• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Rebels are to blame for gas attacks? (Syria)

Ben K. said:
So logically it could not have been those associated with Al Qaeda. It would be ideologically inconsistent for them to invite infidels to fight on Muslim soil.

Osama Bin Laden hated Saddam, but he hated the idea of western troops on Saudi soil more.
Click to expand...

Tomahawks from ships out to sea are not infidels on their soil.
 
I have been informed by an acquaintance of mine with current middle east military knowledge that the blue canisters being fired in the video making the rounds is not a chem munition. it is instead a common "lob bomb", a sort of IED of the rocket world that is very common in Middle Eastern rebel forces.

But this 107mm device is quite capable of firing chemical munitions.
 
head of joaquin said:
Regrettably, I think a lot of conservatives oppose a strike against Syria merely because Obama appears to be for it. So it's not on principle. I'd wager that if it were Bush planning a strike, they'd be clamoring for military action and asserting that Democrats aren't patriotic if they opposed it. That's how they got the whole Iraqi fiasco off the ground.

Since WWII Democrats and progressives have traditionally tried to limit presidential war power and have traditionally tried to deliberate before taking military action. I don't think conservatives can say the same. The isolationist wing maybe, but isolationism is itself a poor ground for arguing against military action.
Click to expand...

I was all for attacking Syria and I was really pissed off at the UN and Obama for not acting. Now, I'm not sure who is the good guy.
 
upsideguy said:
Once again, someone going to a political porn site and asking us to indulge in his fantasies. Where are the serious people at DP?
Click to expand...

How about the Wall Street Journal and Russian intelligence? Is that good enough for you?

Russia Says Syrian Rebels Used Sarin Gas - WSJ.com

Russia said it has "clear" evidence that Syrian rebels fired a rocket laden with sarin gas at an Aleppo suburb in March, a view that clashed with U.S. conclusions on the same issue last month and was initially rejected Tuesday by Washington.
Click to expand...

Or how about from a left wing political porn site?

Russia Says Syrian Rebels Used Sarin Gas - WSJ.com

GENEVA, May 5 (Reuters) - U.N. human rights investigators have gathered testimony from casualties of Syria's civil war and medical staff indicating that rebel forces have used the nerve agent sarin, one of the lead investigators said on Sunday.
Click to expand...
 
What would make this real entertaining , is if they can prove that the Sarin is part of
Saddam's stockpile of WMDs that he hid in Syria.:mrgreen:
 
Montecresto said:
Tomahawks from ships out to sea are not infidels on their soil.
Click to expand...

Are you arguing that they've calculated the degree of response to a chemical false flag to that point and that they see a difference from a religious POV between western air strikes and western boots on the ground?
 
ksu_aviator said:
How about the Wall Street Journal and Russian intelligence? Is that good enough for you?

Russia Says Syrian Rebels Used Sarin Gas - WSJ.com



Or how about from a left wing political porn site?

Russia Says Syrian Rebels Used Sarin Gas - WSJ.com
Click to expand...

The warmongers have their meme and their sticking to it. All sources to the contrary will be demonised and by the time it's obvious to everyone that it was wrong, it will be after the fact, the warmongers will have gotten what they wanted! IRAQ.
 
longview said:
What would make this real entertaining , is if they can prove that the Sarin is part of
Saddam's stockpile of WMDs that he hid in Syria.:mrgreen:
Click to expand...


NOTHING about war and WMD should ever be categorised as entertaining.
 
Ben K. said:
Are you arguing that they've calculated the degree of response to a chemical false flag to that point and that they see a difference from a religious POV between western air strikes and western boots on the ground?
Click to expand...

No. I'm arguing that Assad is winning and they need help, even IF it did mean the presence of infidels for a time.
 
Montecresto said:
The warmongers have their meme and their sticking to it. All sources to the contrary will be demonised and by the time it's obvious to everyone that it was wrong, it will be after the fact, the warmongers will have gotten what they wanted! IRAQ.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but how do they get Past the UN saying such a strike would be Illegal and that it would be aggression to go and help the Rebel Terrorists and attack Assad the Evil Dictator that doesn't do business with us.
 
MMC said:
Yeah, but how do they get Past the UN saying such a strike would be Illegal and that it would be aggression to go and help the Rebel Terrorists and attack Assad the Evil Dictator that doesn't do business with us.
Click to expand...

Those who I'm talking about don't give a flying ____ about the UN. Like Bush said, "get beside us or get behind us"

In other words authorise our aggression or get the hell out of the way!
 
Montecresto said:
The warmongers have their meme and their sticking to it. All sources to the contrary will be demonised and by the time it's obvious to everyone that it was wrong, it will be after the fact, the warmongers will have gotten what they wanted! IRAQ.
Click to expand...

Warmonger is not an accurate term. I would be willing to bet that most people that support some sort of strike against Syria are just looking for justice. After all, what happened was atrocious.

I find it more than just a little offensive that you would dismiss their suffering and the resulting call for action as warmongering. Clearly someone needs to be held responsible for this. I'm definitely not saying no military action. I'm just questioning who the action should target.
 
ksu_aviator said:
Warmonger is not an accurate term. I would be willing to bet that most people that support some sort of strike against Syria are just looking for justice. After all, what happened was atrocious.

I find it more than just a little offensive that you would dismiss their suffering and the resulting call for action as warmongering. Clearly someone needs to be held responsible for this. I'm definitely not saying no military action. I'm just questioning who the action should target.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry you haven't viewed enough of my posts then. Assad is fighting his own war on terror, himself and Putin have made that perfectly CLEAR to those who DO wish to see an end to hostilities. Had the US not interfered with Assad's war on terror from the beginning, Assad would have crushed the rebellion early on and there wouldn't be 100,000 dead or any chemical attacks to be wringing our hands about. But, because of long standing policy of "regime change" for Syria, the US has seized upon its opportunity to see that through and you are a willing accomplice, falling for another round of propaganda being fired at the gullible American public by an all too willing network of media outlets owned by and large by defence contractors, but god bless go forward with your new war.
 
ksu_aviator said:
Warmonger is not an accurate term. I would be willing to bet that most people that support some sort of strike against Syria are just looking for justice. After all, what happened was atrocious.

I find it more than just a little offensive that you would dismiss their suffering and the resulting call for action as warmongering. Clearly someone needs to be held responsible for this. I'm definitely not saying no military action. I'm just questioning who the action should target.
Click to expand...

Mornin KA. :2wave: Well considering the UN and others have stated both sides are guilty of atrocities. Plus the UN admitting that the Rebels have called Assad for chems 6 times and at least 4 of them we know Assad has been taking it to the Rebels. Wherein they were getting their asses kicked. They always somehow come up with a Time out over the Chems. Just when they start losing. The break comes.....then all of a sudden in the Media we hear how the Rebels are gaining ground and doing this and that.

Course The French did say they want to punish Assad. Which was even before there was any evidence attained, and that was after the UN stated the first time the Rebels used Chems. So At least we know the French is about War-Mongering.

Doesn't help them with those 5 Resolutions in the UN for Enforceable Action in 5 different Countries that the French has pressed with.....huh?
 
Obammer should be held to account for the well-being of Syrian citizens?
Seriously people, what are you thinking?
Someone passing gas in that craphole is not on the list of things we should be focused on.
But it is exactly what they'd rather you think about.
What would victory in Syria look like anyways?

2ntwwm9.jpg
 
I say we just let them all kill each other. Keep a lid in Al Queda...smoke any Syrian aircraft...and just let them duke it out until they are all war weary or dead.
 
AngryOldGuy said:
Obammer should be held to account for the well-being of Syrian citizens?
Seriously people, what are you thinking?
Someone passing gas in that craphole is not on the list of things we should be focused on.
But it is exactly what they'd rather you think about.
What would victory in Syria look like anyways?

2ntwwm9.jpg
Click to expand...

There will be no victory
 
stonewall50 said:
I say we just let them all kill each other. Keep a lid in Al Queda...smoke any Syrian aircraft...and just let them duke it out until they are all war weary or dead.
Click to expand...


What do you suppose we should do to Russia if they ever attacked our ally, Israel?
 
If by they you mean the Syrians? Don't worry them IDF boys can deal with that.
If by they you mean the Rooskie's? I'd have to ask: what on earth are you talkin' about Willis?
Pooty was just runnin' his mouth, take a moment to analyze the current disposition of Russian military forces in the area
and then get back to me Bucko
 
AngryOldGuy said:
If by they you mean the Syrians? Don't worry them IDF boys can deal with that.
If by they you mean the Rooskie's? I'd have to ask: what on earth are you talkin' about Willis?
Pooty was just runnin' his mouth, take a moment to analyze the current disposition of Russian military forces in the area
and then get back to me Bucko
Click to expand...


Clearly my intended motive for the question missed the top of your head. It's hypothetical and they is the Russians. What would anybody expect the US should/would do if Russia were to attack our ally Israel. And I ask it because we are in fact going to attack their ally Syria.
 
In a sane world (yanno one where the Demonrats weren't ANYWHERES near the levers of power)
There'd never EVER be ANY reason for them thar Rooskie's to launch a decisive military campaign against Israel.

As for goin' over mah head, huh whut?
 
ksu_aviator said:
I'm not saying that's what happened. But the Syrian government was winning the war and attacking only civilians only galvanized the world against them. That seems like an awfully boneheaded move. I wondered why the UN wasn't acting, it may be because this isn't as clear cut as Obama is making it out to be.
Click to expand...

I don't know all the details, but I do think that it doesn't really make sense that Assad would launch chemical attacks right next to his military stations.
 
AngryOldGuy said:
In a sane world (yanno one where the Demonrats weren't ANYWHERES near the levers of power)
There'd never EVER be ANY reason for them thar Rooskie's to launch a decisive military campaign against Israel.

As for goin' over mah head, huh whut?
Click to expand...

Don't be gettin all serious again, you've been doing good for so long now. What are you saying, only lefties can screw things up?
 
Montecresto said:
OMG. And how are civilians going to turn on Islamist extremist jihadist that have been chopping civilians heads off, that are heavily armed and that all accounts, NATO included, say the civilian population fears and hates. But I know your eager for war not justice.
Click to expand...

Have you been paying ANY attention for the past 10 years?
 
ReformCollege said:
I don't know all the details, but I do think that it doesn't really make sense that Assad would launch chemical attacks right next to his military stations.
Click to expand...

There's a good reason why that doesn't make any sense to you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom