09-20-2013 05:13 PM
368 ... 34567 ...
tools
  1. llamabreath's Avatar
    The guy I'm working with today just said (and i quote) "We should just turn all the Middle East into kitty litter and then the world wouldn't have all this b.s."

    I'll say it again (lest anyone jump to that keyboard)... NOT my words.

    BUT -
    Let's not kid ourselves, we all know (and some may even agree with it) that there are a load of people that have the same thought.

    How would you explain to those people that YOUR way is better, if your way has been tried numerous times throughout history, yet has rarely succeeded in eradicating the threats, killing and suffering that we see all the time?

    08-30-2013 11:52 AM
  2. msndrstood's Avatar
    So the consensus here is that we do nothing.

    Okay, you may get your wish, because that mess called Congress will not give its approval. However, Obama may just order a surgical strike on his own. He doesn't want to but apparently the intel that he has received has made him uncomfortable enough to be willing to go it alone.

    Let's do nothing. and wait and see what happens. I guarantee Assad will see the world doesn't care and he will use chemical weapons again. Or, once Hezbollah sees how effective they are, use them on Israel. Then Israel will go nuclear.

    But let's just wait and see.
    Fairclough and GadgetGator like this.
    08-30-2013 12:16 PM
  3. msndrstood's Avatar
    US Government Syrian intelligence report:
    1,429 killed in chemical attack including
    426 children killed

    Warning: This video is extremely graphic. It shows people dying.
    These people are living this nightmare, we are just observers.

    Syria chemical weapons - Sarin gas attack near Damascus? - Truthloader - YouTube

    Another video even more graphic if the first wasn't enough, with many children stricken and dead.

    Fairclough likes this.
    08-30-2013 12:33 PM
  4. llamabreath's Avatar
    Deb -

    You've been around long enough to know (jeez, you're old ) (and i'm not too far behind you) that these situations in the Middle East have been cycling through the proverbial merry-go-round for years and years and years and years.

    Every ten, fifteen years or so, in the Middle East, a country (or a people) commits atrocities against other countries (or other people) or against itself, America threatens intervention, punishment, the atrocity-happy country (or people) in turn threatens Israel (or Jewish people) if attacked, Israel prepares for the worst and then we all goto lunch.

    We've seen this movie over and over again. Something DIFFERENT needs to be done to bring this viscous cycle to a grinding halt.

    (I'll be back later with one of my other personalities to argue against this).

    msndrstood likes this.
    08-30-2013 12:46 PM
  5. msndrstood's Avatar
    Danny,
    I realize this, believe me. We can't stop every atrocity that goes on in the world, I agree. But, I have a feeling this is the beginning of a whole new chapter in the atrocity playbook. If this is left unanswered, who will be the next in line?

    A list of countries with admitted chemical weapons:

    Country Profile | PSR


    And more than anyone wants to know about chemical weapons.

    Chemical warfare - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


    And chemical warfare through the years:

    Chemical Weapons - Toxipedia


    I think that's enough for anyone to stomach for today.
    08-30-2013 12:52 PM
  6. llamabreath's Avatar
    Danny,
    I realize this, believe me. We can't stop every atrocity that goes on in the world, I agree. But, I have a feeling this is the beginning of a whole new chapter in the atrocity playbook. If this is left unanswered, who will be the next in line?
    Do you seriously believe that the terrorists will or will not use chemical weapons on us (or anywhere else) depending on how we respond to this?

    They are not scared of being killed. They thrive on the fact that WE are. They look forward to dying. We fear it. THAT is why THEY WILL ALWAYS (and i mean ALWAYS) have the advantage over us.

    cdmjlt369 likes this.
    08-30-2013 01:03 PM
  7. msndrstood's Avatar
    08-30-2013 01:24 PM
  8. msndrstood's Avatar
    Then I think we should f*ck it and give up now. Because they have won.
    08-30-2013 01:25 PM
  9. llamabreath's Avatar
    Then I think we should f*ck it and give up now. Because they have won.
    Uh.... didn't say that.
    What I'm saying is, these types of people do not care what our response will be. They simply do. not. care. They will do whatever they wish anyway, probably be successful at it and we should really stop thinking that what we always do will have any real weight, because it won't.

    Let's stop fooling ourselves and try to think outside the box, not just outside the box, but outside the room that the box is in, instead of continuously going down the same path.

    08-30-2013 01:34 PM
  10. cdmjlt369's Avatar
    US intelligence also said Iraq had WMD's. We know how that turned out. The president doesn't want to look foolish because of the red line comment. He needs to put it to congressional vote and congress will vote it down so he can blame congress like every other president does. Of they have this evidence of who used the chemical weapons, why are the inspectors still there???

    Sent from my SCH-I535 using AC Forums mobile app
    Serial Fordicator likes this.
    08-30-2013 01:37 PM
  11. Wiley_11's Avatar
    ..........
    08-30-2013 02:00 PM
  12. Wiley_11's Avatar
    08-30-2013 02:08 PM
  13. msndrstood's Avatar
    08-30-2013 02:49 PM
  14. msndrstood's Avatar
    I think its pretty obvious, there were chemical weapons deployed on August 21, 2013.

    If chemical weapons are floating around the Middle East as Wiley_11 posted in the link above, why haven't they been used before? Terrorist groups have no qualms about mass destruction, if the have them, isn't it interesting that they used them in the exact same neighborhood that Assad's forces have been trying to clear out for the past several months? If the terrorists had them why did they stop when they did? And after the attack, why did Assad continue to pound the area with artillery if not to finish off what he started? And if the Al Nusra group used the gas, wouldn't they be bragging about their newfound power, as terrorist groups like to do? And threaten the United States or Israel with their almighty power?

    We know for a fact that Syria has chemical weapons and has used them on their people before. As I have said before, if there is no intervention, they will be emboldened and use them again.
    I don't know what else I can say or what other evidence everyone is looking for, but weaponized gas was used to kill almost 1500 people, that much is undisputed.
    Fairclough likes this.
    08-30-2013 02:58 PM
  15. msndrstood's Avatar
    I know how the Army of One feels.
    08-30-2013 03:05 PM
  16. cdmjlt369's Avatar
    I think its pretty obvious, there were chemical weapons deployed on August 21, 2013.

    If chemical weapons are floating around the Middle East as Wiley_11 posted in the link above, why haven't they been used before? Terrorist groups have no qualms about mass destruction, if the have them, isn't it interesting that they used them in the exact same neighborhood that Assad's forces have been trying to clear out for the past several months? If the terrorists had them why did they stop when they did? And after the attack, why did Assad continue to pound the area with artillery if not to finish off what he started? And if the Al Nusra group used the gas, wouldn't they be bragging about their newfound power, as terrorist groups like to do? And threaten the United States or Israel with their almighty power?

    We know for a fact that Syria has chemical weapons and has used them on their people before. As I have said before, if there is no intervention, they will be emboldened and use them again.
    I don't know what else I can say or what other evidence everyone is looking for, but weaponized gas was used to kill almost 1500 people, that much is undisputed.
    Or maybe the rebels used the chemicals to make it look like Assad did this knowing it would possibly cause the UN or the US to strike Assad thereby helping the rebels. They have motive. Assad had less motive to do this because he had to know possible military intervention would come of it. Nothing is clearly defined here other than a horrific event took place.

    Sent from my SCH-I535 using AC Forums mobile app
    08-30-2013 03:24 PM
  17. Serial Fordicator's Avatar
    How did I feel about Iraq? I trusted Colin Powell, did not trust Rumsfeld and Cheney, I felt they were running the show, not Bush. When Colin Powell made the case before the UN, I thought it sounded legitimate. However, about 6-8 months into the Iraq war, I began to feel like the Bush administration had no idea what they stepped into. They clearly had no forethought concerning the religious and politicial factions and the history of the region in the past. By 2004, it was obvious it was a mistake and there were no WMD's and there hadn't been any for at least a decade. And worse still, they had broken a previously functioning country and tens of thousands died, for what 10 years later? This was a war of our doing, not an intervention into a government that was systematically killing it's own. On the occasion that that did happen to the Kurds in1988, Reagan turned a blind eye and did not intervene. But then again, the world was pretty flush with oil. The price for a barrel of oil was $12.00 a barrel.

    How is Syria different?

    There are many warring factions, similar to Iraq. However, the fight started with an uprising, rather than a total breakdown of government which we created in Iraq by dissolving the military and government after the invasion on a false pretense that Iraq was involved in 9/11.

    The minority Sunnis are in power with majority Shia, Kurds and Druze being slaughtered. Pretty much the same situation that existed in Iraq. The atrocities that each side commits upon the other are similar. I read a story by Richard Engle about his time in Iraq. A Sunni family's 1 year old son was kidnapped by Shia militants, he was returned 3 days later on their front doorstep in a roasting pan. He had been cooked to death. I will never ever forget that account of man's cruelty to man. Unbelievable. We can't stop stuff like that, depraved minds know no boundaries, but in Syria, the government is killing its own people.

    My question to you is, is an American child worth more than a Syrian child? Where is that line drawn?

    There are people in this country (not directing this at anyone, just a general observation) that feel its ok to kill an abortion doctor to prevent the death of embryos and fetuses, but children already born are left to whatever fate deals them. In this case a prolonged, excruciating death by the hands of the person who is supposed to protect them. Assad's father did the same in1982 with the use of hydrogen cyanide gas. Thousands were killed during that uprising and no one blinked an eye. (Also under a Reagan Presidency) Bashir Assad is carrying on his father's legacy.

    When is enough, enough?

    Sent via Note II
    What's different from African civil wars. Why don't we intervene there too?

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
    cdmjlt369 likes this.
    08-30-2013 03:57 PM
  18. msndrstood's Avatar
    Did anyone use gas in Africa?

    No one seems to get the point that a page had been turned.

    What if this was radiation via a dirty bomb, would that make any difference to you guys?

    Sent via Note II
    Fairclough likes this.
    08-30-2013 04:28 PM
  19. Serial Fordicator's Avatar
    Did anyone use gas in Africa?

    No one seems to get the point that a page had been turned.

    What if this was radiation via a dirty bomb, would that make any difference to you guys?

    Sent via Note II
    If a kid dies by gun, gas, drowning, knife, or someone drops a bus on them, they're still dead.

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
    08-30-2013 06:23 PM
  20. Fairclough's Avatar
    Why have international law about warfare if no one is going to enforce it?

    Without international law we could do what we like when we like e.g. nuclear arms, exterminating a while race, gas your neighbours etc

    Posted via Android Central App
    msndrstood likes this.
    08-30-2013 06:31 PM
  21. msndrstood's Avatar
    Yeah, I kinda expected that response.

    Our moral compass is just as dead.

    Sent via Note II
    08-30-2013 06:40 PM
  22. llamabreath's Avatar
    EDIT

    Tapatalk double post

    08-30-2013 06:42 PM
  23. llamabreath's Avatar
    Why have international law about warfare if no one is going to enforce it?

    Without international law we could do what we like when we like e.g. nuclear arms, exterminating a while race, gas your neighbours etc

    Posted via Android Central App
    Outlaws do not give a damn about laws, let alone lives. Same as the gun control argument.

    CONSCIENCE is what stops people from doing bad things.

    08-30-2013 06:42 PM
  24. Fairclough's Avatar
    I don't think you quite understand the geopolitics. There needs to be stability in the region because at least three nations have nuclear weapons, one of which has had serious issues with warring factions and stability. The US is more concerned about the detonation of nuclear weapons in the region than they are oil. (The nations with the largest supplies of oil are stable) The fact that the US supplies soldiers to protect Pakistani nuclear arms speaks volumes for their concerns.
    Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
    I think they might be a touch more concerned with starting a nuclear war as one launches a missile everyone else would follow suit. Everyone else, now how many people would that leave damaged? Lets not have the cubin missile crisis all over again.

    Ummm, so we supply rebel forces weapons to kill more children? Why does it always have to be us? Its easy to say we need to go to war when we aren't the ones fighting.

    I doubt you'd have this same opinion if it were a Republican in office. How did you feel when we went into Iraq? We have no business in it. The rebels are affiliated with al Qaeda for heavens sake.

    Al Nusra Front, Al-Qaeda Affiliated Syrian Rebels, Vows Revenge For Chemical Attacks

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
    War is never black or white, often its debated over the grey - however when you do nothing its the children who lose out in the end.
    You're risking turning a civil war into a world war.

    Sent from my SCH-I535 using AC Forums mobile app
    Every war these day's has a risk of that magnitude, but the fact is chemical weapons were used and its breaking international law.
    What's different from African civil wars. Why don't we intervene there too?

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
    Because they weren't using gas.
    If a kid dies by gun, gas, drowning, knife, or someone drops a bus on them, they're still dead.

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
    Have you seen someone be attacked by chemical warfare? Vietnam kids had their skin burning off as they ran down the streets crying because of it. Yes skin burning off. Its the way how they die which makes it worse.
    msndrstood likes this.
    08-30-2013 06:54 PM
  25. Serial Fordicator's Avatar
    Why have international law about warfare if no one is going to enforce it?

    Without international law we could do what we like when we like e.g. nuclear arms, exterminating a while race, gas your neighbours etc

    Posted via Android Central App
    Why does America always have to enforce everything? Then everyone hates us for being nosey

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
    08-30-2013 07:10 PM
368 ... 34567 ...
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD