Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 99

Thread: who killed these babies ?

  1. #41
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,282

    Re: who killed these babies ?

    Quote Originally Posted by radioman View Post
    -------------
    I gotta be honest, eco.
    I hear so much dreck from both sides of the fence, that, at this point, I don't know what to believe.
    As Medusa opined in her OP, if Assad is winning, why would he do this?
    1) To make sure he keeps winning.

    2) To win even quicker. The sooner the war ends, the better off the winner will be.

    3) We were winning against the Japanese during WW2, but we still nuked their asses.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  2. #42
    global liberation

    ecofarm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Miami
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    66,318

    Re: who killed these babies ?

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Syria has never had the facilities to produce chemical weapons
    I'm pretty sure that part is not true.

  3. #43
    feckless bon vivant

    radioman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    lotusland
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    3,760

    Re: who killed these babies ?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    Actually poison gas is rather difficult to manufacture, store, and then deploy in such a way as to actually produce the effects that we are seeing on the ground. That, for example, is why we have seen so few incidents of terror groups using it in their attacks. Same-Same with the bio-weapons-in-a-basement theory. The meme that this stuff can be easily manufactured by someone with the will and a copy of the anarchist cookbook is.... not reflected in reality.
    -----------------

    Probably true.
    I would counter with the fact that poison gas WMDs have been around for over a century.
    Any reasonably advanced country can build and disperse this product.
    While the effectiveness and control of the gas is problematic on a battlefield, I think gassing a civilian populace would be easy....too easy.
    No matter how cynical I become toward politicians, it's never enough.

  4. #44
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,076

    Re: who killed these babies ?

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    There's been tons of verification that Hussein moved his NBC weapons to Syria; both from eyewitnesses and Israeli intelligence services.
    You know, it is interesting - a few years ago, this precisely connection would have been leaped upon by our friends on the left, as it would have allowed them to blame George Bush.

  5. #45
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,282

    Re: who killed these babies ?

    Quote Originally Posted by ecofarm View Post
    I'm pretty sure that part is not true.
    I could mistaken. It happens on a rare occasion. However, it doesn't change the eyewitness testimony.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  6. #46
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,076

    Re: who killed these babies ?

    Quote Originally Posted by radioman View Post
    -----------------

    Probably true.
    I would counter with the fact that poison gas WMDs have been around for over a century.
    Any reasonably advanced country can build and disperse this product.
    While the effectiveness and control of the gas is problematic on a battlefield, I think gassing a civilian populace would be easy....too easy.
    That is correct - any reasonably advanced country probably has the assets (if they put their resources into that effort) into building and employing CW. But if the Syrian Resistance is doing it, then it is most likely because they got those weapons from somewhere, because it is unlikely they made them themselves.

  7. #47
    feckless bon vivant

    radioman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    lotusland
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    3,760

    Re: who killed these babies ?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    You know, it is interesting - a few years ago, this precisely connection would have been leaped upon by our friends on the left, as it would have allowed them to blame George Bush.
    -------------------
    Probably so.
    Partisanship will out.
    I would say that allowing the much touted WMDs to be moved pre-war, would have been negligent.
    However, since GW's administration never made such a claim, I doubt it happened.
    Otherwise, we wouldn't have wasted so much time looking in Iraq.
    No matter how cynical I become toward politicians, it's never enough.

  8. #48
    Renaissance Man
    Captain Adverse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Mid-West USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    8,538
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: who killed these babies ?

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Doing it in 1941 didn't get us in trouble. In fact, waiting until 1941 cost far more American lives.
    In 1941 WE were attacked; first by Japan on Pearl Harbor and then by declaration of war by Nazi Germany. Acting in self-defense is not the same as "vetting a good guy" and intervening militarily in the internal affairs of a country involved in a civil war.

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    There were vettable good guys in Iraq after Desert Storm. Did we support them? No. The Result? The invasion of Iraq in 2003.
    Recall we did not overthrow Saddam during Desert Storm, so there was no "vetting" and "replacing" going on. As for the "re-invasion" of Iraq in 2003? I did not support that and there was no reason for it except Bush Jr. wanted a little war all his own. P.S. Saddam was originally one of our "good guys" too, especially when he was focused on fighting Iran.

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    There were vettable good guys in Iran a few years ago. Did we support them? No. The result? That remains to be seen, as Iran's nuclear capabilities grow everyday.
    A few years ago? What are you talking about? You mean starting ANOTHER war but this time with Iran? Recall we originally thought we HAD a "vetted good guy" in there with the Shah of Iran, and despite all reason we KEPT him there. If we had not supported him perhaps there would not be a problem with Iran now.

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    There were vettable good guys in Rwanda. Did we act? No. The result? Nearly a million innocent people were murdered.
    Rwanda was, and is still not our problem. I doubt seriously there were any "good guys" who would have done any different. There was a lot of hate between the ethnic groups there, thanks to colonialism and fake borders uniting differing peoples.

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    The notion that we should turn a blind eye to EVERY crisis is nave, at best.
    Sorry, and where did you get the notion I hold that we should turn a blind eye? Did you miss the humanitarian aid part? Did you miss the sanctuary part? Did you miss the economic and political action part? Elsewhere I have also stated that we act to keep other nations from getting involved. I also advocate support of treaty allies under the terms agreed by the alliance.

    I just don't think we are the World's Policeman. Acting like it has gotten us into trouble over and over and over again. We make few lasting freinds, but many lasting enemies.
    Last edited by Captain Adverse; 08-24-13 at 09:25 PM.
    If I stop responding it doesn't mean I've conceded the point or agree with you. It only means I've made my point and I don't mind you having the last word. Please wait a few minutes before "quoting" me. I often correct errors for a minute or two after I post before the final product is ready.

  9. #49
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,282

    Re: who killed these babies ?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    You know, it is interesting - a few years ago, this precisely connection would have been leaped upon by our friends on the left, as it would have allowed them to blame George Bush.
    I doubt it, because they worked so hard blaming Bush for NOT finding NBC weapons. It would have runined their entire narrative.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  10. #50
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,282

    Re: who killed these babies ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Adverse View Post
    In 1941 WE were attacked; first by Japan on Pearl Harbor and then by declaration of war by Nazi Germany. Acting in self-defense is not the same as "vetting a good guy" and intervening militarily in the internal affairs of a country involved in a civil war.
    Because we waited to be attacked, before becoming involved, we lost nearly a half million Americans on the battlefield.



    Recall we did not overthrow Saddam during Desert Storm, so there was no "vetting" and "replacing" going on. As for the "re-invasion" of Iraq in 2003? I did not support that and there was no reason for it except Bush Jr. wanted a little war all his own. P.S. Saddam was originally one of our "good guys" too, especially when he was focused on fighting Iran.
    There was an uprising, post-Desert Storm, that we should have supported, but didn't.



    A few years ago? What are you talking about? You mean starting ANOTHER war but this time with Iran?
    This is what I'm talking about...

    2009

    Recall we originally thought we HAD a "vetted good guy" in there with the Shah of Iran, and despite all reason we KEPT him there. If we had not supported him perhaps there would not be a problem with Iran now.
    I think it's safe to say that the cats in their now are much worse than the Shah ever thought of being and I doubt that the Islamofacists would hate us any less, had he not been there. Don't forget, the dude that proceeded the Shah was allying himself with the Soviets. Mosa Deg also dissolved parliament and the constitution, much the same way that Morsi recently did in Egypt



    Rwanda was, and is still not our problem. I doubt seriously there were any "good guys" who would have done any different. There was a lot of hate between the ethnic groups there, thanks to colonialism and fake borders uniting differing peoples.
    The Tootsi and the Hutu were at each other long before the Europeans showed up. Just because they've been going at it for a thousand years, doesn't mean they don't have to catch up with the rest of the world.



    Sorry, and where did you get the notion I hold that we should turn a blind eye? Did you miss the humanitarian aid part? Did you miss the sanctuary part? Did you miss the economic and political action part? Elsewhere I have also stated that we act to keep other nations from getting involved. I also advocate support of treaty allies under the terms agreed by the alliance.

    I just don't think we are the World's Policeman. Acting like it has gotten us into trouble over and over and over again. We make few lasting freinds, but many lasting enemies.
    The Fillipinos are our friends; the South Koreans; Grenadans, etc.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •