When will the bombs rain down on Syria?

Forum Sponsor
Dr.Manhattan said:
Moral of the story is that America will do whatever the hell America wants to do. They didn't give a **** and partnered with Bin Laden and Saddam back when it profited the oligarchy running the country.
Click to expand...

Corrected :cool: Just look at the way they handled Iraq. It made a lot of money for a small group of people but that pales in comparison with the amount of tax dollars wasted that what's left of their middle class will have to pay off in the future. I feel sorry for regular Americans that are also big losers in all this mess.
 
ashkan said:
It doesnt take a genius to conclude Assad didnt use chemical weapon on Syrian people. In the past year, there were many instances that the rebels were making huge advances, leaving the Syrian regime trembling, specially in Hamma and Aleppo. In the most uncertain times, Assad didnt use chemical weapons even as his heads of military command were being blown up. Whether he didnt wanna kill unnecessarily or whether he was scared of the international response, he didnt use chemicals then. The pas few months, his government has take back control and is sitting in a very confident place while the international hysteria had wined down. Why the hell would he use chemicals now, knowing it is the ONE thing that wold bring the U.S in! Why is it so hard for people to put 2 n 2 together?! The U.S needs to rid itself of oppositions, specially as Russia and China are gaining power. Syria is a hub for Russia and Iran. Getting rid of Assad;s regime will block Hezbollah's lifeline, secure Israel's illegally occupied territories and the Golan heights even further, take out one of Iran's main allies and at what price? Syrian people's lives. If by now you dont get the imperialistic capitalism of the U.S and its corporate warmachine or its policies to push its agenda in a world that is gaining ground in its face, youll just simply never get it. A country that nuked Japan, used chemical weapons (directy and indirectly) in Iran, Iraq and Vietnam. The country that has solely been responsinble for over 10 wars in a few decades is now trying to punish another government for SUPPODEDLY doing a fraction of what the U.S did itself? COME ON! lol
Click to expand...

Right on. No way Assad would use chem weapons in his position.

The fact that Russia and China is strongly against invasion and the US is ignoring them, is ******.
 
inreb said:
Everybody wants to help. Everybody wants the suffering to stop. If the USA didn't have such an abysmal international record they could pull it off alone. Unfortunately they lost the moral authority a long time ago. No matter what they do with the best of intentions it will never look right. Hiroshima. Or how about Nagasaki?
Click to expand...

They've always tried to remain the World Authority. They just like to push their weight around, but its becoming more apparent that they're of a bully rather than a peacemaker. People are becoming to look less at them as an authority now
 
RockerGuy said:
They've always tried to remain the World Authority. They just like to push their weight around, but its becoming more apparent that they're of a bully rather than a peacemaker. People are becoming to look less at them as an authority now
Click to expand...

Echo and the Bunnyman used to be a fave back in the day too.
 
I don't think this is the same as Iraq or Afghanistan to be honest. If it was, something would have happened much sooner. My feeling is that Assad is a frontman for other interests in the region including the Hezbollah angle. The Russian involvement makes things even more complicated and that is why all nations have sat back and just watched a tragedy unfold for the past year or so. The use of chemical weapons now means that if no one does anything history will read that those capable of halting the murder sat back and did nothing though.

The Brits pulled out because of what happened with Bush and the Iraq fiasco. There's also a delicate political balancing act going on with the main parties there related to the economy too. I don't think that vote has much to do with "doing the right thing".

The US will have a very difficult task determining an appropriate response though as chemical weapons can be delivered by artillery shells too. Air superiority won't take away the threat but it will take away that method of delivery. Russia's sending of warships is a show of bravado, Putin can't be seen to be weak with his political standing in the country but he's not stupid. This won't start WWIII, but I think it will eventually get some concessions from the US for the Russians for whatever they might lose in Syria.
 
I don't understand David Camerons' "humiliating" defeat. He gets to grandstand on principles yet doesn't have to do the nasty stuff because "my hands are tied". Same goes for the most powerful black man on earth lol, he can bleat on about the red line but Congress won't let him do what is his "moral obligation". That's what he's hoping for, anyway. That's what I'm hoping for too because interfering in Syria would be incredibly foolish.
 
You guys are not doing this right.
You were also supposed to provide the date they will "invade".
 
-D- said:
Sept 10th or 11th
What is your estimate?

Is this a backdoor war to get into Iran?

Anyone from Syria with some better insight to the real story of what occurring?
Click to expand...

-D- said:
You guys are not doing this right.
You were also supposed to provide the date they will "invade".
Click to expand...

ill take the 10th for $100
 
jc100 said:
I don't think this is the same as Iraq or Afghanistan to be honest. If it was, something would have happened much sooner. My feeling is that Assad is a frontman for other interests in the region including the Hezbollah angle. The Russian involvement makes things even more complicated and that is why all nations have sat back and just watched a tragedy unfold for the past year or so. The use of chemical weapons now means that if no one does anything history will read that those capable of halting the murder sat back and did nothing though.

The Brits pulled out because of what happened with Bush and the Iraq fiasco. There's also a delicate political balancing act going on with the main parties there related to the economy too. I don't think that vote has much to do with "doing the right thing".

The US will have a very difficult task determining an appropriate response though as chemical weapons can be delivered by artillery shells too. Air superiority won't take away the threat but it will take away that method of delivery. Russia's sending of warships is a show of bravado, Putin can't be seen to be weak with his political standing in the country but he's not stupid. This won't start WWIII, but I think it will eventually get some concessions from the US for the Russians for whatever they might lose in Syria.
Click to expand...

:occasion5:
 
The rebels are "Al Qaeda". So now the USA is on the side of Al Qaeda??


ashkan said:
It doesnt take a genius to conclude Assad didnt use chemical weapon on Syrian people. In the past year, there were many instances that the rebels were making huge advances, leaving the Syrian regime trembling, specially in Hamma and Aleppo. In the most uncertain times, Assad didnt use chemical weapons even as his heads of military command were being blown up. Whether he didnt wanna kill unnecessarily or whether he was scared of the international response, he didnt use chemicals then. The pas few months, his government has take back control and is sitting in a very confident place while the international hysteria had wined down. Why the hell would he use chemicals now, knowing it is the ONE thing that wold bring the U.S in! Why is it so hard for people to put 2 n 2 together?! The U.S needs to rid itself of oppositions, specially as Russia and China are gaining power. Syria is a hub for Russia and Iran. Getting rid of Assad;s regime will block Hezbollah's lifeline, secure Israel's illegally occupied territories and the Golan heights even further, take out one of Iran's main allies and at what price? Syrian people's lives. If by now you dont get the imperialistic capitalism of the U.S and its corporate warmachine or its policies to push its agenda in a world that is gaining ground in its face, youll just simply never get it. A country that nuked Japan, used chemical weapons (directy and indirectly) in Iran, Iraq and Vietnam. The country that has solely been responsinble for over 10 wars in a few decades is now trying to punish another government for SUPPODEDLY doing a fraction of what the U.S did itself? COME ON! lol
Click to expand...
 
ashkan said:
It doesnt take a genius to conclude Assad didnt use chemical weapon on Syrian people. In the past year, there were many instances that the rebels were making huge advances, leaving the Syrian regime trembling, specially in Hamma and Aleppo. In the most uncertain times, Assad didnt use chemical weapons even as his heads of military command were being blown up. Whether he didnt wanna kill unnecessarily or whether he was scared of the international response, he didnt use chemicals then. The pas few months, his government has take back control and is sitting in a very confident place while the international hysteria had wined down. Why the hell would he use chemicals now, knowing it is the ONE thing that wold bring the U.S in! Why is it so hard for people to put 2 n 2 together?! The U.S needs to rid itself of oppositions, specially as Russia and China are gaining power. Syria is a hub for Russia and Iran. Getting rid of Assad;s regime will block Hezbollah's lifeline, secure Israel's illegally occupied territories and the Golan heights even further, take out one of Iran's main allies and at what price? Syrian people's lives. If by now you dont get the imperialistic capitalism of the U.S and its corporate warmachine or its policies to push its agenda in a world that is gaining ground in its face, youll just simply never get it. A country that nuked Japan, used chemical weapons (directy and indirectly) in Iran, Iraq and Vietnam. The country that has solely been responsinble for over 10 wars in a few decades is now trying to punish another government for SUPPODEDLY doing a fraction of what the U.S did itself? COME ON! lol
Click to expand...

I'm not sure you're right on this one. Chemical weapons need a fair bit of prep and skill to deliver and Assad certainly has that capability, plus he's basically sat around for the last couple of years with no interference from anyone else, and done what the hell he likes. He probably figured that no one will stop him. That or he's lost control of his army.

Also, if the US does do something it won't necessarily be in their favour. During the Arab Spring in other parts of the middle east fundamentalist muslim parties gained ground after revolutions. Look at Egypt right afterwards and then also look at them now. Even look at Turkey, a secular country turning more fundamental by the day. If they attack Syria they will stir up Hezbolah and Hezbolah might look at the Golan Heights in order to react somehow.

However, if they do something that actually stops a massacre that is the correct thing to do regardless of how it benefits them or not.

Normally I'd agree that when the US gets involved in these types of things they are doing it for alterior motives but I think they did the right thing in Libya with Gadaffi, and I hope they do the right thing in Syria with Assad.
 
I say they attack one week before the next "Debt Ceiling" deadline is to be reached. So sometime in early October.
 
Friday 13th
 
BLUE_KAWI said:
Well Well Well...what do we have here???

Bombshell: Syria's "chemical weapons" turn out to be fluoride
http://youtu.be/et1NSxT1K4w

CNN Caught Staging News Segments on Syria With Actors
http://friendsofsyria.co/2013/09/01/cnn-caught-staging-news-segments-on-syria-with-actors/
Click to expand...

Lol.....err....Sarin is a binary weapon...that means it needs two components to be mixed together to make the actual gas. Couple of reasons for this, you can store the components seperately safely...and they can be mixed before distribution..also the agent, once mixed, lasts longer. One of the components can be made from other starting materials AND A SOURCE OF FLUORIDE!!!! Booyakasha....

TLDR: the guy in the video is a kingsize dumbass.
 
Zero Hedge
 
Could it be because Qatar is the largest exporter of liquid natural gas in the world and Assad won't let them build a natural gas pipeline through Syria? Of course. Qatar wants to install a puppet regime in Syria that will allow them to build a pipeline which will enable them to sell lots and lots of natural gas to Europe.

[ZH: And as we asked last week, why is Saudi Arabia spending huge amounts of money to help the rebels and why has Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan been "jetting from covert command centers near the Syrian front lines to the Élysée Palace in Paris and the Kremlin in Moscow, seeking to undermine the Assad regime"?] Well, it turns out that Saudi Arabia intends to install their own puppet government in Syria which will allow the Saudis to control the flow of energy through the region.

On the other side, Russia very much prefers the Assad regime for a whole bunch of reasons. One of those reasons is that Assad is helping to block the flow of natural gas out of the Persian Gulf into Europe, thus ensuring higher profits for Gazprom.

Now the United States is getting directly involved in the conflict. If the U.S. is successful in getting rid of the Assad regime, it will be good for either the Saudis or Qatar (and possibly for both), and it will be really bad for Russia. This is a strategic geopolitical conflict about natural resources, religion and money, and it really has nothing to do with chemical weapons at all.

It has been common knowledge that Qatar has desperately wanted to construct a natural gas pipeline that will enable it to get natural gas to Europe for a very long time.
Forum Sponsor
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom