How the Syria Plan Broke Through, Just in Time.....

Moot said:

So Kerry made a rhetorical statement that not even he believed would ever happen....and then while on the plane trip home he gets a call from Lavrov saying that Putin will be making an announcement soon and by the time he lands Syria has agreed to let the international community monitor their chemical weapons stockpile? That is remarkable.

If Syria gives up control over it's chemical weapons, then Obama won't have to attack. That looks like a winning solution for the US, imo.

Click to expand...

Heya Moot :2wave: .....Yeah, and if you read further you can see why especially after Obama sends the Word on down.

Well they (Syria) did file with the UN so now they got 30 more days by UN procedures.

I would agree with you if we don't attack and then stay out of their civil war completely.

Snappo said:

Like I always say, Russia had first pick and now we have to pick the useless fat kid in the corner eating his grape icee. Either we pick Al Qaeda or we don't get to make any coin on the misery in Syria.

Click to expand...

I'm sure you know I'm appalled at your calloused assessment of this, but to play along for a moment, the US had every opportunity to pick first and support president Assad, as Beau has pointed out as well.

APACHERAT said:

I wasn't suggesting that the Libertarians hide behind a label but that they openly stand behind their political ideology like those in the Tea Party movement have. It was the Tea Party movement who knocked the neoconservatives from power within the GOP. The only problem today, no one is in charge of the GOP since the mid term elections of 2010.

You're going to find more Americans under the GOP tent who have more in common with the Libertarian Party than you will under the Democrat tent, that's for sure. There's no place for individual freedoms under the Democrat tent.

Of all of the diffrent political parties that have a platform, I'm more aligned with the Constitution Party.

But the problem with most political parties they write up a platform every four years and then they ignore it.

Click to expand...

I do not believe the LP has anything in common with GOP or DNC, because both GOP and DNC want to grow government and increase spending. The only difference between GOP and DNC is that GOP are very sky-daddy in how they write laws. They are less interested in the separation of church and state than the DNC. GOP and DNC know one thing - that they will be out of work if they don't appeal to the largest group of voters. If one grabs 40% of the vote, the other wants 41%. And the easiest way to beat out the other guy is to have the biggest pool of voters to entice. And since 10% of Americans hold 90% of the wealth; clearly the group to schmooze are the "have nots". LP on the other hand takes a moral high ground - do what's best and most honest and do not pander just for votes. Of course that is why they are irrelevant on the big stage. That will not change until America somehow un-retards themselves and realizes both DNC and GOP are fisting them until they hemorrhage.

Montecresto said:

I'm sure you know I'm appalled at your calloused assessment of this

Click to expand...

You are the dreamer and I am the realist. You see the world as it should be and perhaps can be, and I see it as the cesspool it is. And I have seen my share of cesspools. Clark Air Force base comes to mind as I say that. It's outside of Angeles City in North Luzon. Muslims living in bamboo and paper huts underneath bridges, Christians living in 1 room apartments, and the salary of an average worker in the neighborhood of 3 or 4 bucks a day. It wasn't much better in Saudi Arabia either. Or Honduras. Or Belize. Or dozens of other countries I have had to do work in. I make no apologies for who I am. I look in the mirror and I am fine with my hatred of islam, or hatred of crime, or hatred of people too lazy to rise above the poverty even when given opportunity after opportunity. If they want to be the prey instead of the hunter, fine with me. Have's and have-not's. It is what it is. I say lets make some money off arab misery. I would rather USA be the top of the food chain than the middle or bottom.

MMC said:

Heya Snappo.....I say we stay out of it and choose neither side. See who rises to the cream of the crop. Then we know who is who. Focus on Egypt.

Click to expand...

I'd agree with you but personally I wouldn't mind hearing a few Syrians whine that their families were exterminated in bombing runs. But if I didn't hate Syrians so; I would agree with you. Let them kill each other and stay out of it. It's an Arab League problem. USA has no skin in the game. Maybe we can sell arms somewhere else and break even against Russia elsewhere.

Snappo said:

I look in the mirror and I am fine with my hatred of islam, or hatred of crime, or hatred of people too lazy to rise above the poverty even when given opportunity after opportunity. If they want to be the prey instead of the hunter, fine with me. Have's and have-not's. It is what it is. I say lets make some money off arab misery. I would rather USA be the top of the food chain than the middle or bottom.

Click to expand...

Thumbs up. I get so tired of how the followers of Islam are handled with a gentle hand in the mid-east. They're just a bunch of barbarians. As long as they want theocracies above all else then they will never be seen as nothing more than savages.

ObamaCo a year ago: Syria's use of chemical weapons will cross a Red Line for "us"

ObamaCo ten days ago: Well, um....funny thing....looks like "our" Red Line consists of me stepping away from using "my" military that "I" have the unilateral authority to utilize as "I" deem necessary, and handing my little ultimatum hot potato off to "them" in congress.

ObamaCo four days ago: My fellow Americans...we MUST act, children are dead, I implore you to understand the ramifications to our's and the international community's continuing security if we don't deploy a targeted, "unbelievably small" military strike....which I have authority to do..... but again... we'll wait and see what congress says.

ObamaCo today: Well...okay..here's the thing....Putin and Assad sorta demanded I pull military attacks off the table, so I won't really enforce "our" Red Line at all....in fact, I'll fold like a cheap beach chair, and let the UN and Putin handle this Syria mess....as we prolly could have quietly..and with resolve...negotiated fairly easily in the first place...had I not been such a cowboy and escalated everything....

Progressives: BRILLIANT foreign policy, Obama!!

No matter the outcome it still blows my mind that the United States (and Russia) feel they have the jurisdiction to use smaller countries as players in a game of chess. Both the US and Russia continue to manipulate 3rd parties to gain what they want politically, and it is very unjust.

Snappo said:

I'd agree with you but personally I wouldn't mind hearing a few Syrians whine that their families were exterminated in bombing runs. But if I didn't hate Syrians so; I would agree with you. Let them kill each other and stay out of it. It's an Arab League problem. USA has no skin in the game. Maybe we can sell arms somewhere else and break even against Russia elsewhere.

Click to expand...

Mornin Snappo. :2wave: Well we do have the Rebels/Terrorists that whine all the time about civilians getting killed. Course what they fail to tell many. A lot of those civilians are family members and supporters of the Rebels. Which help the Rebels, hide the Rebels, and give Aid to the Rebels. All the while helping to scope out Assad's people.

So naturally Assad's Armed Forces will attack them. That's even with Offensives put on by the Rebels. While using Civilian neighborhoods to launch their attacks from.

Course then the Rebels/Terrorists then run to the media and cry out Massacre.

MMC said:

Mornin Snappo. :2wave: Well we do have the Rebels/Terrorists that whine all the time about civilians getting killed. Course what they fail to tell many. A lot of those civilians are family members and supporters of the Rebels. Which help the Rebels, hide the Rebels, and give Aid to the Rebels. All the while helping to scope out Assad's people.

So naturally Assad's Armed Forces will attack them. That's even with Offensives put on by the Rebels. While using Civilian neighborhoods to launch their attacks from.

Course then the Rebels/Terrorists then run to the media and cry out Massacre.

Click to expand...

I think the media does not properly represent the truth. The truth is that there was collateral damage as far back as the Revolutionary War. As long as rebels fight from the homes of civilians, from churches, from school playgrounds, from crowded mobs in the street, etc. there will always be the need for military troops to respond back in a way that also takes out civilians. Hardly anything was said about human shields either. As soon as USA announced (with their big effing mouths that can't keep a secret) that they were going to bomb Assad, immediately human shields went up at every military base and chemical weapons installation in Syria.

Snappo said:

I think the media does not properly represent the truth. The truth is that there was collateral damage as far back as the Revolutionary War. As long as rebels fight from the homes of civilians, from churches, from school playgrounds, from crowded mobs in the street, etc. there will always be the need for military troops to respond back in a way that also takes out civilians. Hardly anything was said about human shields either. As soon as USA announced (with their big effing mouths that can't keep a secret) that they were going to bomb Assad, immediately human shields went up at every military base and chemical weapons installation in Syria.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I think I had some info up on Assad moving things into Civilian neighborhoods. Plus moving things around and tightening those Anti Air defenses. Jane's Counter Terrorism peeps were saying once Assad got the S300's that his Anti Air would be fully complete. Which they can set up and take down in 5mins.

MMC said:

Yeah, I think I had some info up on Assad moving things into Civilian neighborhoods. Plus moving things around and tightening those Anti Air defenses. Jane's Counter Terrorism peeps were saying once Assad got the S300's that his Anti Air would be fully complete. Which they can set up and take down in 5mins.

Click to expand...

Germany and some other countries are now ponying up to the bar and offering to kick in cash and technical assistance to destroy these weapons. Granted, a planet free of chemical and biological WMD's is a safer planet indeed; but the underlying problem is not addressed. Dead is dead. The conventional bombs used to carpet the entire city of Tokyo at the end of WW II is a perfect example. Those wiped out more people than even the nuclear detonations did. So clearly it's not how you kill large groups of people; it's THAT you kill large groups of people. Religions either need to become safe to the human race or abolished. Wars need to cease; and clearly that means the method for dispute resolution needs to be repaired. UN is not doing a successful job at removing wars from the world; so why pay tens of billions to keep that farce afloat? 200 countries, only a handful even paying into it, and an even smaller handful giving troops to the security council. Someone needs to build a better mouse trap IMHO. So we have Assad willing to walk away from his chemical weapon stores. Big whoop. Dropping huge conventional bombs from his air force isn't any better, nor is having a few thousand of his troops sweep through a town with AK-47's shooting anything that moves.

Reminds me of a Ron White joke. He is talking about how some idiot ropes himself to a telephone pole during a hurricane so he can experience it. Ron's comment is "It's not THAT the wind is blowing; it's WHAT the wind is blowing. Being roped to a tree wont help when you have a Volvo in your spleen".

Snappo said:

I think the media does not properly represent the truth. The truth is that there was collateral damage as far back as the Revolutionary War. As long as rebels fight from the homes of civilians, from churches, from school playgrounds, from crowded mobs in the street, etc. there will always be the need for military troops to respond back in a way that also takes out civilians. Hardly anything was said about human shields either. As soon as USA announced (with their big effing mouths that can't keep a secret) that they were going to bomb Assad, immediately human shields went up at every military base and chemical weapons installation in Syria.

Click to expand...

Are you aware that civilian supporters of president Assad (yes, he has plenty of them) launched a campaign to blockade military targets on a voluntary basis?

Montecresto said:

Are you aware that civilian supporters of president Assad (yes, he has plenty of them) launched a campaign to blockade military targets on a voluntary basis?

Click to expand...

In America, our government tends to try to protect us from mass extermination. In arab countries, mass extermination via human shields is apparently encouraged. Ask yourself this: If Bush knew a day before 9-11 that WTC was gonna be taken out by suicide arabs, do you think he would have put a few thousand women and children in the Twin Towers to dissuade the muslims?

F*ck Assad, and f*ck Al Qaeda. Either make a few bucks helping both of them kill each other; or sit on the sidelines and just let it happen anyway but with only Russia making coin. There are no good guys in Syria. They are all bad, down to the teachers that teach that Jews are sub-human in school, and down to the little kids that the parents plan to eventually strap TNT to. Syria is a bad place, front to back.

Snappo said:

In America, our government tends to try to protect us from mass extermination. In arab countries, mass extermination via human shields is apparently encouraged. Ask yourself this: If Bush knew a day before 9-11 that WTC was gonna be taken out by suicide arabs, do you think he would have put a few thousand women and children in the Twin Towers to dissuade the muslims?

F*ck Assad, and f*ck Al Qaeda. Either make a few bucks helping both of them kill each other; or sit on the sidelines and just let it happen anyway but with only Russia making coin. There are no good guys in Syria. They are all bad, down to the teachers that teach that Jews are sub-human in school, and down to the little kids that the parents plan to eventually strap TNT to. Syria is a bad place, front to back.

Click to expand...

How does that speak to what I said. Civilians volunteered themselves as shields at military targets!

Montecresto said:

How does that speak to what I said. Civilians volunteered themselves as shields at military targets!

Click to expand...

There were reports with video showing rebel prisoners being bused into suspected target areas to be used as human shields. I don't think they volunteered.:shock:

Snappo said:

In America, our government tends to try to protect us from mass extermination. In arab countries, mass extermination via human shields is apparently encouraged. Ask yourself this: If Bush knew a day before 9-11 that WTC was gonna be taken out by suicide arabs, do you think he would have put a few thousand women and children in the Twin Towers to dissuade the muslims?

F*ck Assad, and f*ck Al Qaeda. Either make a few bucks helping both of them kill each other; or sit on the sidelines and just let it happen anyway but with only Russia making coin. There are no good guys in Syria. They are all bad, down to the teachers that teach that Jews are sub-human in school, and down to the little kids that the parents plan to eventually strap TNT to. Syria is a bad place, front to back.

Click to expand...

I have heard that Al Quaeda has been created by the government of the USA ?



Ok, actually Clinton doesn't speak about "Al Quaeda" but about "Mujaheddin". Does it change something?


Your comment reminds me of a well known video on which you can see Albright explaining how worth it was to kill thousand of people.

Montecresto said:

How does that speak to what I said. Civilians volunteered themselves as shields at military targets!

Click to expand...

Because, and I say again, USA would never allow that. If some muslim country threatened to attack USA (in fact Syria and Iran have threatened that), you would NOT be allowed to surround a USA military base with civilians. So, and I say again, Assad is therefore reckless and allowing civilians to be put in harm's way.

Thomas_ said:

I have heard that Al Quaeda has been created by the government of the USA ?

Click to expand...

Sort of true. There was a long cold war with USSR and when USSR invaded Afghanistan we fed arms and military training to the crazy muslims hiding in the mountains doing guerrilla attacks against USSR. The king of the crazies back then was Bin Laden, whom our CIA trained to be a very dangerous guerrilla. As you know, that came back to bite us in the a$$ pretty hard. So our conundrum is thus: we hate Assad and we hate Al Qaeda; but Russia is already arming Assad and we want to be against Russia and we want to sell arms. What do we do? Personally, I do not care which side people die on - they are all arab muslims and as a Jew I am extremely happy to see both sides take heavy losses. Both sides want to exterminate Israel, so having both sides weakened by losses makes Israel safer IMHO.

Thomas_ said:

Your comment reminds me of a well known video on which you can see Albright explaining how worth it was to kill thousand of people.

Click to expand...

It's a rough world we live in. People who can only handle care bears and group hugs struggle with the fact that life isn't always fair or always pretty. I am not saying Albright is always right and I certainly don't like her party in the least; but Saddam was definitely putting Middle East oil in danger. Personally, I would have preferred we heavily armed Saddam and became his best friend in the world and let him roll over Saudi Arabia. Baath Party was secular and certainly better than what the Saud Family calls laws and human rights. The down side of Saddam - he sure hated Kurds. But he hated Iran too and so do we. Bush made a bad choice IMHO, but I have never been a POTUS so it's hard for me to second guess the guy.

Mizmo said:

There were reports with video showing rebel prisoners being bused into suspected target areas to be used as human shields. I don't think they volunteered.:shock:

Click to expand...

That's great, al Qaida prisoners being used as human shields, that would work be cause we know Obama wouldn't fire upon his ally's. And yes I agree, they wouldn't be volunteers. Now back to the civilians that support president Assad and did volunteer??

Snappo said:

Because, and I say again, USA would never allow that. If some muslim country threatened to attack USA (in fact Syria and Iran have threatened that), you would NOT be allowed to surround a USA military base with civilians. So, and I say again, Assad is therefore reckless and allowing civilians to be put in harm's way.

Click to expand...

Sure, no ones ever said president Assad is above reproach. But don't hold the US in such high esteem, just yet. If a country 100 times more powerful (or might you consider the US to be 1,000 times more powerful than Syria) than the US was coming for Obama, do you think he might welcome his supporters surrounding his forces facilities as human shields?

MMC said:

My, my, my.....well Neo Cons and Neo Libs. Read it and Breathe Deep. Looks like on this issue.....Obama is really backing up the First Team. As unfortunate as it is. Putin.....the Bully Kid that Obama said was sitting in the back of the class showed Obama why he was just visiting. :lol:

Click to expand...

Has anyone told you you sound a little like Tokyo Rose?

Montecresto said:

Sure, no ones ever said president Assad is above reproach. But don't hold the US in such high esteem, just yet. If a country 100 times more powerful (or might you consider the US to be 1,000 times more powerful than Syria) than the US was coming for Obama, do you think he might welcome his supporters surrounding his forces facilities as human shields?

Click to expand...

Let's say you are kind of a wimp. If a big bad bully came over to punch your lights out, would you hold your 6 year old daughter in front of your face hoping he won't punch through her to get to you? That's a human shield. You still not against them?

Mizmo said:

There were reports with video showing rebel prisoners being bused into suspected target areas to be used as human shields. I don't think they volunteered.:shock:

Click to expand...

Arabs are sickening. They also strap TNT to their young children and tell them to detonate in crowded marketplaces. I do not see that it's going to be an easy road trying to civilize them.

aberrant85 said:

Has anyone told you you sound a little like Tokyo Rose?

Click to expand...

No.....and never after the Visual perception. Although when I do decide to speak out in Public. E.F. Hutton listens. :lol: