I suppose.

I'm not an expert. But sometimes it's good to not be an expert. I can see the wood for the trees though, and sometimes I wonder if the experts can.

Damn, I only logged in to post a poem (and not another bloater of a random essay). Sorry. This was it -



The Storm Cone

1932


THIS is the midnight—let no star
Delude us—dawn is very far.
This is the tempest long foretold—
Slow to make head but sure to hold.

Stand by! The lull ’twixt blast and blast
Signals the storm is near, not past;
And worse than present jeopardy
May our forlorn to-morrow be.

If we have cleared the expectant reef,
Let no man look for his relief.
Only the darkness hides the shape
Of further peril to escape.

It is decreed that we abide
The weight of gale against the tide
And those huge waves the outer main
Sends in to set us back again.

They fall and whelm. We strain to hear
The pulses of her labouring gear,
Till the deep throb beneath us proves,
After each shudder and check, she moves!

She moves, with all save purpose lost,
To make her offing from the coast;
But, till she fetches open sea.
Let no man deem that he is free!


..............



1932!

What happened a few years after that?

I think it's safe to say we are well on the way to another world war. The battle lines are just being drawn that's all.


Stand by! The lull ’twixt blast and blast
Signals the storm is near, not past;
And worse than present jeopardy
May our forlorn to-morrow be.

The WSJ has an article more clearly outlining the composition of Friday's strike: https://www.wsj.com/articles/officials-a...1523730187

Quote:In terms of military tactics, Saturday’s strikes were markedly different from those a year ago in which cruise missiles were fired from the eastern Mediterranean. This time, the strikes were carried out by U.S., French and British ships and aircraft in the Red Sea, Mediterranean and the Persian Gulf.

“These attacks on multiple axes were able to overwhelm the Syrian air-defense system,” said Marine Lt. Gen. Kenneth F. McKenzie, director of the Pentagon’s Joint Staff. The majority of the missiles fired were American.

In the Red Sea, the guided-missile cruiser USS Monterey and the destroyer USS Laboon fired a total of 37 Tomahawk cruise missiles. In the North Arabian Gulf, the destroyer USS Higgins launched 23 Tomahawk cruise missiles.

In the eastern Mediterranean, the USS John Warner, an U.S. submarine fired six Tomahawk cruise missiles, while the French frigate Languedoc, fired three missiles.

In the air, two B-1 bombers, which took off from the Al Udeid base in Qatar, flew toward Syria and fired 19 JASSM air-to-ground missiles. It represented the first time the weapon has been used in combat.

British Tornado and Typhoon aircraft fired eight Storm Shadow missiles; French Rafale and Mirage planes launched nine Scalp missiles.

I'm just curious about the presence of significant military hardware there thats all.

Its all well having an AWAC, a missile frigate and some fighters to defend it as of last years attack but its another to have several ships and a sub or two there, a lot more fighters and bombers, a couple of VIP spy planes and who knows what else in the myriad of military bases around there.

The excuse is to keep a watchful eye on Assad so he doesn't use CWs but he won't be using them because he didn't use them in the first place and even if he wanted to where is the need? He is winning and its a matter of time until the eventual victory is declared.

Its a setup pure and simple. The US can keep their shit there for all I care but the Brits and French have nowhere near the funding to keep those assets there on a long term period ready to fire on the whims of some sort of intelligence.

If Assad declares victory he stays. Then what? Oh yeah, he then has to confront Turkey and Israel who for the past few years have invaded the country and lets not talk about the US ground presence.

It must be a twilight episode but when USAF delivers death from above on Syrian military and Russian contractors to protect something >>inside<< Syria and makes no apologies for it and doesn't even announce the slaughter, then who is the problem here?

(04-14-2018 12:56 AM)lowhead360 Wrote:  

(04-13-2018 09:59 PM)Rigsby Wrote:  The West sense a chink in the armor. This is a fight they think they can win.

Anyways, you mentioned "proof" Assad did it? Care to share it? You seem awfully eager to speak on behalf of British and French lads going overseas to fight the Russians, the least you could do is share a link or two and do your part for the war effort (since I doubt you were referring to yourself when you were talking about said lads).

Let me take your points one by one:

The West got rolled on by a bunch of goat farmers in Afghanistan. Them sensing a chink in anyone's armor doesn't mean shit.

Indeed, not many people or armies have been able to conquer that land for quite some time. And even those that did conquer it way back when, well, what good did it do?

I wouldn't say the boys that went in to Afghanistan got 'rolled' though. Sure some had their limbs blown off by IED's and whatnot. Some might have even dropped in to the odd impromptu ambush. But their hands were tied out of political correctness. They weren't allowed to go full on. Fighting with one hand tied behind their backs most the time. This was a political war. It was fought in a political way. Unfortunately, someone forgot to drop a note to the Afghanis themselves and they went all 'asymmetric' on the combatants there.

There was a lot of good that was done though. Schools got built. Roads opened that had been closed off before. It came at a cost of lives and limbs, but many who were there are proud of the little they did, even though they had to sacrifice so much for it.

I hate the game. But I love the players. These men that went there and fought were just players in the game. They did the best they could. And they did make some change for the better. Whether they should have been there in the first place? Well...

If you want to get deep with Afghanistan, then there are many reports you can read of the situation prior to the Allied forces going in. The whole Opium/Heroin thing? Well, that is extremely complicated again. The agro-economics of the region coupled with many other factors. It deserves a whole thread by itself. And maybe someone should make a thread about that.

You seem to have reacted a little emotionally to my words of "sensing a chink in their armour". I wasn't speaking from a first person perspective. I was talking about what I thought they were thinking. It was at least once removed. I did say that I thought this exchange might lead on to wwwIII. Their thoughts are not my thoughts. And my thoughts about what they are thinking could be very wrong.

Anyway, it turned out I was right. The chink in the armor was exposed. I don't think that's a good thing. I don't feel as if I am vindicated or right or think it's a good thing in any way shape of form.

You may like to look up a phrase called 'theory of mind'.



Next point:

Anyways, you mentioned "proof" Assad did it? Care to share it?

Sure, I posted this a few pages back. Perhaps you missed it?

===================

As for the issue of chemical weapons? Well, you may or may not know of bellingcat. Well respected military analysis site to some, propaganda out let to others:

https://www.bellingcat.com/news/mena/201...pril-2018/

On April 7th 2018 reports began emerging of alleged chemical attacks on the city of Douma, in the rebel held pocket of Eastern Ghouta, Syria. Reports indicated that a significant number of people, including children, had been killed by these attacks. This report will assess and verify the open source information regarding these attacks, and draw conclusions from the available evidence.

Summary

A large compressed gas cylinder of a type used in previous aerial chlorine attacks was filmed on top of the building where a large number of fatalities were documented.

The number of dead bodies that can be established through open source data is 34+.

Aircraft spotters reported two Mi-8 Hip helicopters heading southwest from Dumayr Airbase, in the direction of Douma, 30 minutes before the chemical attack in Douma, and two Hip helicopters were observed above Douma shortly before the attack.

The Syrian Government has previously been identified as using Mi-8 Hip helicopters to drop chlorine cylinders on opposition held areas.


Conclusion

Based on the available evidence, it is highly likely the 34+ victims killed in the 1930 attack on the apartment building near al-Shuhada Square were killed as a result of a gas cylinder filled with what is most likely chlorine gas being dropped from a Hip helicopter originating from Dumayr Airbase.
====================


Now, at no point did I ever claim to have proof Assad did this. So don't Straw-man me like that homey! I never made such an assertion. Read my words above for what I did say.

Bellingcat is one resource that a lot of very serious people take very seriously. But it gets better, there are actually other sources of information with regard to Assad gassing his own people. I'm not saying they are correct. I'm not saying they are not propaganda. I am just passing the information on. Please do not make the mistake of me endorsing the links I post!

In fact, there are two other far more credible sources where this claim was made. I forget them right now, but I can dig them out if pressed or called out on it I promise you.

I'm not saying these are facts. I'm not presenting them as truth. I am merely putting them forward so you may look at them yourself and make up your own mind. The reason I did not put forward the more credible stuff, is that well, I'm not sure I believe it, however credible it is. But by all means, push me on the subject and I will provide sources for you, for you to make up your own mind.

These sources also seem to provide 'evidence' that in the previous attack in Syria, it was Assad and his 'regime' that attacked his own people with chemical weapons. This isn't to say Assad gave the go-ahead - it may have been forces on his side out of his control. But then again, it seems that a lot of people believe that Assad has used chemical weapons against his own people in the years preceding this unholy clusterfuck that has become Syria. I like Assad. He's no angel though, just like Putin.

I really don't know. I've never claimed to know, I have only offered opinion because I value truth higher than all else. Truth is the most rarest of things.


Your final point I will address:

You seem awfully eager to speak on behalf of British and French lads going overseas to fight the Russians, the least you could do is share a link or two and do your part for the war effort (since I doubt you were referring to yourself when you were talking about said lads).


Do I really seem that eager to speak on behalf of British and French lads going overseas to fight the Russians? I wouldn't say I did. I thought we were just talking. That I was bringing my unique perspective and adding some value to the understanding of the situation. I think I've only really mentioned it in passing, and that it's not something I've labored the point over. Please tell me why you think I'm so "awfully eager to speak on behalf of British and French lads"?

"The least you could do is share a link or two".

To what? What do you want from me? You don't complete your statement in a meaningful grammatical sense. What is it you want me to share a link or two, to?

"and do your part for the war effort (since I doubt you were referring to yourself when you were talking about said lads)."

I think I see what you are getting at. I won't play word games here with you.

You seem to have painted me as some kind of propagandizing war-monger, chicken-hawk, that talks loud but doesn't walk the walk. Would that be right?

That I am somehow a mouth-piece for another agency who is trying to get other people's children sent off to fight in another senseless war?

And your most cutting barb: since I doubt you were referring to yourself when you were talking about said lads


You are quite right and totally correct. I was not referring to myself. At no point did I ever claim to be referring to myself. At no point do I ever claim to have served. In fact, I've made it quite explicit that I have not. Lest there be any confusion. Because sometimes, I do talk about military matters. Because I take an interest in them. I come from what you might call a military family, I have friends who have served in the military, and I keep up with military affairs to an extent that might surprise you. I have my reasons for doing this. But I'm sure you will understand for reasons of persec if I don't dox myself any further.

But somehow you seem to have made a grand judgement of my character and called me out in the most snidest of ways.

Have you ever served?

No need to answer that as it might dox you. It's a rhetorical question for now.

Look, I get it, you see me as some kind of bellicose blowhard on a forum claiming to have proof of Assad committing atrocities. And maybe you served in the military and you particularly hate people like me with their cowardly armchair general behaviour. That's ok.

Let's just get a couple of things straight.

I never claimed to have any proof at any time with anything I have posted. I merely put forward points of views. It's what we do around here, without being shouted down for being partisan.

I never claimed to serve in the military in any capacity. I have stated this several times so there is no confusion on this matter.

The places that I visit and the military men I talk to who are 'friends' will never be true friends or 'muckers'. It's not possible. There are those that have served and there are those that will never understand. I'm one that will never understand the deep bond forged by those who put their lives on the line to fight monsters so people like me can sleep safely in their beds at night.

I don't pretend to be something I'm not. And to my own self I am true. And I don't try to come across as someone I'm not to people who can sniff that out in 10 seconds stat!

I have absolutely no clue what the fuck is going on in Syria. I often preface my posts with 'just for entertainment' and all the other self-effacing comments I can make.

Many people on this forum find value in my posts. Some very well respected and long-standing members in fact. I relish and cherish the odd like or two I get from them when I make a high-value post.

This fosters an environment of people wanting to be the best they can, to make the best high-value posts they can. If we were shot down with snide and snark every other debatable or contentious post we made, then this forum would be in tatters.


lowhead, don't even feel this post of mine is so much about you in particular. It's just something that needed to be said in general, and I can't be arsed to go in to this in such depth where everyone questions my motives or credentials. Or those of other people, either, just for presenting opposing information.

My motives are pure. My aim is true.

But I have no credentials. There is absolutely no reason at all why you should ever believe a word I type. I'm happy to be called out, and I'm happy to be corrected.

I hope this did go someway to addressing your concerns with my post though. No snark, no snide. We're good, I hope, lowhead.

I think maybe we just got off on the wrong foot.

(04-14-2018 06:28 PM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  I'm just curious about the presence of significant military hardware there thats all.

Its all well having an AWAC, a missile frigate and some fighters to defend it as of last years attack but its another to have several ships and a sub or two there, a lot more fighters and bombers, a couple of VIP spy planes and who knows what else in the myriad of military bases around there.

The excuse is to keep a watchful eye on Assad so he doesn't use CWs but he won't be using them because he didn't use them in the first place and even if he wanted to where is the need? He is winning and its a matter of time until the eventual victory is declared.

Its a setup pure and simple. The US can keep their shit there for all I care but the Brits and French have nowhere near the funding to keep those assets there on a long term period ready to fire on the whims of some sort of intelligence.

If Assad declares victory he stays. Then what? Oh yeah, he then has to confront Turkey and Israel who for the past few years have invaded the country and lets not talk about the US ground presence.

It must be a twilight episode but when USAF delivers death from above on Syrian military and Russian contractors to protect something >>inside<< Syria and makes no apologies for it and doesn't even announce the slaughter, then who is the problem here?

Foolsgo1d, all (or most) your points are valid concerns. But logic or common sense does not come in to this. This is why I feel I can reply to you on a matter you so clearly know far more about.

These things have been set in stone for a while. The power-mongers of the world have a hard-on for Iran. Syria is the first stage in making that dream come true. Russia is probably the end game.

We can listen to experts till the cows come home. But they all give a very different version of events.

And now we are at the stage where whole countries of people believe in reports by certain organisations, and just outright dismiss other reports by organisations that do not fit their agenda.

The world and its people are becoming extremely partisan on both sides.

Btw, what ever happened to that bloke who was running the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights or wtf it was called? LOL.

The economic situation in Iran is really really bad.

A friend of mine was back there after a few years recently and I talked to him about it today, some of the biggest takes from him and his most recent visit:

- All the optimism re: nuclear deal is finished among people. So many live under poverty line now, Dollar to Toman has gone 6,000 vs 1. (It was 1,000 to 1 less than 7 years ago).

- There are rumours that IRGC is setting up a silent coup to bring down Rouhani and could be behind some of the latest economic "coincidences" which has led to a lot of public dissatisfaction. Whether Supreme Leader is also behind the plan, I don't know.

- He said he felt people were a lot more reserved now, compared to 10 years ago. They lambast the regime in close gatherings, but it feels as a sense of nihilism is setting in. He said sadly the smartphone attention seeking culture has truly cracked it there as well. The regime may have scored some wins in terms of foreign policy lately, domestically they're much weaker.

- Farmers in Isfahan turned their back to the Friday prayer Imam, chanting: "Our enemy is here, it's a lie that our enemy is America."

- He said there was a belief among people that if Obama hadn't done the nuclear deal and given the regime so much cash, it'd have financially collapsed by now. I don't know if it's true or not. But he said he has never felt people to be so internally angry and frustrated.


*** Which brought me to remember John Bolton is in cahoots with MEK (Iranian terrorist group, similar to a lot of Syrian "Rebel" groups). When everyday, ordinary people will protest again, I'm shit scared of US now assisting the wrong, radical groups such as MEK, maybe separatists in Kurdistan or Azeri or Baloch regions as opposed to rational thought leaders....as chaos in Iran would be of to their interest. Saudi Arabia is already doing some shady work in mostly Arab region of Khuzestan. A lot of things could go wrong, and it'll be the people who'll suffer as foreign powers definitely won't want a rational, nationalist opposition to lead in case of regime change.

There is a feeling that the regime is very much under pressure....He was saying loads of people believed that once Khamenei dies (He's only 79), then the regime won't be able to stand in its current structure and function, as there is lack of a coherent succession plan and there are so many parallel power groups gearing up to take over that the regime itself, may suicide itself. I want these religious cockroaches gone and people's lives and freedoms to improve, but I'm nervous as hell if foreign powers corrupt any movement with radical groups. Time will tell ...





I'd be over the moon even with secular strongman which prioritizes national sovereignty and improves economy and basic freedoms, but US' idea of "Iranian Opposition" is an Islamo-Marxist death cult like MKO with a rotten Hijabi Babushka as their figure-head. Definitely, something to keep an eye on.

Twitter thread compiling a whole slew of 'White Hat' propaganda from Syria & surrounds :

1. Indignation in the UK and US about strike without any Parliamentary or Congressional consultation.

2. No reported loss of civilian or military lives in Syria due to hits on unoccupied facilities.

3. Russia didn't bother to fire off any of its missiles.

4. Second-string Syrian anti-aircraft systems reportedly knocked down 71/103 US subsonic cruise missiles.

5. North Korean disarmament talks severely jeopardized.

6. Iran even more wary of Western intentions, prepared for cancellation of the nuclear treaty.

7. China outraged.

8. The credibility of alleged grounds for attack seriously questioned in UK and US, retrospectively calling into question other government official stories.

9. Infuriation of much of Trump's domestic support base, including public figures such as Alex Jones, Tucker Carlson, Sarah Palin and many others.

10. Olympian calm reaction from Russian MOD, contrasting their dignity with Anglo-Zionist hysterics.

11. Obvious impetus for Sino-Russian undermining of Zionist euro and dollar currencies.

12. Israel, US, France and Britain now openly attacking Syria instead of relying on covert means.

13. Jordan now in Syrian crosshairs because of apparently allowing attacks on neighbor Syria from its soil from the Al Tanf base.

14. Saudi Arabia fully exposed as an ally of Israel.

15. NATO breaking up because of refusal of Italy, Germany, Canada, Holland or any other NATO members to participate militarily, leaving Britain, France and the US operating on their own.




Etc, etc, etc.







Someone try to tell me how this was a successful attack.

Quote:Someone try to tell me how this was a successful attack.

It saved face for Trump after his stupid tweet.

(04-14-2018 07:39 PM)rudebwoy Wrote:  ...Someone try to tell me how this was a successful attack.

Add in the perpetuation of the globalist narrative that Syria are supposedly nasty & Assad is a supposed 'butcher' who uses undocumented chemical weapons.

The Leader of the British Opposition, Jeremy Corbyn MP (Labour) being interviewed by Andrew Marr on BBC. Compare Corbyn's reasoned and rational response to the Syrian strikes to those of May and the ruling Conservatives.

(04-14-2018 07:39 PM)rudebwoy Wrote:  4. Second-string Syrian anti-aircraft systems reportedly knocked down 71/103 US subsonic cruise missiles.

If you believe that...

(04-15-2018 10:03 AM)Batka Wrote:  The Leader of the British Opposition, Jeremy Corbyn MP (Labour) being interviewed by Andrew Marr on BBC. Compare Corbyn's reasoned and rational response to the Syrian strikes to those of May and the ruling Conservatives.

The guy is an utter coward.

He had his chance. After the Paris attacks he could have stated that the commons vote was actually for a reduction in bombs dropped on Syria et al. by the Uk, Jordan etc.

He could have asked why the fuck didn't we use our air power when Isis was walking across the desert murdering men, women and children.

Our ally, Qatar was simultaneously funding, arming and training Isis as well as bankrolling Paris St Germain football club. Could have pointed that out.

Could have said it. Bottled it.

Asked some very weak questions instead.

He's a coward.

The rule of law, a joint consensus, blah blah blah, he's a faggot that would bottle it if he had to make the big decisions.

(04-13-2018 09:59 PM)Rigsby Wrote:  The Russians pulled their ships out of port a couple of days ago. Little use in keeping them there as sitting ducks.

There is massive backing for this attack on Syria.

It really does look as if Assad gassed those people. There is proof. He must be taught a lesson. A lot of British and French lads are prepared to go in there now and teach this beast a lesson.

Anyone who believes that bullshit must get his world news from CNN.

Regarding Corbyn, anti-war is an easy and politically expedient position to take right now.

My 80+ year old grandma, who reads the New York Times, Boston Globe, and watches CNN, told my father she thought the gas attack was a false flag almost immediately (based on the bizarre timing.)

American bots are out in full force...It's amazing how coordinated the narrative creation is. From Left to Right, all the same shit. From "It's Extremely Dangerous to Our Democracy", to needing a "Comprehensive Strategy"

What is your fucking "comprehensive strategy" for Syria? Bomb the country to rubble, kill Assad, then let a rag-tag group of non-Syrian Jihadis start war and mayhem within the country for the next decades? Sounds like a comprehensive strategy - one used very well in Iraq, Libya - it even managed to destabilize and re-radicalize Egypt.

Guess the strategy is destruction and mayhem and support for Jihad and Islam.

Now even more sanctions against Russian companies. Of course of the CW attack in Syria. Your government is absolutely sure that the average American is the dumbest creature in the world.

So the next narrative is to go to congress for something amounting to more than 60 days? Interadesting.

The attack was illegal and had no merit whatsoever but hey, Trump is the POTUS so we can't question it according to some. No questions asked about the danger posed to civilians of that so-called chemical weapons facility they blew up in Damascus where hundreds of people were seen looking over its corpse and now anybody questioning the move is being labelled as an Assad apologist in the media.

This is full-on propaganda.

Even uber liberal/progressive Jeff Sachs, Columbia University was calling this entire episode madness.

That neocon Zionist fuck Bolton gets on Team Trump and soon after a false flag goes down in Syria.

Interesting.

An interesting take I found on pol.

https://i.imgur.com/LcHPNhT.jpg