BLOCKBUSTER! Syrian Rebels Take Responsibility For Chemical Attack...

[dilloduck]

dilloduck, why is it you love Assad and the Baathists and the commies?

quit being a reactionary and answer the question.

 

[Vox]

The idea Assad woke up one day and decided to order his Military to attack women & babies with heinous Chemical Weapons, is just plain ludicrous. It didn't happen. I know so many desperately want to believe that fairy tale, but it's just that...A fairy tale.

actually it is totally possible.

but that is not the issue here.

the issue here - why do we need to get involved?

Because powerful US "allies" - Israel and Saudi Arabia - have ORDERED Obama to do so.

.

I don't think so. It looks more like our dear leader desperately NEEDS a war to get involved into - "phony scandals" being partially the reason to, but not only.

 

[tinydancer]

The likely reality is, Assad is winning the War. And for some reason that's unacceptable to the U.S. and others. So they had to concoct this 'Chemical Attack' farce. The good thing is, most Americans don't seem to be buying it. Maybe times are changing? I'm actually encouraged.

From what I gather Saudi Arabia and Qatar are backing the rebels. Qatar apperently has a huge gas reserve and need a pipeline to get their product to market.

It needs to go right thru Syria. Assad won't cave because he is aligned with Putin. Russia controls the gas market to the EU.

One more time, all you have to do is follow the money.

They are desperate to remove Assad from office and have spent a fortune arming the rebels.

 

[Vox]

since when are you such a warmonger?

since the dear leader brainwashed you that HE needs to have a war?

I am not supporting we go to war with Syria. Why do you people only think in extremes. It isn't an either or situation. We are not going to invade Syria or go to war with them. That is not what is being proposed or even considered. Strikes against Assad in order to assist the rebels is what is being considered.

However, my main point is that you cannot believe anything coming out of Russia and to side with Assad, North Korea, Russia and Iran is amazingly absurd: but you all do it for partisan reasons because you hate the democratic administration. Essentially, you all seem to be happy to be traitors to our country, siding with anything and anyone who is against Obama, even to the detriment of truth, democracy and freedom. I remember the other thread when all the right wingers were applauding Putin as such a great guy: he's a lying, manipulative, evil and murderous dictator. And you would put him above our own president. Sickening.

In Libya, we did as much as was necessary to make sure the rebels win which wasn't a lot. They can do the same thing in Syria and a punitive bombing is undoubtedly the beginning of that.

and now tell me how did the US benefited from that. and why did we need the rebels to win.

 

[paulitician]

dilloduck, why is it you love Assad and the Baathists and the commies?

Assad and Syria have not earned our love, or hate. It's not even about that. It's their Country. It's their Civil War. There is no valid justification for our involvement. Period, end of story.

 

[Contumacious]

[

It's no secret that the Sauds and Qatar are financing mercenaries to overthrow Assad. Our government doesn't like to comment on that.

According to news reports confirmed by a member of the Syrian opposition, Riyadh currently sends weapons on an ad hoc basis to the Syrian opposition by way of Sunni tribal allies in Iraq and Lebanon. But in light of recent developments, more weapons are almost certainly on their way. After his delegation withdrew in frustration from last week's Friends of Syria meeting in Tunisia, Prince Saud al-Faisal, the Saudi foreign minister, said that humanitarian aid to Syria was "not enough" and that arming the Syrian rebels was an "excellent idea." Soon afterward, an unnamed official commented in the state-controlled Saudi press that Riyadh sought to provide the Syrian opposition with the "means to achieve stability and peace and to allow it the right to choose its own representatives." Meanwhile, Saudi clerics are now openly calling for jihad in Syria and scorning those who wait for Western intervention. One prominent unsanctioned cleric, Aidh al-Qarni, openly calls for Assad's death.

Other Sunni Gulf states, principally Qatar, may be contributing weapons. On Monday, Feb. 27, Qatari Prime Minister Hamad bin Jassim al-Thani said, "We should do whatever necessary to help [the Syrian opposition], including giving them weapons to defend themselves." The positions of other regional actors are less clear. But whether or not they supply weapons to the Free Syrian Army -- the armed opposition composed of defectors and local militia -- all these Sunni states now want the Assad regime to crumble because it is an ally and proxy of their sworn Shiite enemy, Iran, which destabilizes the region with terrorism and nuclear threats. "

.

 

[Vox]

The likely reality is, Assad is winning the War. And for some reason that's unacceptable to the U.S. and others. So they had to concoct this 'Chemical Attack' farce. The good thing is, most Americans don't seem to be buying it. Maybe times are changing? I'm actually encouraged.

From I gather Saudi Arabia and Qatar are backing the rebels. Qatar apperently has a huge gas reserve and need a pipeline to get their product to market.

It needs to go right thru Syria. Assad won't cave because he is aligned with Putin. Russia controls the gas market to the EU.

One more time, all you have to do is follow the money.

They are desperate to remove Assad from office and have spent a fortune arming the rebels.

exactly. let them conduct their war themselves.

why do the US need to get involved?

 

[Vox]

The idea Assad woke up one day and decided to order his Military to attack women & babies with heinous Chemical Weapons, is just plain ludicrous. It didn't happen. I know so many desperately want to believe that fairy tale, but it's just that...A fairy tale.

actually it is totally possible.

but that is not the issue here.

the issue here - why do we need to get involved?

Cuz Obama insists on spanking Assad's ass so he will never do it again. That that will work.....

like it did in Libya? riiiiiight

 

[JakeStarkey]

dilloduck, why is it you love Assad and the Baathists and the commies?

quit being a reactionary and answer the question.

 

[JakeStarkey]

dilloduck, why is it you love Assad and the Baathists and the commies?

Assad and Syria have not earned our love, or hate. It's not even about that. It's their Country. It's their Civil War. There is no valid justification for our involvement. Period, end of story.

The point is this: you support people who poison gas children.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Oh, did the Lord resurrect Kaddafi?

I don't see how the reactionary bed wetting appeasers avoid body cramps from so quickly changing positions.

 

[dilloduck]

[

It's no secret that the Sauds and Qatar are financing mercenaries to overthrow Assad. Our government doesn't like to comment on that.

According to news reports confirmed by a member of the Syrian opposition, Riyadh currently sends weapons on an ad hoc basis to the Syrian opposition by way of Sunni tribal allies in Iraq and Lebanon. But in light of recent developments, more weapons are almost certainly on their way. After his delegation withdrew in frustration from last week's Friends of Syria meeting in Tunisia, Prince Saud al-Faisal, the Saudi foreign minister, said that humanitarian aid to Syria was "not enough" and that arming the Syrian rebels was an "excellent idea." Soon afterward, an unnamed official commented in the state-controlled Saudi press that Riyadh sought to provide the Syrian opposition with the "means to achieve stability and peace and to allow it the right to choose its own representatives." Meanwhile, Saudi clerics are now openly calling for jihad in Syria and scorning those who wait for Western intervention. One prominent unsanctioned cleric, Aidh al-Qarni, openly calls for Assad's death.

Other Sunni Gulf states, principally Qatar, may be contributing weapons. On Monday, Feb. 27, Qatari Prime Minister Hamad bin Jassim al-Thani said, "We should do whatever necessary to help [the Syrian opposition], including giving them weapons to defend themselves." The positions of other regional actors are less clear. But whether or not they supply weapons to the Free Syrian Army -- the armed opposition composed of defectors and local militia -- all these Sunni states now want the Assad regime to crumble because it is an ally and proxy of their sworn Shiite enemy, Iran, which destabilizes the region with terrorism and nuclear threats. "

.

Saudi Arabia and Qatar bankroll Syrian rebels? ? RT News

 

[Borillar]

dilloduck, why is it you love Assad and the Baathists and the commies?

Assad and Syria have not earned our love, or hate. It's not even about that. It's their Country. It's their Civil War. There is no valid justification for our involvement. Period, end of story.

The point is this: you support people who poison gas children.

It isn't known for certain which side used these weapons. By attacking, you may in fact be aiding and abetting the very people who did this. Secondly, how is a military attack going to benefit the children? Thirdly, how is it any of our business? We weren't attacked. Neither were our allies.

The US doesn't have to throw its weight around every time some despot sneezes. If the people of Syria or the middle East want democracy or change, they will have to fight for it themselves.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

Assad is horrible, no doubt. The opposition is also horrible. An alliance with either side is unthinkable and unworkable. The US should keep its nose out of this conflict. The so called line in the sand should be use of Chemical weapons against our forces or those of our allies. If the Syrian government or rebels use these weapons against one another, so be it. Not a reason to involve our military.

Exactly. Unfortunately, I believe Obama is only looking for the least amount of justification to invade yet another country and make it look "good." It's so sad.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

We may not get involved. It isn't determined yet. The UK is not going to participate. France may do so. I think the idea is to do what was done in Libya, do enough to bring things to a head and end things. But it is problematic because of the support from Russia. The US may end up doing nothing, but I think the administration, France, and Cameron are all tried of watching innocent people die and want to end it. Assad refuses to leave. He's going to refuse to leave until he is the last man standing if need be. He doesn't care about anyone but himself. The only country in the ME that supports him is Iran: that should tell you something. But the other countries are not getting involved because they don't want to start a war either. The US does not want a war with Syria. They want to put a stop to what is going on there with so many innocents dying.

Assad is an evil dictator. He may be intelligent and educated, but he is a narcissist who thinks he is above paying the price for what he's done and is doing and that he can last forever. It reminds me of when Khadafy said to the men who had captured him, asking them why they were angry with him, asking "What did I do to you?" Assad thinks he is above recrimination. I used to work with someone who worked in Syria for a couple of years, an American. She talked about what a scary, creepy place it was with the secret police watching and listening to everything you did. I was talking to a couple of Middle Eastern people this morning, people I work with, who are from a country very close to Syria. They were also talking about how the secret police in Syria were everywhere and the people were continually watched and oppressed.

Our own current leader could be described in a similar fashion. He's been known to be quite the narcissist, and a bit of a Dictator. And he's heavily contributed to creating our creepy Police State here. But does that mean Syria should begin round the clock bombing of the U.S.?

This is so absurd. You are either a complete imbecile or you are being completely dishonest intellectually. As I said before, go live in a country like Syria was, or in Iran, Russia or North Korea. Then you will know what a real narcissist dictator is, what a truly oppressive regime is. Your calling Obama a dictator is total intellectual dishonesty and total partisanship. No one but the ultra rw idiots believe such bs. Comparing Obama to a real dictator is like comparing drinking sour milk to drinking bleach. One may be unpleasant for a short period of time, the other will kill you.

Considering how much freedom our great nation SHOULD have, the police are doing everything humanly possible to control it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Assad and Syria have not earned our love, or hate. It's not even about that. It's their Country. It's their Civil War. There is no valid justification for our involvement. Period, end of story.

The point is this: you support people who poison gas children.

It isn't known for certain which side used these weapons. By attacking, you may in fact be aiding and abetting the very people who did this. Secondly, how is a military attack going to benefit the children? Thirdly, how is it any of our business? We weren't attacked. Neither were our allies.

The US doesn't have to throw its weight around every time some despot sneezes. If the people of Syria or the middle East want democracy or change, they will have to fight for it themselves.

No, you don't get "just one more time." Beyond moral certainty we know that the Assad regime used poison gas on civilians.

Beyond moral certainty we know that you support the Assad regime and his communist backers.

 

[paulitician]

dilloduck, why is it you love Assad and the Baathists and the commies?

Assad and Syria have not earned our love, or hate. It's not even about that. It's their Country. It's their Civil War. There is no valid justification for our involvement. Period, end of story.

The point is this: you support people who poison gas children.

We've been over that already. Obviously, you know it's not true.

 

[g5000]

"We know that for three days before the attack, the Syrian regime's chemical weapons personnel were on the ground in the area, making preparations," said Kerry, referring to intercepts of conversations of Syrian officials. "And we know that the Syrian regime elements were told to prepare for the attack by putting on gas masks and taking precautions associated with chemical weapons."

So much for the claim the rebels were behind the chemical attack.

In a brief appearance before reporters, Obama emphasized that he is only considering a "limited, narrow act" against Syria.

"We're not considering any open ended commitment," Obama said. "We're not considering any boots on the ground approach."

White House releases report detailing Syria chemical attack

 

[tinydancer]

since when are you such a warmonger?

since the dear leader brainwashed you that HE needs to have a war?

I am not supporting we go to war with Syria. Why do you people only think in extremes. It isn't an either or situation. We are not going to invade Syria or go to war with them. That is not what is being proposed or even considered. Strikes against Assad in order to assist the rebels is what is being considered.

However, my main point is that you cannot believe anything coming out of Russia and to side with Assad, North Korea, Russia and Iran is amazingly absurd: but you all do it for partisan reasons because you hate the democratic administration. Essentially, you all seem to be happy to be traitors to our country, siding with anything and anyone who is against Obama, even to the detriment of truth, democracy and freedom. I remember the other thread when all the right wingers were applauding Putin as such a great guy: he's a lying, manipulative, evil and murderous dictator. And you would put him above our own president. Sickening.

In Libya, we did as much as was necessary to make sure the rebels win which wasn't a lot. They can do the same thing in Syria and a punitive bombing is undoubtedly the beginning of that.

I think people are fucked up for knowingly trying to help AQ's arm in Syria.

 

[Borillar]

The point is this: you support people who poison gas children.

It isn't known for certain which side used these weapons. By attacking, you may in fact be aiding and abetting the very people who did this. Secondly, how is a military attack going to benefit the children? Thirdly, how is it any of our business? We weren't attacked. Neither were our allies.

The US doesn't have to throw its weight around every time some despot sneezes. If the people of Syria or the middle East want democracy or change, they will have to fight for it themselves.

No, you don't get "just one more time." Beyond moral certainty we know that the Assad regime used poison gas on civilians.

Beyond moral certainty we know that you support the Assad regime and his communist backers.

And by supporting the opposition you are siding with Al Qaeda and Islamists. This is a snake pit. If you kill one of the snakes, the other snakes will bite you. Best strategy is to not step in the pit.