Thread: Strike against Syria

Aug 2012:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avQKLRGRhPU

Sept 2013:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfDUO_XF8KU

Originally Posted by gssixgun

You guys need to actually listen to the speech from today...

Well, I posted this at breaky, and I'm not sure if 'today' is 'today', but I'll have a look and see if I can find what he's saying now...
By the way, today (my today, not yours) was the first time I heard the words 'nuclear war' in regards to this. Seems Russia is NOT happy with Obama's plan...

How did we get from ...








to

Originally Posted by carlmaloschneider

Well, I posted this at breaky, and I'm not sure if 'today' is 'today', but I'll have a look and see if I can find what he's saying now...
By the way, today (my today, not yours) was the first time I heard the words 'nuclear war' in regards to this. Seems Russia is NOT happy with Obama's plan...

Russia is already backing from their previous absolute 'no' stance to punishing Al-Assad regime for CW. Probably it means only that even the Russian authorities now have proofs against Al-Assad. Russia cannot much longer play their game on thousands of innocent Syrian victims. That was the price of the show this far. Of course they cannot openly admit it without looking like a bad guy.

It means also that the days of Al-Assad regime are soon to be over. Now Russia is just trying to get all the benefits it can without losing everything to west. Sooner or later there will be regime more friendly to west in Syria just like more or less now is in Iraq and Afganistan. It's good for our business and also for our -yours and mine- living standards. I might be wrong of course but this far that all has gone exactly like that. Replacing not so friendly regime with something more neutral or friendly. And it's not always for human rights.

Must be over 20 years ago when i stopped thinking foreign deployments as 'defending our country' or such bs. In the end it's just making money for the big boys and if lucky, maybe few coins for regular people too.

I'm rather cynic with world power politics but is no wonder the whole middle east is so important to west. Did they really care about human rights then there had been Rwanda and Darfur to intervene. And Gaza of course.

Originally Posted by Sailor

I'm rather cynic with world power politics but is no wonder the whole middle east is so important to west. Did they really care about human rights then there had been Rwanda and Darfur to intervene. And Gaza of course.

I tell you, I remember every day hearing about the genocide going on in Rwanda and thinking to myself that the US is usually so quick to intervene on behalf of the innocent (at least, that's what I was always taught growing up) but we sure are taking our time in getting involved in this one.

Then, as an adult, learning about how badly we (well, our government) were embarrassed about Somalia gave me a whole new perspective on our elected officials.

I don't mean this as a racist comment, because I'm the furthest thing from a racist, but I can't help but wonder if part of Obama's motives for lots of the more, well, atypical things he's tried to achieve (I'm trying to be civil here) are driven by the fact that he's the first non-white President. You know, like there's something to prove or that he has to make his mark. Either that, or the man just has ego and/or control issues.


One other observation, this time about this thread. I noticed a few posts back things starting to south between OCDshaver, Gugi and nessmuck. I'm not going to hem and haw about it, but I just want to remind everybody that we're all friends here and let's try not to say something that would directly insult someone on a personal level. That's what gets folks in trouble, and what gets threads closed and topics banned. I like all of you very much and I'm also enjoying the discussion too much to see things go downhill.

Originally Posted by crouton976

I don't mean this as a racist comment, because I'm the furthest thing from a racist, but I can't help but wonder if part of Obama's motives for lots of the more, well, atypical things he's tried to achieve (I'm trying to be civil here) are driven by the fact that he's the first non-white President. You know, like there's something to prove or that he has to make his mark. Either that, or the man just has ego and/or control issues.

I never thought about that, honestly. Skin colour for being behind of all this. Of course i might be wrong. You live, you learn.
Well i never thought about us going to Afganistan just because we had first female president


All joking aside, it's opinions that argue here, not people. No need to get into, or take serious, any personal attacks. Guess we're all more or less gentlemen here.
As someone speaking from outside USA it is sometimes difficult to remember that here in Europe we have no such things as 'right' or 'left' like you see it. Or being either pro or against something. Rather a political field of various shades of grey (pink, green, black, dk green, yellow, light blue, yellow with red dots etc etc). Just a big number of political parties from all sides of the society, more or less forced to negotiate and make compromises with each other.

Originally Posted by gssixgun

The absolute dumbest statement of today's news cycle that I heard..

This statement after decades of Muslim Suicide/Homicide bombers..

"The CW bombs were set off in a section of Damascus that the "Free Syrian Army" was advancing, what you are saying is they set of these bombs to hurt their own people, that just doesn't make sense"


Now keep in mind that I do not necessarily saying the CW use was a set up to get a Western response, but I am saying that it sure was a possibility...

"The Arabic newspaper Al-Akhbar cites information according to which there is a plan approved by the U.S. government to create a new pipeline for transporting gas from Qatar to Europe involving Turkey and Israel. The capacity of such a pipeline is not mentioned, but considering the resources of the Persian Gulf and Eastern Mediterranean region, it could exceed that of both the Islamic Pipeline and Nabucco, directly challenging Russia’s South Stream. The main developer of this project is Frederick Hoff, who is «in charge of gas issues in the Levant» and a member of the U.S. «Syrian Crisis Committee». This new pipeline is to begin in Qatar, cross Saudi territory and then the territory of Jordan, thus bypassing Shiite Iraq, and reach Syria. Near Homs the pipeline is to branch in three directions: to Latakia, Tripoli in northern Lebanon, and Turkey. Homs, where there are also hydrocarbon reserves, is the «project’s main crossroads», and it is not surprising that it is in the vicinity of this city and its «key», Al-Qusayr, that the fiercest fighting is taking place. Here the fate of Syria is being decided. The parts of Syrian territory where detachments of rebels are operating with the support of the U.S., Qatar and Turkey, that is, the north, Homs and the environs of Damascus, coincide with the route that the pipeline is to follow to Turkey and Tripoli, Lebanon. A comparison of a map of armed hostilities and a map of the Qatar pipeline route indicates a link between armed activities and the desire to control these Syrian territories."

The Geopolitics of Gas and the Syrian Crisis: Syrian “Opposition” Armed to Thwart Construction of Iran-Iraq-Syria Gas Pipeline | Global Research

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-4QMOUrj0it.../photo%2B3.jpg

It kind of makes some sense in this context. You have to ask, why is Russia continually asking for proof that the Syrian gov't unleashed these weapons. In the context of a fight over these pipelines, it makes sense. Often in the news there are things that simply don't add up. So you have to ask, under what circumstance DO they make sense? This may be an explanation. Look where the article is saying the pipeline would go. Look on the map where the fighting is taking place. If the city of Horns is the cross roads for this pipeline and its to extend to Turkey, I have to envision that the areas of fighting just to the North of Horns would be the logical path toward Turkey.

This stuff just makes me chuckle... I can't help myself, don't try the guilt trip either it just won't work, I am just soooo beyond that... I wonder if they found Kerry's "friend's" medals too LIAR !!!!

OCD it breaks my heart to hear how bad things have gotten in my home town

A day after Secretary of State John Kerry compared Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to Adolf Hitler and Saddam Hussein, Britain's Daily Mail published a picture of Kerry dining with Assad in February 2009.

John Kerry's cosy dinner with Syria's 'Hitler': Secretary of State and Assad pictured dining out in Damascus | Mail Online

It's going to be fascinating to see how the Obama-loving press report this (photo courtesy AFP):




Assad and Kerry - who was then a senator for Massachusetts - lean in towards each other and appear deep in conversation as their wives look on.

A waiter is pictured at their side with a tray of green drinks - which are believed to be lemon and crushed mint.

The picture is believed to have been taken in February 2009 in the Naranj restaurant in Damascus when Kerry led a delegation to Syria to discuss ideas and talk about the way forward for peace in the region.




So four and a half years ago, Kerry and wife Teresa dined with the Assads.

If Kerry were a Republican who on Sunday compared Assad to Hitler and Hussein, the media would have a field day with this picture.

Given their affection for Obama and Kerry, it's going to be fascinating to see how this gets reported in the coming days.