War With Syria: Yea Or Nay?

[U2Edge]

our missiles will kill civilians, count on it. probably thousands of them. probably more than assad killed with CW.

this is stupid, it will accomplish nothing.

Ever contemplate how many people Assad could kill with his next Sarin gas attack?

Probably not nearly as many as 2 or 3 hundred US Tomahawk missiles would.

300 missiles won't kill 10,000 people, but Assad's next Sarin gas attack could kill well beyond that.

 

[Kondor3]

It doesn't matter whether the Syrians have used chemical weapons or not.

We are not the World's Policeman and this is not our fight.

 

[U2Edge]

our missiles will kill civilians, count on it. probably thousands of them. probably more than assad killed with CW.

this is stupid, it will accomplish nothing.

Ever contemplate how many people Assad could kill with his next Sarin gas attack?

And when spread by incomplete destruction by Tomahawk missile?
Or does collateral damage still not count?

The missile strike is not targeting chemical stockpiles.

 

[U2Edge]

It is when they put US National Security at risk by using WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION!

Where's your PROOF "they" have used WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION?

We still do not have proof Assad carried out the chemical weapons attack. And if he did, there is no difference between him and the US officials who ordered napalm and white phosphorous to be used against civilians in Iraq. The US uses chemical weapons against civilians. Why is it OK for the US to unlawfully use chemical weapons against civilians but not OK for Assad to do the same?

Napalm and White Phosphorous are not WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION and are not banned by the Chemical Weapons Convention treaty of 1997.

 

[Kondor3]

"gathering the land" for empire has been the main motto for them during the last 600+years no matter what name was the country called - Moscovia, Russian empire or Soviet Union. The essence never changed - "moscow is the third rome and the fourth will not exist"

The Russians have never had the culture of Rome.

That is not what I meant and not what is behind the phrase of the XV century monk

It's a concept for the drive to be a superpower:
http://www.ksk.edu.ee/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/KVUOA_Toimetised_12-Laats.pdf

When Constantinople (the Second Rome) fell in 1453, it was hoped that the continuation of the Byzantine Imperial bloodline (through the female side) would result in a Muscovite (Duchy of Muscovy, including the city of Moskva [Moscow]) dynasty that could claim the Imperial Title and turn Muscovy into the Third Rome in the process.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Rome

 

[Contumacious]

It doesn't matter whether the Syrians have used chemical weapons or not.

That is very very true.

The scam is to install a Sunni government which will allow Israel to attack Iran without fearing that Syria will attack Israel.

.

 

[Geaux4it]

Ever contemplate how many people Assad could kill with his next Sarin gas attack?

And when spread by incomplete destruction by Tomahawk missile?
Or does collateral damage still not count?

The missile strike is not targeting chemical stockpiles.

Like we know where it has all been moved too?

-Geaux

 

[Geaux4it]

Ever contemplate how many people Assad could kill with his next Sarin gas attack?

Probably not nearly as many as 2 or 3 hundred US Tomahawk missiles would.

300 missiles won't kill 10,000 people, but Assad's next Sarin gas attack could kill well beyond that.

Who cares?. Survival of the fittest

-Geaux

 

[R.C. Christian]

Where's your PROOF "they" have used WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION?

We still do not have proof Assad carried out the chemical weapons attack. And if he did, there is no difference between him and the US officials who ordered napalm and white phosphorous to be used against civilians in Iraq. The US uses chemical weapons against civilians. Why is it OK for the US to unlawfully use chemical weapons against civilians but not OK for Assad to do the same?

Napalm and White Phosphorous are not WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION and are not banned by the Chemical Weapons Convention treaty of 1997.

Oh for fuck sake. Does it matter?

 

[R.C. Christian]

It doesn't matter whether the Syrians have used chemical weapons or not.

That is very very true.

The scam is to install a Sunni government which will allow Israel to attack Iran without fearing that Syria will attack Israel.

.

Exactly. Rep en route.

 

[MisterBeale]

It's like people on this site have never heard of the "The Project for a “New Middle East”"
General Wesley Clark tells of how Middle East destabilization was planned as far back as 1991 - YouTube

Worth a few minutes to read:

"'Hegemony is as old as Mankind…' -Zbigniew Brzezinski, former U.S. National Security Advisor.

"The term 'New Middle East' was introduced to the world in June 2006 in Tel Aviv by U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice (who was credited by the Western media for coining the term) in replacement of the older and more imposing term, the 'Greater Middle East.'

"This shift in foreign policy phraseology coincided with the inauguration of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) Oil Terminal in the Eastern Mediterranean.

"The term and conceptualization of the 'New Middle East,' was subsequently heralded by the U.S. Secretary of State and the Israeli Prime Minister at the height of the Anglo-American sponsored Israeli siege of Lebanon. Prime Minister Olmert and Secretary Rice had informed the international media that a project for a 'New Middle East' was being launched from Lebanon.

"This announcement was a confirmation of an Anglo-American-Israeli 'military roadmap' in the Middle East.

"This project, which has been in the planning stages for several years, consists in creating an arc of instability, chaos, and violence extending from Lebanon, Palestine, and Syria to Iraq, the Persian Gulf, Iran, and the borders of NATO-garrisoned Afghanistan.

Plans for Redrawing the Middle East: The Project for a ?New Middle East? | Global Research

This is an excellent article, one I suggest everybody bookmark and put in the political file in their bookmarks. I have noticed that it has been updated since when I first read it back in 2009, it was first published in 2006.

Global Research, January 27, 2013
Global Research 18 November 2006

Excellent piece, great image too. I love when they show hypothetical changes to the map. When I was in sixth grade, I was fascinated to learn how the map of Europe used to look before WWI, and how it used to look before WWII. That should be a clue to what kind of war should be necessary to get these kind of map changes folks.

Basically, it is a MUST read for everyone here on the US message boards if you want to have a clearer picture of what they are teaching at West Point and Bethesda, and discussing at that higher levels at the Pentagon. There is definitely a split in the higher levels though. Some of the higher leadership in the military believe we should be preparing for the inevitable showdown with China, they believe this strongly. A defensive war is the only moral war. Others, are definitely behind this new preemptive war, fascist movement. This is not the only place I have found information on this long term strategy.

Here is another great source that backs up what is in that source. It is always great to have more than one source to verify what is known. Add that to what General Wesley Clark has revealed, and you have a pretty compelling case that the American nation is being used by the globalists as the prime mover and as the engineer of a global world order, whether we, the American citizens and sovereign tax payers like it or not.

The Social “Big Bang” of the 21st Century Turkey: From Atlantic to Eurasia
http://nsnbc.me/2013/07/01/the-social-big-bang-of-the-21st-century-turkey-from-atlantic-to-eurasia/

The Second Israel = “Free Kurdistan” is an invariant of the Great Middle East Project. One of the invariants of the US policy concerning the Middle East is to turn Northern Iraq into a permanent base of its own, or equivalently into a second Israel. This target can be reached by founding a “Free Kurdistan”. The territory of the Kurdistan Regional Government is by itself not adequate for the sustainability of such a state. Sustainability requires expansion of the territory to the North into Turkey and an opening to the Mediterranean via a “Kurdish Corridor” in Northern Syria. A possible expansion to the East into Iran is also desirable. The competence and accumulation needed for founding and running such a state is owned by the PKK. This collection of statements depicts the framework within which the USA considers the “Kurdish factor” in the Middle East.

 

[georgephillip]

It's like people on this site have never heard of the "The Project for a “New Middle East”"
General Wesley Clark tells of how Middle East destabilization was planned as far back as 1991 - YouTube

Worth a few minutes to read:

"'Hegemony is as old as Mankind…' -Zbigniew Brzezinski, former U.S. National Security Advisor.

Plans for Redrawing the Middle East: The Project for a ?New Middle East? | Global Research

Isn't ZB the advisor to Carter that oversaw the overthrow of the Shah in Iran so the Muslim Ayatollah could return to power? As I recall, the Shah was mistreating some Russians that were making mischief in Iran, Carter didn't like that and wanted a religious leader to replace him.
How did that work out?

Carter and Brezinski were on watch when Ike's Iran handiwork of 1953 blew-back in their faces:

"Mohammad Mosaddegh or Mosaddeq[a] (Persian: مُحَمَد مُصَدِق*; IPA: [mohæmˈmæd(-e) mosædˈdeɣ] ( listen); 16 June 1882 – 5 March 1967), was the democratically elected[1][2][3] Prime Minister of Iran from 1951 until 1953, when his government was overthrown in a coup d'état orchestrated by the British MI6 and the American CIA."

The Shah's Secret Police mistreated thousands during his US-supported reign and today's Mad Mullahs filled that power vacuum when Shah fled in 1979.

Some of Brezinski's policy prescriptions also appealed to the Gipper:

"1979 saw two major strategically important events: the overthrow of U.S. ally the Shah of Iran, and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. The Iranian Revolution precipitated the Iran hostage crisis, which would last for the rest of Carter's presidency.

"Brzezinski anticipated the Soviet invasion, and, with the support of Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and the People's Republic of China, he created a strategy to undermine the Soviet presence.

"Using this atmosphere of insecurity, Brzezinski led the United States toward a new arms buildup and the development of the Rapid Deployment Forces – policies that are both more generally associated with Ronald Reagan now."

Zbigniew Brzezinski - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Many believe Ziggy did much more than anticipate the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. In fact, he has proudly admitted to luring the Soviets into their own Vietnam, and he may have a great deal to do with what's happening in Syria (and beyond) today.

 

[Geaux4it]

[/QUOTE]

The missile strike is not targeting chemical stockpiles.[/QUOTE]

Just saw a video clip of Obama today saying he went to Congress because he was not sure if the chemical attacks caused an immediate threat to the US. Hello- That is what 99% of the people on this board have been saying for days now.

-Geaux

 

[georgephillip]

It is when they put US National Security at risk by using WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION!

Where's your PROOF "they" have used WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION?

Everywhere! This train left the station a long time ago!

So POST IT already unless it's CLASSIFIED for the next generation.

 

[paulitician]

The missile strike is not targeting chemical stockpiles.[/QUOTE]

Just saw a video clip of Obama today saying he went to Congress because he was not sure if the chemical attacks caused an immediate threat to the US. Hello- That is what 99% of the people on this board have been saying for days now.

-Geaux[/QUOTE]

I'm sensing desperation now. And that's dangerous. Who knows what he'll concoct next? Stay tuned.

 

[Bill Angel]

Just saw a video clip of Obama today saying he went to Congress because he was not sure if the chemical attacks caused an immediate threat to the US. Hello- That is what 99% of the people on this board have been saying for days now.

-Geaux

The present political conundrum does bring to mind a fictional scenario from the time of World War II. What if Nazi Germany had embarked on a programme of killing its political enemies with poison gas BEFORE the USA had declared war on Nazi Germany and Japan, and the USA learned about it? Would the USA have attempted to carry out military activities meant to curtail such gassing by the Nazi forces, or would isolationist sentiment in the USA have stymied any attempts by the Roosevelt Administration to do so?

 

[Spoonman]

Breaking news. Obama announces deployment of a new secret weapon to Syria. the EM-350 Urban assault Vehicle.

 

[proudveteran06]

If this had been Bush Senator Obama , Henry Reed, Barbara Boxer and all the other LIBERALS out there would be screaming their heads off !!!!! What Hypocrites

 

[Hoffstra]

If this had been Bush Senator Obama , Henry Reed, Barbara Boxer and all the other LIBERALS out there would be screaming their heads off !!!!! What Hypocrites

that's not the issue.

we need to bring together the anti-war forces, who cares who they are and how they voted for the Iraq War.

this is about preventing a massive tragedy!!!

 

[Geaux4it]

Just saw a video clip of Obama today saying he went to Congress because he was not sure if the chemical attacks caused an immediate threat to the US. Hello- That is what 99% of the people on this board have been saying for days now.

-Geaux

The present political conundrum does bring to mind a fictional scenario from the time of World War II. What if Nazi Germany had embarked on a programme of killing its political enemies with poison gas BEFORE the USA had declared war on Nazi Germany and Japan, and the USA learned about it? Would the USA have attempted to carry out military activities meant to curtail such gassing by the Nazi forces, or would isolationist sentiment in the USA have stymied any attempts by the Roosevelt Administration to do so?

Interesting scenario.

Times were different then without question. The Jewish ties to America would have been a driving force. But let's be clear here- America was much more dominant militarily in WW1 and WW2 from a standpoint of sheer determination to win. Since then, not so much. Once past the shock and awe, things settle down. Korea, Vietnam, and Afghanistan have not been our finest hour.

-Geaux