US Fires At Least 30 Tomahawks At Syria

[Abbey Marie]

I agree that it wasn't a wise move.

I suspect he did due to a statement being made by our government that Assad's removal wasn't on the table and we were going to try to work with him - which he took as a cart blanche to do whatever he wanted.

Big mistake.



Why did he use them so many times before?

Ron Paul claims there is no proof Assad ever used chemical weapons.

Lol, I long ago stopped listening to what our local babbling homeless woman says. And to what Ron Paul says, too.

Well, actually, I stopped listening to him, first. :cool:

[NightTrain]

Why did he use them so many times before?
Ron Paul claims there is no proof Assad ever used chemical weapons.

Which explains why Syria agreed to the 2013 deal to remove and destroy all their chemical weapons.

Sometimes I get the urge to slap the curl out of Rand Paul's poodle-inspired-wig.

[revelarts]

No, you said it was unconstitutional. No need to deflect to anyone else; we're talking specifically about Trump beating up Syria's air base with 59 Tomahawks.

Show me.

1st of all shooting 59 tomahawk missiles at any nation's military we are not at war with is an act of war.
[Add to that, by the Geneva Convention (which the U.S. basically created and signed) it is a war crime to instigate aggressive war against another country.]

2nd the constitution only grants certain powers to the President. if it's not EXPLICTLY granted then it's retained by the people. and any ASSUMPTION of ANY authority is unconstitutional... i.e. illegal.

3rd the text of the constitution is clear
The Congress shall have Power... To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;


The president is granted only two powers relating to foreign affairs: 1 he is commander-in-chief of the armed forces, Basically the Chief General. And 2 the power to receive ambassadors.
Generals don't have the authority to instigate military actions against peaceful foreign states. period.
"Alexander Hamilton spoke in such terms when he said that the president, although lacking the power to declare war, would have “the direction of war when authorized or begun.” The president acting alone was authorized only to repel sudden attacks (hence the decision to withhold from him only the power to “declare” war, not to “make” war, which was thought to be a necessary emergency power in case of foreign attack)..."



...At the Constitutional Convention, the delegates expressly disclaimed any intention to model the American executive exactly after the British monarchy. James Wilson, for example, remarked that the powers of the British king did not constitute “a proper guide in defining the executive powers. Some of these prerogatives were of a Legislative nature. Among others that of war & peace.” Edmund Randolph likewise contended that the delegates had “no motive to be governed by the British Government as our prototype.”

....James Madison wrote to Thomas Jefferson, “The constitution supposes, what the History of all Governments demonstrates, that the Executive is the branch of power most interested in war, and most prone to it. It has accordingly with studied care vested the question of war in the Legislature.” Madison even proposed excluding the president from the negotiation of peace treaties, on the grounds that he might obstruct a settlement out of a desire to derive “power and importance from a state of war.”....

https://www.libertyclassroom.com/warpowers/

....

http://www.azquotes.com/picture-quotes/quote-the-constitution-vests-the-power-of-declaring-war-in-congress-therefore-no-offensive-george-washington-30-77-45.jpg


"...NO OFFENSIVE Expedition..."
(last i checked "surgical strike" is not in the constitution and by any definition it'd be considered OFFENSIVE in this unprovoked attack on Syria rather than DEFENSIVE.)

So yeah, Trump and Obama and any others that have done so in the past have been Unconstitutional .... broken the law.

So do you care NT?

[revelarts]

DO you folks remember that in 2013 the U.S. Gov't Accused Assad of the same thing but later everyone found out that it was the REBELS that had used them instead.

I don't understand the complete and BLIND FAITH in the scanty Gov't reports of WHO did it or even what actually happened.

[sear]

"Do you not understand the difference between a surgical strike and a formal declaration of war?" NT #241

"Surgical strike" is a term derived from laymen.
Surgery involves slicing the body open with precision instruments for performing therapeutic operations, tumor removal or bowl resection for examples.
In terms of characterizing military combat "surgical strike" is at best a metaphor.
In any case it is a characterization of warfare.

But a "formal declaration of war" (your term), isn't a martial term. It's a legal term.
So the two are quite different, even if related.

"Do you not understand the powers granted to the President to carry out such military actions as he deems necessary?" NT

Have I not already referenced ARTICLE 2. SECTION 2.- 1?

"The President shall be Commander in Chief ..."

BUT !!

That doesn't resolve the war powers debate. It merely defines it.

"This is stuff I learned in grade school." NT #241

Apparently not well enough, as you seem oblivious to the war powers debate, unresolved to this date.

"However, I am willing to educate you -" NT

"Willing" perhaps, but utterly unable apparently. Don't flatter yourself. Google it.

" You're not the first liberal I've educated " NT #241

Correct.

a) I'm the one taking the conservative position here.
The United States Constitution is an 18th Century document, and this is the 21st Century, a new millennium.
Our Constitution is our most fundamental, and oldest written U.S. law.
So my position is conservatism by definition.
There is no U.S. law that predates our Constitution, and thus no more conservative position than me defending / explaining it.

b) What you have educated me about is that you don't understand the subject you're pretending to offer valid if not expert opinion on.

"Don't show your @$$." comedienne Wanda Sykes quoting her mother's advice to her
"My guess is that "diplomatically" we have sent word to Assad that if he tries to use chemical weapons again, we will assassinate him." A #243

It's an amusing perspective, but quite unlikely.

Since the JFK administration we've been hesitant to do that, for precisely the reason you'd imagine; bad karma.

"ETA: Speaking of Iraq, does anyone think Assad could be using the very weapons that disappeared from Iraq?" A #243

No.
Assad is trashing his own country. He will soon be presiding over rubble, if he lives that long.
Millions of his "subjects" are ex-pat refugees, and many of them are the top echelons of his country, the doctors, lawyers, and other professionals, with the resources to up-stakes, and book.
Assad is dumbing down his nation enormously.

Therefore Assad would have wanted to have put an end to this "rebellion" at the start, 5 years ago.
If Assad had had such chemical weapon from the start, he'd have been a fool to not use it.
So I deduce it was only recently acquired, perhaps since the Kerry / Putin / Assad chem. weapons purge.

"I agree that it wasn't a wise move." BD #249

A desperate move. What other options has Assad got? He's in a frantic clutch to cling to power.

[NightTrain]

Here you two chuckleheads go :


Article II of the Constitution spells out that “the President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states.” The War Powers Resolution, passed by Congress in 1973 over President Nixon's veto, requires that a President must report to Congress within 48 hours after introducing military forces into hostilities and must end the use of such within 60 days unless Congress permits otherwise.

This particular situation is far less than actual ground combat forces. If Trump wanted to, he'd have several divisions rolling M1A2 Abrams blitzkrieging their way across Syria as long as it was done in 59 days - one for every Tomahawk launched!

So, since the actual operation took 1 hour from launch, rendezvous in midair to group all 59 so they'd strike simultaneously because they were all launched from 2 Destroyers out in the Gulf, that gives Trump 59 days, 23 hours extra before the mission was accomplished. Now that's what I call ahead of schedule!

Isn't learning fun?

More Fun Facts at : https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/did-trump-ordered-missile-strikes-fall-under-the-war-powers-resolution

Even moonbats in Congress understand this stuff - and that includes geniuses that think Guam might tip over with too many Marines stationed on it.

[revelarts]

Here you two chuckleheads go :

[/B][/I][/COLOR]

This particular situation is far less than actual ground combat forces. If Trump wanted to, he'd have several divisions rolling M1A2 Abrams blitzkrieging their way across Syria as long as it was done in 59 days - one for every Tomahawk launched!

So, since the actual operation took 1 hour from launch, rendezvous in midair to group all 59 so they'd strike simultaneously because they were all launched from 2 Destroyers out in the Gulf, that gives Trump 59 days, 23 hours extra before the mission was accomplished. Now that's what I call ahead of schedule!

Isn't learning fun?

More Fun Facts at : https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/did-trump-ordered-missile-strikes-fall-under-the-war-powers-resolution

Even moonbats in Congress understand this stuff - and that includes geniuses that think Guam might tip over with too many Marines stationed on it.

the 1st Moonbat
http://www.azquotes.com/picture-quotes/quote-the-constitution-vests-the-power-of-declaring-war-in-congress-therefore-no-offensive-george-washington-30-77-45.jpg


But NT please give me a strait answer to this.
You keep talking about how "short" a strike this was, how it's not AS BAD or as BIG a "boots on the Ground" etc.

If North Korea "surgically struck" an air force base in California with 56 missiles,
would you say that was an aggressive act of war on Ill's part?

YES OR NO?

Would you have to educate people on the how radically different that is in a legal sense from Korean "boots on the ground" in San Deigo?

[sear]

NT #256

Right.
I'm the one that first mentioned The War-Powers Act, not you. So why are you now pretending YOU are teaching ME something? Who do you think you're kidding?

- The War-Powers Act is statute. And statute can NEVER trump the Constitution. Don't take my word for it. Just read Art.6 Sect.2, aka "the supremacy clause".

- The War-Powers Act does not resolve the war powers debate. What if the president complies with the notification requirement in the act, but congress refuses to declare war?
That at best remains an unresolved question today.

"This particular situation is far less than actual ground combat forces." NT

I'll leave it to you to define "less" in that sentence.

But whatever your definition may be, even if the sentence is true, it's immaterial.
Casus belli isn't defined on a sliding scale.

Know it or not, believe it or not, like it or not, admit it or not, launching 59 cruise missiles against the military airbase of a sovereign nation is an act of war, pure and simple.
The number of boots involved has nothing to do with it.

[sear]

#257

The Washington quotation / graphic is fine. But it's an opinion, albeit a weighty one. It's insight into original intent.

"You keep talking about how "short" a strike this was, how it's not AS BAD or as BIG a "boots on the Ground" etc."

Right.
It was an act of war in any case.

The pretense that Trump is off the hook because of the War-Powers Act is a subterfuge. Even if it's true, so what?
This Syrian conflict has been going on for 5 years.
Do you really presume to tell me the U.S. congress is going to declare war on Syria before the War-Powers Act deadline NT continues to harp on?

I wouldn't bet on it.

[NightTrain]

the 1st Moonbat
http://www.azquotes.com/picture-quotes/quote-the-constitution-vests-the-power-of-declaring-war-in-congress-therefore-no-offensive-george-washington-30-77-45.jpg

I saw your picture the first time.

GW's quote doesn't negate the War Powers Resolution, however.



But NT please give me a strait answer to this.
You keep talking about how "short" a strike this was, how it's not AS BAD or as BIG a "boots on the Ground" etc.

If North Korea "surgically struck" an air force base in California with 56 missiles,
would you say that was an aggressive act of war on Ill's part?

YES OR NO?

Would you have to educate people on the how radically different that is in a legal sense from Korean "boots on the ground" in San Deigo?

Need a little background on this.

In your hypothetical scenario, have we been killing political dissidents willy-nilly? Using chemical weapons? Defying UNSC resolutions? Getting deliberately bad haircuts and gaining an unsightly amount of weight while the hippies starve in San Diego?

[NightTrain]

NT #256

Right.
I'm the one that first mentioned The War-Powers Act, not you. So why are you now pretending YOU are teaching ME something? Who do you think you're kidding?

- The War-Powers Act is statute. And statute can NEVER trump the Constitution. Don't take my word for it. Just read Art.6 Sect.2, aka "the supremacy clause".

- The War-Powers Act does not resolve the war powers debate. What if the president complies with the notification requirement in the act, but congress refuses to declare war?
That at best remains an unresolved question today.

"This particular situation is far less than actual ground combat forces." NT

I'll leave it to you to define "less" in that sentence.

But whatever your definition may be, even if the sentence is true, it's immaterial.
Casus belli isn't defined on a sliding scale.

Know it or not, believe it or not, like it or not, admit it or not, launching 59 cruise missiles against the military airbase of a sovereign nation is an act of war, pure and simple.
The number of boots involved has nothing to do with it.

Believe it or not, I've been thumping liberals on the interwebs with Jim since right after 9/11 on various boards we've run, and the '73 War Powers has come up hundreds of times.

I know it's hard to believe with your ill-justified ego, but you didn't just bring something up brand new around here. Weird, eh?


If it's not constitutional, then you'd better hot-foot it down to the nearest courthouse to put an end to it. If successful, you'll win a Nobel Prize and accolades from Madonna, Matt Damon, Al Gore and Rev. Possibly even a smooch from Lena Dunham.

Don't worry about it being the Law of the Land for 43 years through many conflicts in every Presidency since - clearly you and Rev know more about this than Congress, Constitutional Lawyers & our Judical branch.

This is your shot at the big time - keep us posted!

[revelarts]

I saw your picture the first time.

GW's quote doesn't negate the War Powers Resolution, however.

the war powers act does not negate the constitution.
The INTENT of the constitution by the framers is what the Washington, Maddison, Hamilton, the continental congress members quotes speak to, the meaning of Constitution.
At least for those that like the abide by it and don't believe that it's a living document.




Need a little background on this.

In your hypothetical scenario, have we been killing political dissidents willy-nilly? Using chemical weapons? Defying UNSC resolutions? Getting deliberately bad haircuts and gaining an unsightly amount of weight while the hippies starve in San Diego?

It was a yes or no question. there's no need for background. this is a dodge NT.

And when it comes right down to it you really don't want me to answer that question honestly, you'll just go off on a flag waving name calling tangent at my answer.

[NightTrain]

the war powers act does not negate the constitution.
The INTENT of the constitution by the framers is what the Washington, Maddison, Hamilton, the continental congress members quotes speak to, the meaning of Constitution.
At least for those that like the abide by it and don't believe that it's a living document.

We have a system of 3 branches, designed by our Founding Fathers to serve as check and balance to one another.

In 1973, after shenanigans by Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon, Congress decided to act and spell out the limits to the President's unilateral military action powers by enacting the law. Nixon vetoed it and he was summarily overridden by Congress. The Constitution : Working As Intended.

Thus, he has the ability to wage all-out war for a period of 60 days if he so chooses from the required 48 hour window of his report to Congress after the initiation of hostilities. That includes a lot of hardware and personnel and a great deal of leeway.

This act has not been successfully challenged in court in the 43 years since its passage, which leads me to believe that it's perfectly constitutional.

Since talented lawyers on both sides of the aisle have not been successful, what makes you think that you know better than the experts in their field with all the money in the world backing them?





It was a yes or no question. there's no need for background. this is a dodge NT.

And when it comes right down to it you really don't want me to answer that question honestly, you'll just go off on a flag waving name calling tangent at my answer.

Context is everything, Rev.

If the animal had not been using WMDs against his own civilians, I'd say there was NOT a case for action. Instead, we have multiple instances of him doing it in the past, in one case he killed 1400 civilians IIRC, prior to the 2013 agreement.

So, Rev, since you love to invent preposterous scenarios for the old shoe-on-the-other-foot routine, I have one for you :

You are a muslim in Syria because you don't know any better. Your own family gets gassed and dies a horrible death by a ruthless dictator. Do you :

A) Plead with someone, anyone, to intervene to stop the mass murders

B) Haul ass down to the nearest Internet Cafe to research the legality of Assad's possession and use of WMDs

C ) Load a hologram into R2D2 in the hopes he can somehow find Obe Wan and bring help

I've seen a few Syrians answering 'A', but nothing so far on the other answers. I could be wrong, though.

[Black Diamond]

DO you folks remember that in 2013 the U.S. Gov't Accused Assad of the same thing but later everyone found out that it was the REBELS that had used them instead.

I don't understand the complete and BLIND FAITH in the scanty Gov't reports of WHO did it or even what actually happened.
Who is everyone? One journalist and one UN official? So far I found Seymour Hersch, who has also written a controversial book on bin laden, and one UN official who wanted to do more investigating. Most of the sites making this claim are conspiracy ones.

[sear]

"I know it's hard to believe with your ill-justified ego, but you didn't just bring something up brand new around here. Weird, eh?" NT #261

I never claimed to be a legislator.

I simply mentioned that I addressed the War-Powers act, AND the War-Powers debate before you did; and that therefore your assertion that you were teaching me about it was (is) absurd.

[NightTrain]

"I know it's hard to believe with your ill-justified ego, but you didn't just bring something up brand new around here. Weird, eh?" NT #261

I never claimed to be a legislator.

I simply mentioned that I addressed the War-Powers act, AND the War-Powers debate before you did; and that therefore your assertion that you were teaching me about it was (is) absurd.

So you're claiming Firsties? I admit, that's tough to argue against. It worked brilliantly for me up until the 4th grade when a 5th grade girl demonstrated a kick to the nuts carried more weight and she took my swing.


So, if you already were aware that there is a Federal Law in place, one with 43 years of precedent spanning 7 different Presidencies with all their different engagements, actions, strikes, operations, assassinations and untold covert operations we'll never even hear of - you still claim that he doesn't have the power that the law says he does?

Odd position to take after saying you know all about it. It's written in plain English.

[revelarts]

We have a system of 3 branches, designed by our Founding Fathers to serve as check and balance to one another.
In 1973, after shenanigans by Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon, Congress decided to act and spell out the limits to the President's unilateral military action powers by enacting the law. Nixon vetoed it and he was summarily overridden by Congress. The Constitution : Working As Intended.
Thus, he has the ability to wage all-out war for a period of 60 days if he so chooses from the required 48 hour window of his report to Congress after the initiation of hostilities. That includes a lot of hardware and personnel and a great deal of leeway.
This act has not been successfully challenged in court in the 43 years since its passage, which leads me to believe that it's perfectly constitutional.
Since talented lawyers on both sides of the aisle have not been successful, what makes you think that you know better than the experts in their field with all the money in the world backing them?


Abortion hasn't been successfully chanlleged either But I'd still say it's unconstitutional (and murder) to kill babies. And that Roe vs wade is a flawed Unconstitutional decision.
Talented lawyers defend bad law all the time.
the "War powers act", while it tried to reign in Presidents that had already gone off the unconstitutional deep end. The Act itself grants powers that even congress can't legitimately grant. It's something that would have to be changed by amendment. Can Congress grant the Supreme court the right to instigate and war for 60-90 days? Can it Grant a Single member of Congress that power? Say the speaker of the house. What about grant the power to the U.N.? Would you say that's constitutional since congress did it and no one's been able to challenge it?




Context is everything, Rev.

OK well if you're going to press it, you'd need to have an apples and apples comparison then NT. You can't honestly make one to one comparisons of the situations.
Look , how many Isis trrops are actively engaged in an attempted armed overthrow of Washington D.C. for the past 12+ years. And have taking over several U.S. cities with U.S. troops fighting to recently win back a war torn Dallas and Boston?
While there's NO WAY that i can or will say that Assad is a good guy. I suspect that many here in the "ANYTHING for VICTORY" crowd would not have problem with any measures taken to supposedly secure a fULL and complete victory of U.S. forces by whatever president was in power.
including the use of WMDs and torture.
Many on this board support torture for FAR less than what Assad and Syria has seen over the past 12+ years
IN FACT the U.S. SENT terrorist SUSPECTED to ASSAD so that HE could torture them FOR US just a few years ago.

Assad has been a Bad guy... as you say... BEFORE 2013. and done far worse than the recent ACCUSED attack. But for some reason we never attacked his country outright. why now? From Ronald Reagan till now we've somehow managed to live with Assad even WORK WITH Assad.
This event is NOT some SHOCKING event that somehow can't be allowed to stand. Like with IRAQ years ago , sadly, there are SEVERAL other countries that have leaders (animals) that are killing their people willy nilly over BS. Some like the leaders in our Ally Afghanistan Gov't who allow systematic child rape of boys and girls. Animals? i'd say so.
But no 56 tomahawks headed their way. WHY?





So, Rev, since you love to invent preposterous scenarios for the old shoe-on-the-other-foot routine, I have one for you :

this is one reason why i find it difficult to talk to you guys sometimes.
I ask a question and ask for a strait answer, but i get dodges and then NEW questions and your upset if i don't reply.
Can you answer my question NT?

for the record the U.S HAS used WMDs in the form of white phosphorus which has been banned by US law and International treaties as a weapon, the U.S. has RIGHTLY broken UN resolutions. and Yes the U.S has people practically starving to death and homeless in San Diego. while many are FAT.

SO North Korea sends 56 missiles into Marine Corps Air Station Miramar located in San Diego, California is that an act of WAR?
Yes OR No NT?

I'll answer all of your hypothetical questions IN the way YOU presented them if you can be up front and honest and answer this ONE.

[aboutime]

Abortion hasn't been successfully chanlleged either But I'd still say it's unconstitutional (and murder) to kill babies. And that Roe vs wade is a flawed Unconstitutional decision.
Talented lawyers defend bad law all the time.
the "War powers act", while it tried to reign in Presidents that had already gone off the unconstitutional deep end. The Act itself grants powers that not even congress can't legitimately grant. It's something that would have to be changed by amendment. Can Congress grant the Supreme court the right to instigate and war for 60-90 days? Can it Grant a Single member of Congress that power? Say the speaker of the house. What about grant the power to the U.N.? Would you say that's constitutional since congress did it and no one's been able to challenge it?



OK well if you're going to press it, you'd need to have an apples and apples comparison then NT. You can't honestly make one to one comparisons of the situations.
Look , how many Isis trrops are actively engaged in an attempted armed overthrow of Washington D.C. for the past 12+ years. And have taking over several U.S. cities with U.S. troops fighting to recently win back a war torn Dallas and Boston?
While there's NO WAY that i can or will say that Assad is a good guy. I suspect that many here in the "ANYTHING for VICTORY" crowd would not have problem with any measures taken to supposedly secure a fULL and complete victory of U.S. forces by whatever president was in power.
including the use of WMDs and torture.
Many on this board support torture for FAR less than what Assad and Syria has seen over the past 12+ years
IN FACT the U.S. SENT terrorist SUSPECTED to ASSAD so that HE could torture them FOR US just a few years ago.

Assad has been a Bad guy... as you say... BEFORE 2013. and done far worse than the recent ACCUSED attack. But for some reason we never attacked his country outright. why now? From Ronald Reagan till now we've somehow managed to live with Assad even WORK WITH Assad.
This event is NOT some SHOCKING event that somehow can't be allowed to stand. Like with IRAQ years ago , sadly, there are SEVERAL other countries that have leaders (animals) that are killing their people willy nilly over BS. Some like the leaders in our Ally Afghanistan Gov't who allow systematic child rape of boys and girls. Animals? i'd say so.
But no 56 tomahawks headed their way. WHY?




this is one reason why i find it difficult to talk to you guys sometimes.
I ask a question and ask for a strait answer, but i get dodges and then NEW questions and your upset if i don't reply.
Can you answer my question NT?

for the record the U.S HAS used WMDs in the form of white phosphorus which has been banned by US law and International treaties as a weapon, the U.S. has RIGHTLY broken UN resolutions. and Yes the U.S has people practically starving to death and homeless in San Diego. while many are FAT.

SO North Korea sends 56 missiles into san San Diego is that an act of WAR?
Yes OR No NT?

I'll answer all of your hypothetical questions IN the way YOU presented them if you can be up front and honest and answer this ONE.



rev. Answer this if you will. Is there a difference between OFFENSIVE, and DEFENSIVE? Militarily speaking?
Those 59 Tomahawks into Syria were a DEFENSIVE warning to Assad, or the Russians to STOP the killing of innocents with CHEMICALS.

IF North Korea sent 56 missiles into San Diego...that would be just like PEARL HARBOR, or September 11, 2001.

Better yet. Something you might understand better. Was the Stone in the SLING SHOT used by DAVID, against GOLIATH OFFENSIVE, OR DEFENSIVE?

There is a huge difference...you are seemingly unwilling to accept.

[revelarts]

rev. Answer this if you will. Is there a difference between OFFENSIVE, and DEFENSIVE? Militarily speaking?
.... yesss there is. especially when we're talking about STARTING a war.


IF North Korea sent 56 missiles into San Diego...that would be just like PEARL HARBOR, or September 11, 2001.

Exactly, thank you AT.


r
Better yet. Something you might understand better. Was the Stone in the SLING SHOT used by DAVID, against GOLIATH OFFENSIVE, OR DEFENSIVE?

There is a huge difference...you are seemingly unwilling to accept.

the Philistines came into Israel.
ONTO Israel soil with ARMED troops and offered a direct "military" challenge to the Israeli leadership.
David Volunteered to accept the military challenge in DEFENSE of an attack on Israel.

What am i not understanding or unwilling to accept here?

Syria never attacked the U.S., or came onto U.S. Soil.
In fact it seems to me the source of Chem attack should be PROVEN BEFORE anyone assumes to condemn much less ATTACK a sovereign country for the way they are executing a civil war and fighting known terrorist.

[Gunny]

.... yesss there is. especially when we're talking about STARTING a war.

Exactly, thank you AT.



the Philistines came into Israel.
ONTO Israel soil with ARMED troops and offered a direct "military" challenge to the Israeli leadership.
David Volunteered to accept the military challenge in DEFENSE of an attack on Israel.

What am i not understanding or unwilling to accept here?

Syria never attacked the U.S., or came onto U.S. Soil.
In fact it seems to me the source of Chem attack should be PROVEN BEFORE anyone assumes to condemn much less ATTACK a sovereign country for the way they are executing a civil war and fighting known terrorist.Rev, you could turn anything into a Who Gives a F- drama. It was a one off show of force. The President is allowed by law to do it. End of damned story.

[NightTrain]

Abortion hasn't been successfully chanlleged either But I'd still say it's unconstitutional (and murder) to kill babies. And that Roe vs wade is a flawed Unconstitutional decision.
Talented lawyers defend bad law all the time.
the "War powers act", while it tried to reign in Presidents that had already gone off the unconstitutional deep end. The Act itself grants powers that even congress can't legitimately grant. It's something that would have to be changed by amendment. Can Congress grant the Supreme court the right to instigate and war for 60-90 days? Can it Grant a Single member of Congress that power? Say the speaker of the house. What about grant the power to the U.N.? Would you say that's constitutional since congress did it and no one's been able to challenge it?

I hate abortion. It is an abomination.

However, it is legal. Wrong, but legal.

And until that decision is overturned, there is nothing to be done about it other than working to overturn it.

Similarly, if you don't like what Congress passed in '73, then you need to do your duty and work to get it overturned, or declared illegal, or unconstitutional, whatever.

The law says he can do it, and that's that. That's called being a realist.




OK well if you're going to press it, you'd need to have an apples and apples comparison then NT. You can't honestly make one to one comparisons of the situations.
Look , how many Isis trrops are actively engaged in an attempted armed overthrow of Washington D.C. for the past 12+ years. And have taking over several U.S. cities with U.S. troops fighting to recently win back a war torn Dallas and Boston?

The ISIS muzzies are killing Americans and it is the President's duty to protect American citizens.

I don't need another reason to unleash our killers and let them go to work. Most Americans don't, either.


While there's NO WAY that i can or will say that Assad is a good guy. I suspect that many here in the "ANYTHING for VICTORY" crowd would not have problem with any measures taken to supposedly secure a fULL and complete victory of U.S. forces by whatever president was in power.
including the use of WMDs and torture.
Many on this board support torture for FAR less than what Assad and Syria has seen over the past 12+ years
IN FACT the U.S. SENT terrorist SUSPECTED to ASSAD so that HE could torture them FOR US just a few years ago.

I don't remember that. I think you're wrong. Link?


Assad has been a Bad guy... as you say... BEFORE 2013. and done far worse than the recent ACCUSED attack. But for some reason we never attacked his country outright. why now? From Ronald Reagan till now we've somehow managed to live with Assad even WORK WITH Assad.
This event is NOT some SHOCKING event that somehow can't be allowed to stand. Like with IRAQ years ago , sadly, there are SEVERAL other countries that have leaders (animals) that are killing their people willy nilly over BS. Some like the leaders in our Ally Afghanistan Gov't who allow systematic child rape of boys and girls. Animals? i'd say so.
But no 56 tomahawks headed their way. WHY?

Can you point out where someone else has used Chemical Weapons in the last 4 months?


this is one reason why i find it difficult to talk to you guys sometimes.
I ask a question and ask for a strait answer, but i get dodges and then NEW questions and your upset if i don't reply.
Can you answer my question NT?

for the record the U.S HAS used WMDs in the form of white phosphorus which has been banned by US law and International treaties as a weapon,

White Phosphorus is a multi-use munition. In some cases it is legal, in others illegal. We follow the ROE and claims by liberal journalists to the contrary are dubious at best. Our guys say they don't use them in a manner not prescribed and that's good enough for me.


the U.S. has RIGHTLY broken UN resolutions.

I didn't know there have ever been any UN Resolutions in place against us. Link?


and Yes the U.S has people practically starving to death and homeless in San Diego. while many are FAT.

You're not being honest here. The US Gov isn't deliberately starving citizens and you know it.


SO North Korea sends 56 missiles into Marine Corps Air Station Miramar located in San Diego, California is that an act of WAR?
Yes OR No NT?

I'll answer all of your hypothetical questions IN the way YOU presented them if you can be up front and honest and answer this ONE.

Depends on your point of view, but the answer is : Yes.

However, if we were gassing our civilians with outlawed Chem Weapons in violation after violation by a ruthless dictator clinging to power here in America, I'd be part of the rebellion and cheering on my new favorite Tubby Tyrant. I'd even bake my rotund roadie a cake for helping us out. In this case, from my standpoint, he is a generous benefactor and is working to help remove the offending dictator for the good of Americans and the world.

Wouldn't you agree?

Your turn.

[revelarts]

Rev, you could turn anything into a Who Gives a F- drama. It was a one off show of force. The President is allowed by law to do it. End of damned story.

9/11 was one "show of force".
Allah supposedly gave them "the right" to do it.
end of story?


Plus the law does NOT give the president the right to do it.
As long we we consider the constitution THE LAW.

if not well fine. the 2nd amendment isn't the law either the gov't can take all the guns if it's "the law" go figure.
I hope you have no problem with that if congress says so and don't turn it into a Who Gives a F- drama.

[Black Diamond]

9/11 was one "show of force".
Allah supposedly gave them "the right" to do it.
end of story?


Plus the law does NOT give the president the right to do it.
As long we we consider the constitution THE LAW.

if not well fine. the 2nd amendment isn't the law either the gov't can take all the guns if it's "the law" go figure.
I hope you have no problem with that if congress says so and don't turn it into a Who Gives a F- drama.
Yeah. trump = bin laden.

[Gunny]

9/11 was one "show of force".
Allah supposedly gave them "the right" to do it.
end of story?


Plus the law does NOT give the president the right to do it.
As long we we consider the constitution THE LAW.

if not well fine. the 2nd amendment isn't the law either the gov't can take all the guns if it's "the law" go figure.
I hope you have no problem with that if congress says so and don't turn it into a Who Gives a F- drama.You know what ? Maybe people should just stop killing other people? THERE's a plan.

Until they do, you kill them back. You try to sound so above it all and idealistic. Your idealism and literalism ain't close to where the rubber meets the road.

[aboutime]

.... yesss there is. especially when we're talking about STARTING a war.

Exactly, thank you AT.



the Philistines came into Israel.
ONTO Israel soil with ARMED troops and offered a direct "military" challenge to the Israeli leadership.
David Volunteered to accept the military challenge in DEFENSE of an attack on Israel.

What am i not understanding or unwilling to accept here?

Syria never attacked the U.S., or came onto U.S. Soil.
In fact it seems to me the source of Chem attack should be PROVEN BEFORE anyone assumes to condemn much less ATTACK a sovereign country for the way they are executing a civil war and fighting known terrorist.


rev. So, what you are actually saying, and condoning here is...If Assad of Syria bombed your family, in whatever American city you happen to live in. Because you never attacked him, or his children...that's FINE WITH YOU?

[Balu]

"Next." NT #239

"Next" is:

BUT !!

Trump WAGED war, WITHOUT a formal declaration of war.

Not much of a fuss about it, because the federal government leadership is all Republicans. So they're not going to rat themselves out.

But it does renew the as yet unresolved war-powers debate* yet once again.

"Next."

* Some believed The War Powers Act would help address it. Obviously, not adequately, and so the debate continues.

Nazis did the same June 22, 1941 against Russia. Here we have a complete analogy

[Balu]

I saw your picture the first time.

GW's quote doesn't negate the War Powers Resolution, however.




Need a little background on this.

In your hypothetical scenario, have we been killing political dissidents willy-nilly? Using chemical weapons? Defying UNSC resolutions? Getting deliberately bad haircuts and gaining an unsightly amount of weight while the hippies starve in San Diego?

Do you believe that IF you dare to strike Russian airfield on the territory of Russia you will IMMEDIATELY get the RECIPROCAL full-scale NUKE strike on YOUR Territory.
And now try to think over again why NK are so intent and eager to obtain nuclear weapons and the means of delivery to get YOU in any case.

[Black Diamond]

Nazis did the same June 22, 1941 against Russia. Here we have a complete analogy
Yeah funny the Nazis were your allies until you got teabagged by the corporal with one testicle.

[Gunny]

Nazis did the same June 22, 1941 against Russia. Here we have a complete analogyUh no? Dumbass. You think I'm somehow beneath you and you're stupid. We didn't sign a peace treaty with Syria then invade the place. You can't be THIS dumb. Then again .. you ARE commie. Once commie, always a commie.

[Black Diamond]

Do you believe that IF you dare to strike Russian airfield on the territory of Russia you will IMMEDIATELY get the RECIPROCAL NUKE full-scale strike on YOUR Territory.
And now try to think over again why NK are so intent and eager to obtain nuclear weapons and the maens of delivery to get YOU in any case.
Flex your muscles all you want. You're no match for America.

[NightTrain]

Do you believe that IF you dare to strike Russian airfield on the territory of Russia you will IMMEDIATELY get the RECIPROCAL NUKE full-scale strike on YOUR Territory.
And now try to think over again why NK are so intent and eager to obtain nuclear weapons and the maens of delivery to get YOU in any case.

I don't think Putin would.

I think he'd reconsider after contemplating that we can strike wherever we please with our Stealth with impunity. You guys can't even shoot down 59 Tomahawks after we told you where and when they were coming, for goodness sake.

Putin wouldn't escalate to nukes. North Korea is crazy enough, but Putin isn't.

[aboutime]

Nazis did the same June 22, 1941 against Russia. Here we have a complete analogy



Comrade Balu. Allow me to tell you..FIRST HAND, where you can STICK all of your propagana Analogies.
We are no longer living in the 1930's, or 1940's. Reality today is. Putin Wants His USSR status back, and is brainwashing all of you into believing HE IS CONCERNED FOR "YOU"!
Putin is the GREATEST LIAR in Russia since LENEN, and STALIN. Use that analogy, and tell us how it worked.

[Gunny]

Flex your muscles all you want. You're no match for America.Balu's not even a match for words on a screen.

[revelarts]

Someone questioned me about sources for 2013's reversal of the accusations against Assad.

but Hey if your'e only going to believe sources you personally like. i can't help you.
if you have a reason to dismiss my sources other than name calling and not liking what they say fine. then sure we should take the reports with a grain of salt but otherwise.
it is what it is.

not liking it doesn't mean it's not true right?

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/world/article24755128.html


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/21/syria-chemicals-weapons-experts-lethal-toxin


Jean Pascal Zanders is widely acknowledged as one of the world’s top chemical weapons experts, having been quoted in the last two weeks about Syrian chemical weapons by Time (http://world.time.com/2013/08/19/u-n-chemical-weapons-experts-arrive-in-syria-are-they-on-a-fools-errand/), the Los Angeles Times (http://articles.latimes.com/2013/aug/21/world/la-fg-syria-poison-gas-20130822), Post-Gazette (http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/news/world/us-awaits-un-probe-of-syria-chemical-weapons-claims-700552/), Huffington Post (http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/08/30/syria-sarin-claims_n_3843049.html), Der Spiegel (http://ml.spiegel.de/article.do?id=918667), Agence France-Presse (http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/08/22/chemical-weapons-experts-say-symptoms-in-syria-consistent-with-nerve-gas-attack/), Global Post (http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/thomson-reuters/130826/syria-chemical-evidence-fades-un-team-under-fire), and many other publications.We interviewed Zanders by phone.
Q: You were quoted in the Huffington Post on August 30th as saying that the Youtube videos cited by the American government were not conclusive, as you couldn’t tell where or when the videos were taken … or even whether they were from the same incident or different incidents.
Do you still hold that view, or have you seen other videos that change your mind?
Zanders: No, I have not changed my mind. The general observation still stands, and it will stand until we have the actual report from the U.N. investigation.
I do not deny that a chemical with toxic chemicals has taken place. But I am just as concerned about how people are interpreting things in terms of a particular goal … which in this case is military intervention.
.....

One of the concerns I have is if we look over the periods starting in March 19th with the major allegation of chemcial weapons use near Aleppo, Syria, everything is being reinterpreted as sarin.
When I look at video images that have been going around, what I see is a large number of people suffering from aspyhixia, but only a minority (if the photos are representative of the total picture) display symptoms that would correspond to exposures to neurotoxicants.
John Kerry used the term “signatures of sarin”. But signatures of sarin are things one can have from other organophosphorus compounds.
Q: You’re talking about the fact that pesticides or other nerve agents can give “false positives” for sarin?
Zanders: Yes, but not just that.
Somebody could have been – and this is purely hypothetical – exposed to an organophosphorus compound neurotoxicant which is produced in large volumes in industry. For example, for agricultural purposes.
On the low end of the spectrum, we have insecticide sprays which we can buy in the supermarkets. On the middle of the spectrum, we have organophosphorus compounds which are intermediaries of other products, or that are used in agriculture for pest and rodent control. I know specifically that the use of such compounds for pest and rodent control is common in the Middle East.
So, if someone were exposed to that in the right volume, there would be clear signatures of neurotoxicant exposure.
So it’s not just a question of false signatures in the sense of chemical tests giving a false positive, but also physiological symptoms that someone might show due to exposure to these commonly-used chemicals.
[The area where the chemical incident occurred was in a heavily-contested battle zone and had been heavily bombed. So that could have released industrial or agricultural chemicals.]
Q: Do you have any knowledge about whether the chain of custody of alleged U.S. tests which Kerry talked about are proper?
Zanders: No, and that’s part of my criticism that Western governments have overstated their case.
We do not know where the samples come from. And we do not know how representative they are for a certain area.
Certain samples could have been selectively given to Western sources for analysis. Assume that you do not know where a sample comes from … your whole chain of custody is compromised.
That’s why UN inspectors can only use samples they have collected themselves.
There was an article in the Wall Street Journal a couple of days ago saying that Prince Bandar got one alleged victim of chemical warfare out of the country, sent him to the UK, and that person is the basis of which the British made their claims about Syrian chemical weapons use. [Article (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323423804579024452583045962.html).]
..
In the U.S. document, there is not a single reference to physiological samples.
Postscript: Zanders says we must wait for the results from the U.N. weapons inspection before reaching any conclusions about who is responsible for the August 21st tragedy. [Background (http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/08/debunking-u-s-claims-about-un-weapons-inspections.html).]


Former [B]Associated Press and Newsweek reporter – Robert Parry – notes (http://consortiumnews.com/2013/12/13/fresh-doubts-about-syrias-sarin-guilt/):
A United Nations analysis of samples taken from one of the two sites of the alleged Sarin attack outside Damascus, Syria, on Aug. 21 found zero chemical weapons agents, and one UN laboratory backed off its earlier claim to have found a residue that can result from degraded Sarin on the remnants of the missile, according to revisions in a new UN report.

This failure to find Sarin anywhere in Moadamiyah, a suburb south of Damascus, undercuts analyses by Human Rights Watch and the New York Times that relied on a vectoring of the two attack sites – the other in Zamalka/Ein Tarma to the east where Sarin was detected – to conclude that an elite unit of the Syrian military must have been responsible for the attacks that brought the United States close to war in Syria.

The new UN report, released Thursday, also assessed other cases of possible chemical weapons use in Syria, including claims by the government that rebels have used Sarin and other chemical agents to inflict casualties on government soldiers and civilians.
UN inspectors said they “collected credible information that corroborates the allegations that chemical weapons were used in Khan Al Asal (near the northern city of Aleppo) on 19 March 2013 against soldiers and civilians,” but the inspectors said they were unable to undertake a complete study because of time delays and security concerns.
The UN inspectors also examined a few incidents in the days after the Aug. 21 attack in which the Syrian government claimed its soldiers were targeted with chemical weapons, including an Aug. 25 incident at Ashrafiah Sahnaya, a town southwest of Damascus. The UN inspectors said they found evidence suggesting a small-scale attack was made against soldiers but were unable to establish the facts definitively.


The Washington Post noted (http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-12-16/world/35864232_1_chemical-weapons-chemical-arms-free-syrian-army) last December 2012:
U.S. officials are increasingly worried that Syria’s weapons of mass destruction could fall into the hands of Islamist extremists, rogue generals or other uncontrollable factions.
Last week, fighters from a group that the Obama administration has branded a terrorist organization were among rebels who seized the Sheik Suleiman military base near Aleppo, where research on chemical weapons had been conducted. Rebels are also closing in on another base near Aleppo, known as Safirah, which has served as a major production center for such munitions, according to U.S. officials and analysts.
***
A former Syrian general who once led the army’s chemical weapons training program said that the main storage sites for mustard gas and nerve agents are supposed to be guarded by thousands of Syrian troops but that they would be easily overrun.

The sites are not secure, retired Maj. Gen. Adnan Silou, who defected to the opposition in June, said in an interview near Turkey’s border with Syria. “Probably anyone from the Free Syrian Army or any Islamic extremist group could take them over,” he said....

AP wrote (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_UNITED_STATES_SYRIA_INTELLIGENCE_DOUBTS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-08-29-03-11-56): "U.S. intelligence officials are not so certain that the suspected chemical attack was carried out on Assad’s orders, or even completely sure it was carried out by government forces, the officials said."


Turkish state newspaper Zaman reported (http://www.zaman.com.tr/gundem_adanada-el-kaide-operasyonu-12-gozalti_2094730.html) earlier this year (Google translation (http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.zaman.com.tr%2Fgundem_adanada-el-kaide-operasyonu-12-gozalti_2094730.html)):
The Turkish General Directorate of Security … seized 2 kg of sarin gas in the city of Adana in the early hours of yesterday morning. The chemical weapons were in the possession of Al Nusra terrorists believed to have been heading for Syria.

Haaretz reported on March 24th, “Jihadists, not Assad, apparently behind reported chemical attack in Syria (http://www.haaretz.com/news/middle-east/jihadists-not-assad-apparently-behind-reported-chemical-attack-in-syria.premium-1.511680)“.

Some already mention the Seymour Hersh article and his report was confirmed by the Turkish news sources http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2015/10/30/seymour-hersh-news-report-banned-us-finally-confirmed-turkey.html

so yeah... Rebels not Assad in 2013 even though the U.S and the west Initially blamed it all on Assad.
does it make sense to QUESTION this recent attack BEFORE we assume ANYTHING.
seems very reasonable to me.

[Black Diamond]

Balu's not even a match for words on a screen.
Clearly. Someone calls him a mean name and he hides.

[Gunny]

Clearly. Someone calls him a mean name and he hides.Could someone give Rev his meds back?

[Black Diamond]

Someone questioned me about sources for 2013's reversal of the accusations against Assad.

but Hey if your'e only going to believe sources you personally like. i can't help you.
if you have a reason to dismiss my sources other than name calling and not liking what they say fine. then sure we should take the reports with a grain of salt but otherwise.
it is what it is.

not liking it doesn't mean it's not true right?

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/world/article24755128.html


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/21/syria-chemicals-weapons-experts-lethal-toxin







AP wrote (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_UNITED_STATES_SYRIA_INTELLIGENCE_DOUBTS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-08-29-03-11-56): "U.S. intelligence officials are not so certain that the suspected chemical attack was carried out on Assad’s orders, or even completely sure it was carried out by government forces, the officials said."


Turkish state newspaper Zaman reported (http://www.zaman.com.tr/gundem_adanada-el-kaide-operasyonu-12-gozalti_2094730.html) earlier this year (Google translation (http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.zaman.com.tr%2Fgundem_adanada-el-kaide-operasyonu-12-gozalti_2094730.html)):
The Turkish General Directorate of Security … seized 2 kg of sarin gas in the city of Adana in the early hours of yesterday morning. The chemical weapons were in the possession of Al Nusra terrorists believed to have been heading for Syria.

Haaretz reported on March 24th, “Jihadists, not Assad, apparently behind reported chemical attack in Syria (http://www.haaretz.com/news/middle-east/jihadists-not-assad-apparently-behind-reported-chemical-attack-in-syria.premium-1.511680)“.

Some already mention the Seymour Hersh article
so yeah... Rebels not Assad in 2013 even though the U.S and the west Initially blamed it all on Assad.

does it make sense to QUESTION this recent attack BEFORE we assume ANYTHING.
seems very reasonable to me.
Yeah it was a false flag set up the John McCain and the neocons.

[Balu]

rev. Answer this if you will. Is there a difference between OFFENSIVE, and DEFENSIVE? Militarily speaking?
Those 59 Tomahawks into Syria were a DEFENSIVE warning to Assad, or the Russians to STOP the killing of innocents with CHEMICALS.


Marvelous! Especially that there WERE NO proofs that Syrians made this chemical attack. I am applauding standing! :clap::clap:

[Black Diamond]

Could someone give Rev his meds back?
Yeah he skipped a dose.

[Gunny]

Marvelous! Especially that there WERE NO proofs that Syrians made this chemical attack. I am applauding standing! :clap::clap:Wow. aboutime isn't on Balu's ignore list. Yet. We'll see how long this shit lasts Black Diamond. I've been wondering ... if you put the whole board on ignore ... why log in?

[Black Diamond]

Wow. @aboutime (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=2272) isn't on Balu's ignore list. Yet. We'll see how long this shit lasts @Black Diamond (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=2142). I've been wondering ... if you put the whole board on ignore ... why log in?
He is playing the role of Tokyo Rose.

[Balu]

I don't think Putin would.

I think he'd reconsider after contemplating that we can strike wherever we please with our Stealth with impunity. You guys can't even shoot down 59 Tomahawks after we told you where and when they were coming, for goodness sake.

Putin wouldn't escalate to nukes. North Korea is crazy enough, but Putin isn't.
I would recommend you to read our Military Doctrine and think about your holey Missile Defense system. No, he wouldn't escalate. He WILL START with nuke strike as a DEFENSIVE measure against USA aggressor, according to DOCTRINE. So don't treat our kindness for our weakness.
And do pay attention that once Putin named you an aggressor and Putin is not an emotional person. He always thinks before talking.

[NightTrain]

I would recommend you to read our Military Doctrine and think about your holey Missile Defense system. No, he wouldn't escalate. He WILL START with nuke strike as a DEFENSIVE measure against USA aggressor, according to DOCTRINE. So don't treat our kindness for our weakness.
And do pay attention that once Putin named you an aggressor and Putin is not an emotional person. He always thinks before talking.

If he's foolish enough to launch nukes, then so be it. I suggest you get a bottle of 10 Million Sunblock for Moscow.

However, Putin knows that Russia is completely outmatched and he'll back down. Just like you guys did during the Cuba Missile Crisis when Kennedy told you he was going to blow your ships out of the water if they crossed the line - and you were a hell of a lot stronger back then.

It really doesn't have to be this way. Stop propping up dictators and lying about Chemical Weapons and we'll all get along fine.

[Black Diamond]

Someone questioned me about sources for 2013's reversal of the accusations against Assad.

but Hey if your'e only going to believe sources you personally like. i can't help you.
if you have a reason to dismiss my sources other than name calling and not liking what they say fine. then sure we should take the reports with a grain of salt but otherwise.
it is what it is.

not liking it doesn't mean it's not true right?

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/world/article24755128.html


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/21/syria-chemicals-weapons-experts-lethal-toxin







AP wrote (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_UNITED_STATES_SYRIA_INTELLIGENCE_DOUBTS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-08-29-03-11-56): "U.S. intelligence officials are not so certain that the suspected chemical attack was carried out on Assad’s orders, or even completely sure it was carried out by government forces, the officials said."


Turkish state newspaper Zaman reported (http://www.zaman.com.tr/gundem_adanada-el-kaide-operasyonu-12-gozalti_2094730.html) earlier this year (Google translation (http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.zaman.com.tr%2Fgundem_adanada-el-kaide-operasyonu-12-gozalti_2094730.html)):
The Turkish General Directorate of Security … seized 2 kg of sarin gas in the city of Adana in the early hours of yesterday morning. The chemical weapons were in the possession of Al Nusra terrorists believed to have been heading for Syria.

Haaretz reported on March 24th, “Jihadists, not Assad, apparently behind reported chemical attack in Syria (http://www.haaretz.com/news/middle-east/jihadists-not-assad-apparently-behind-reported-chemical-attack-in-syria.premium-1.511680)“.

Some already mention the Seymour Hersh article and his report was confirmed by the Turkish news sources http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2015/10/30/seymour-hersh-news-report-banned-us-finally-confirmed-turkey.html

so yeah... Rebels not Assad in 2013 even though the U.S and the west Initially blamed it all on Assad.
does it make sense to QUESTION this recent attack BEFORE we assume ANYTHING.
seems very reasonable to me.
The two first links you sited said nothing of it "everyone found out it was the Rebels, not Assad". Only Seymour hersch, as I said. And he wrote a book about bin laden recently saying the government lied about that ,which has been refuted.
You certainly are way off when you say "everyone found out it was the Rebels, not Assad." And turkey was once allied Syria, so one should question them as much as they should question this fuckstick Balu.

[sear]

"Trump WAGED war, WITHOUT a formal declaration of war." sear

"Nazis did the same June 22, 1941 against Russia." B #276

That's fine, or not.
But on Jun 22, 1941 Nazis were not bound by the United States Constitution.

But on April 9, 2017 the president of the United States is.

[Gunny]

The two first links you sited said nothing of it "everyone found out it was the Rebels, not Assad". Only Seymour hersch, as I said. And he wrote a book about bin laden recently saying the government lied about that ,which has been refuted.
You certainly are way off when you say "everyone found out it was the Rebels, not Assad." And turkey was once allied Syria, so one should question them as much as they should question this fuckstick Balu.It was the Klingons. Where's Capt Kirk when you need him? Oh yeah, he's selling hotel rooms now,:laugh:

[Balu]

If he's foolish enough to launch nukes, then so be it. I suggest you get a bottle of 10 Million Sunblock for Moscow.

However, Putin knows that Russia is completely outmatched and he'll back down. Just like you guys did during the Cuba Missile Crisis when Kennedy told you he was going to blow your ships out of the water if they crossed the line - and you were a hell of a lot stronger back then.

It really doesn't have to be this way. Stop propping up dictators and lying about Chemical Weapons and we'll all get along fine.

I don't want and will not stop you to live in the world of own illusions...
As to Chemicals you first present the PROOFS. Then we'll talk. Otherwise your strike remains unfounded aggression against the sovereign country. ( speaking between us rather worthless and unskillful because less than 24 hours the flights resumed)
Such proofs of YOURS which costed MILLIONS lifes of INNOCENT people already doesn't satisfy anybody.

http://ru-an.info/Photo/QNews/n4180/1.jpg

[Black Diamond]

I don't want and will not stop you to live in the world of own illusions...
As to Chemicals you first present the PROOFS. Then we'll talk. Otherwise your strike remains unfounded aggression against the sovereign country. ( speaking between us rather worthless and unskillful because less than 24 hours the flights resumed)
Such proofs of YOURS which costed MILLIONS lifes of INNOCENT people already doesn't satisfy anybody.

http://ru-an.info/Photo/QNews/n4180/1.jpg
https://www.pri.org/stories/2014-08-21/pact-between-hitler-and-stalin-paved-way-world-war-ii-was-signed-75-years-ago

[revelarts]

I hate abortion. It is an abomination.
However, it is legal. Wrong, but legal.
And until that decision is overturned, there is nothing to be done about it other than working to overturn it.
Similarly, if you don't like what Congress passed in '73, then you need to do your duty and work to get it overturned, or declared illegal, or unconstitutional, whatever.
The law says he can do it, and that's that. That's called being a realist.

If they come to take your firearms i suspect you'll fully comply and not hide any. because it's the law.





The ISIS muzzies are killing Americans and it is the President's duty to protect American citizens.
I don't need another reason to unleash our killers and let them go to work. Most Americans don't, either.

that's the problem, to many people only want to use the constitution when it suits them.
Other than that they don't CARE if gov't Kills or takes rights as long as people APPROVE of those killed or approve of the rights taken away.


I don't remember that. I think you're wrong. Link?

...Arar, a thirty-four-year-old graduate of McGill University whose family emigrated to Canada when he was a teen-ager, was arrested on September 26, 2002, at John F. Kennedy Airport. He was changing planes; he had been on vacation with his family in Tunisia, and was returning to Canada. Arar was detained because his name had been placed on the United States Watch List of terrorist suspects. He was held for the next thirteen days, as American officials questioned him about possible links to another suspected terrorist. Arar said that he barely knew the suspect, although he had worked with the man’s brother. Arar, who was not formally charged, was placed in handcuffs and leg irons by plainclothes officials and transferred to an executive jet. The plane flew to Washington, continued to Portland, Maine, stopped in Rome, Italy, then landed in Amman, Jordan.

During the flight, Arar said, he heard the pilots and crew identify themselves in radio communications as members of “the Special Removal Unit.” The Americans, he learned, planned to take him next to Syria. Having been told by his parents about the barbaric practices of the police in Syria, Arar begged crew members not to send him there, arguing that he would surely be tortured. His captors did not respond to his request; instead, they invited him to watch a spy thriller that was aired on board.
Ten hours after landing in Jordan, Arar said, he was driven to Syria, where interrogators, after a day of threats, “just began beating on me.” They whipped his hands repeatedly with two-inch-thick electrical cables, and kept him in a windowless underground cell that he likened to a grave. “Not even animals could withstand it,” he said. Although he initially tried to assert his innocence, he eventually confessed to anything his tormentors wanted him to say. “You just give up,” he said. “You become like an animal.”
A year later, in October, 2003, Arar was released without charges, after the Canadian government took up his cause. Imad Moustapha, the Syrian Ambassador in Washington, announced that his country had found no links between Arar and terrorism. Arar, it turned out, had been sent to Syria on orders from the U.S. government, under a secretive program known as “extraordinary rendition.”
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2005/02/14/outsourcing-torture




Can you point out where someone else has used Chemical Weapons in the last 4 months?
On February 13 2017, Kim Jong-nam—the half-brother of North Korean leader Kim Jong-un—was killed (http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/08/asia/malaysia-north-korea-blame-kim-jong-nam/) at the airport in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Malaysian investigators have determined that two women, who have since been charged with murder, used VX nerve agent—a chemical weapon—in the assassination. Attribution has not yet been confirmed, but Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak has directly blamed North Korea (DPRK) for the assassination. In addition, U.S. and South Korean officials reportedly (http://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-malaysia-un-idUSKBN16F2NS) believe DPRK is responsible for the killing.
https://www.lawfareblog.com/did-north-koreas-use-vx-nerve-agent-violate-international-law


March 4 2017
ISIS launches chemical weapon attack on women and children, including a two-month-old baby, in Mosul Iraq




The tiny baby is one of 12 people being treated in hospital after the attack
The 12, including women and children show signs of exposure to chemical weapons
Mortars are thought to have been fired from ISIS held west Mosul into the east
An emergency response plan has been activated by the UN World Health



http://conservativetribune.com/new-low-isis-uses-chemical/
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4281070/ISIS-guilty-war-crime-chemical-weapon-attack.html#ixzz4dnwinj3w

From January to August of 2016 the Sudanese gov't was accused of using Chemical weapons against it's people. Anyone shooting missile at them? nope. As a matter of fact the U.N. put reps of the Sudanese gov't onto the board OVERSEEING the use of chemical weapons. the Chemoc-l weapons watchdog executive council.
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2017/03/sudan-elevation-to-opcws-governing-body-a-slap-in-the-face-for-victims-of-chemical-attacks/




White Phosphorus is a multi-use munition. In some cases it is legal, in others illegal. We follow the ROE and claims by liberal journalists to the contrary are dubious at best. Our guys say they don't use them in a manner not prescribed and that's good enough for me.
well OK if you think it's the best policy to let the gov't self police. And know that the U.S. military (brass or enlisted) never lie, make mistake, has bad members or commit atrocities. fine sure that makes sense.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/08/sides-using-illegal-white-phosphorus-firebombs-residents-donetsk-ukraine.html
the Battle Book, published by the U.S. Command and General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, contains the following sentence: “It is against the law of land warfare to employ WP against personnel targets.” (http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/army/docs/st100-3/c5/5sect3.htm)

U.S and Britian Evidence use here (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/20/iraq-war-anniversary-birth-defects-cancer_n_2917701.html), here (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/army-to-be-sued-for-war-crimes-over-its-role-in-fallujah-attacks-1961475.html), here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/4440664.stm), here (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/10/fallujah-birth-defects-ra_n_571119.html), here (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2005/nov/15/usa.iraq), here (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/us-forces-used-chemical-weapons-during-assault-on-city-of-fallujah-514433.html).
Saudi Arabia appears to be using U.S.-supplied white phosphorus ...
(https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2016/09/19/saudi-arabia-appears-to-be-using-u-s-supplied-white-phosphorus-in-its-war-in-yemen/)Seymour Hersh Says Hillary Clinton Approved Sending Libya's Sarin To Syrian Rebels Link (http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-05-01/seymour-hersh-says-hillary-approved-sending-libyas-sarin-syrian-rebels)
Israel also used white phosphorous (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/25/israel-white-phosphorus-gaza) in 2009 during “Operation Cast Lead” (and perhaps subsequently (http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=fda_1353192244)). Israel ratified Protocol III of Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (“Protocol III”) – which outlaws the use of incendiary devices in war – in 2007 (http://www.geneva-academy.ch/RULAC/international_treaties.php?id_state=113). So this was a war crime.

but you're right it is legal to use it


I didn't know there have ever been any UN Resolutions in place against us. Link?
you got me I should have said Treaties
link (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjoqcSV-5jTAhUC2GMKHWlJBUoQFgg0MAQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.latimes.com%2Fnation%2Fnation now%2Fla-na-un-torture-committee-police-shootings-20141128-story.html&usg=AFQjCNEUSvWaCn6Qog9DTP1FECm6NscadQ&bvm=bv.152174688,d.cGc), link (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjoqcSV-5jTAhUC2GMKHWlJBUoQFggnMAI&url=https%3A%2F%2Ftheintercept.com%2F2014%2F10%2F1 5%2Fun-investigator-report-condemns-mass-surveillance%2F&usg=AFQjCNFPJwaJulJ5nlsBoPunFHR-gVBIQg&bvm=bv.152174688,d.cGc),
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/leslie-griffith/us-quietly-breaks-un-trea_b_88347.html
https://newrepublic.com/article/119928/us-violates-un-convention-against-torture-signed-20-years-ago

However Israel has in fact broken "hundreds of resolutions", for good reason. but when's the last time we fired 56 missiles at them? never. we sell them arms.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/11/israel-has-violated-hundreds-of-un-resolutions.html
NKorea has broken several U.N. Resolutions, our response since Bush .. 'cough well, let china handle it.' any Chinese missiles?
Sudan, and Iran as well.
what we have here is Selective enforcement, And i have wonder about the real motives.



You're not being honest here. The US Gov isn't deliberately starving citizens and you know it.
'depends on your point of view.'
and then there this ..where we support or a least don't shot 56 missiles at out Saudi Allies that are causing starvation of Children in Yemen by their military actions. not much news about that either.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/04/yemen-famine-feared-as-starving-children-fight-for-lives-in-hospital




Depends on your point of view, but the answer is : Yes.
thank you, yes.

Shooting missile at any sovereign nations military (or civilians) is an act of war.
that's a plain fact. the reason for attacking another nation that HAS NOT attacked you may justified as some AD HOC retaliation on others behalf but it's STILL an act of war.


However, if we were gassing our civilians with outlawed Chem Weapons in violation after violation by a ruthless dictator clinging to power here in America, I'd be part of the rebellion and cheering on my new favorite Tubby Tyrant. I'd even bake my rotund roadie a cake for helping us out. In this case, from my standpoint, he is a generous benefactor and is working to help remove the offending dictator for the good of Americans and the world.
Wouldn't you agree?

If the alternatives were fighting a Scum Bag American dictator but if he's defeated Muslim extremist were almost guaranteed to replace him. Or fighting WITH the scum bag dictator to defeat the muslims extremist. Well Sadly i'd have to fight with or at least fight AGAINST the muslim extremist. If Putin came in and started attacking the Scum Bag American Dictator I might like it little but mostly i'd be pissed.

do you agree?

[Balu]

"Trump WAGED war, WITHOUT a formal declaration of war." sear

"Nazis did the same June 22, 1941 against Russia." B #276

That's fine, or not.
But on Jun 22, 1941 Nazis were not bound by the United States Constitution.

But on April 9, 2017 the president of the United States is.

Nothing fine when the war is started. This must be evident.
The Nazis were bounded by Non-aggression pact between the USSR and Germany, as Russia by Memorandum on the prevention of incidents and ensuring air safety during operations in Syria which we have suspended after the USA aggression against Syria. Thus Russia "closed the sky" over Syria. That was a warning for you the Pentagon understood pretty well.

[Gunny]

If they come to take your firearms i suspect you'll fully comply and not hide any. because it's the law.




that's the problem, to many people only want to use the constitution when it suits them.
Other than that they don't CARE if gov't Kills or takes rights as long as people APPROVE of those killed or approve of the rights taken away.


...Arar, a thirty-four-year-old graduate of McGill University whose family emigrated to Canada when he was a teen-ager, was arrested on September 26, 2002, at John F. Kennedy Airport. He was changing planes; he had been on vacation with his family in Tunisia, and was returning to Canada. Arar was detained because his name had been placed on the United States Watch List of terrorist suspects. He was held for the next thirteen days, as American officials questioned him about possible links to another suspected terrorist. Arar said that he barely knew the suspect, although he had worked with the man’s brother. Arar, who was not formally charged, was placed in handcuffs and leg irons by plainclothes officials and transferred to an executive jet. The plane flew to Washington, continued to Portland, Maine, stopped in Rome, Italy, then landed in Amman, Jordan.

During the flight, Arar said, he heard the pilots and crew identify themselves in radio communications as members of “the Special Removal Unit.” The Americans, he learned, planned to take him next to Syria. Having been told by his parents about the barbaric practices of the police in Syria, Arar begged crew members not to send him there, arguing that he would surely be tortured. His captors did not respond to his request; instead, they invited him to watch a spy thriller that was aired on board.
Ten hours after landing in Jordan, Arar said, he was driven to Syria, where interrogators, after a day of threats, “just began beating on me.” They whipped his hands repeatedly with two-inch-thick electrical cables, and kept him in a windowless underground cell that he likened to a grave. “Not even animals could withstand it,” he said. Although he initially tried to assert his innocence, he eventually confessed to anything his tormentors wanted him to say. “You just give up,” he said. “You become like an animal.”
A year later, in October, 2003, Arar was released without charges, after the Canadian government took up his cause. Imad Moustapha, the Syrian Ambassador in Washington, announced that his country had found no links between Arar and terrorism. Arar, it turned out, had been sent to Syria on orders from the U.S. government, under a secretive program known as “extraordinary rendition.”
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2005/02/14/outsourcing-torture



On February 13 2017, Kim Jong-nam—the half-brother of North Korean leader Kim Jong-un—was killed (http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/08/asia/malaysia-north-korea-blame-kim-jong-nam/) at the airport in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Malaysian investigators have determined that two women, who have since been charged with murder, used VX nerve agent—a chemical weapon—in the assassination. Attribution has not yet been confirmed, but Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak has directly blamed North Korea (DPRK) for the assassination. In addition, U.S. and South Korean officials reportedly (http://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-malaysia-un-idUSKBN16F2NS) believe DPRK is responsible for the killing.
https://www.lawfareblog.com/did-north-koreas-use-vx-nerve-agent-violate-international-law


March 4 2017
ISIS launches chemical weapon attack on women and children, including a two-month-old baby, in Mosul Iraq




The tiny baby is one of 12 people being treated in hospital after the attack
The 12, including women and children show signs of exposure to chemical weapons
Mortars are thought to have been fired from ISIS held west Mosul into the east
An emergency response plan has been activated by the UN World Health



http://conservativetribune.com/new-low-isis-uses-chemical/
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4281070/ISIS-guilty-war-crime-chemical-weapon-attack.html#ixzz4dnwinj3w

From January to August of 2016 the Sudanese gov't was accused of using Chemical weapons against it's people. Anyone shooting missile at them? nope. As a matter of fact the U.N. put reps of the Sudanese gov't onto the board OVERSEEING the use of chemical weapons. the Chemoc-l weapons watchdog executive council.
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2017/03/sudan-elevation-to-opcws-governing-body-a-slap-in-the-face-for-victims-of-chemical-attacks/




well OK if you think it's the best policy to let the gov't self police. And know that the U.S. military (brass or enlisted) never lie, make mistake, has bad members or commit atrocities. fine sure that makes sense.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/08/sides-using-illegal-white-phosphorus-firebombs-residents-donetsk-ukraine.html
the Battle Book, published by the U.S. Command and General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, contains the following sentence: “It is against the law of land warfare to employ WP against personnel targets.” (http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/army/docs/st100-3/c5/5sect3.htm)

U.S and Britian Evidence use here (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/20/iraq-war-anniversary-birth-defects-cancer_n_2917701.html), here (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/army-to-be-sued-for-war-crimes-over-its-role-in-fallujah-attacks-1961475.html), here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/4440664.stm), here (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/10/fallujah-birth-defects-ra_n_571119.html), here (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2005/nov/15/usa.iraq), here (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/us-forces-used-chemical-weapons-during-assault-on-city-of-fallujah-514433.html).
Saudi Arabia appears to be using U.S.-supplied white phosphorus ...
(https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2016/09/19/saudi-arabia-appears-to-be-using-u-s-supplied-white-phosphorus-in-its-war-in-yemen/)Seymour Hersh Says Hillary Clinton Approved Sending Libya's Sarin To Syrian Rebels Link (http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-05-01/seymour-hersh-says-hillary-approved-sending-libyas-sarin-syrian-rebels)
Israel also used white phosphorous (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/25/israel-white-phosphorus-gaza) in 2009 during “Operation Cast Lead” (and perhaps subsequently (http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=fda_1353192244)). Israel ratified Protocol III of Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (“Protocol III”) – which outlaws the use of incendiary devices in war – in 2007 (http://www.geneva-academy.ch/RULAC/international_treaties.php?id_state=113). So this was a war crime.

but you're right it is legal to use it


you got me I should have said Treaties
link (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjoqcSV-5jTAhUC2GMKHWlJBUoQFgg0MAQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.latimes.com%2Fnation%2Fnation now%2Fla-na-un-torture-committee-police-shootings-20141128-story.html&usg=AFQjCNEUSvWaCn6Qog9DTP1FECm6NscadQ&bvm=bv.152174688,d.cGc), link (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjoqcSV-5jTAhUC2GMKHWlJBUoQFggnMAI&url=https%3A%2F%2Ftheintercept.com%2F2014%2F10%2F1 5%2Fun-investigator-report-condemns-mass-surveillance%2F&usg=AFQjCNFPJwaJulJ5nlsBoPunFHR-gVBIQg&bvm=bv.152174688,d.cGc),
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/leslie-griffith/us-quietly-breaks-un-trea_b_88347.html
https://newrepublic.com/article/119928/us-violates-un-convention-against-torture-signed-20-years-ago

However Israel has in fact broken "hundreds of resolutions", for good reason. but when's the last time we fired 56 missiles at them? never. we sell them arms.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/11/israel-has-violated-hundreds-of-un-resolutions.html
NKorea has broken several U.N. Resolutions, our response since Bush .. 'cough well, let china handle it.' any Chinese missiles?
Sudan, and Iran as well.
what we have here is Selective enforcement, And i have wonder about the real motives.



'depends on your point of view.'
and then there this ..where we support or a least don't shot 56 missiles at out Saudi Allies that are causing starvation of Children in Yemen by their military actions. not much news about that either.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/04/yemen-famine-feared-as-starving-children-fight-for-lives-in-hospital




thank you, yes.

Shooting missile at any sovereign nations military (or civilians) is an act of war.
that's a plain fact. the reason for attacking another nation that HAS NOT attacked you may justified as some AD HOC retaliation on others behalf but it's STILL an act of war.



If the alternatives were fighting a Scum Bag American dictator but if he's defeated Muslim extremist were almost guaranteed to replace him. Or fighting WITH the scum bag dictator to defeat the muslims extremist. Well Sadly i'd have to fight with or at least fight AGAINST the muslim extremist. If Putin came in and started attacking the Scum Bag American Dictator I might like it little but mostly i'd be pissed.

do you agree?I WILL agree that was incoherent.

[revelarts]

Yeah it was a false flag set up the John McCain and the neocons.


The two first links you sited said nothing of it "everyone found out it was the Rebels, not Assad". Only Seymour hersch, as I said. And he wrote a book about bin laden recently saying the government lied about that ,which has been refuted.
You certainly are way off when you say "everyone found out it was the Rebels, not Assad." And turkey was once allied Syria, so one should question them as much as they should question this fuckstick Balu.

the 1st 2 links said nothing?
they mentioned a couple of chem experts that thought the accusations against Assad were basically BS.

then i post Former Associated Press and Newsweek reporter – Robert Parry who mainly reported on the UN investigation.
that's not "ONLY" Semor Hersh is it BD?

I added in some AP stories on U.S. intel officials on the fact that rebels had access to WMDs
AND the Turkish news Confirmation of the Hersh article about the Syria .
So yeah EVERYONE who wanted to know VIA THE UN REPORTS found out that it was the rebels and NOT Assad.

But hey you can pretend it's false if you like.
believe whatever makes you feel good here BD , also make more jokes, and assumptions about bad motives .
that'll make all the facts go away.
maybe

[Gunny]

the 1st 2 links said nothing?
they mentioned a couple of chem experts that thought the accusations against Assad were basically BS.

then i post Former Associated Press and Newsweek reporter – Robert Parry who mainly reported on the UN investigation.
that's not "ONLY" Semor Hersh is it BD?

I added in some AP stories on U.S. intel officials on the fact that rebels had access to WMDs
AND the Turkish news Confirmation of the Hersh article about the Syria .
So yeah EVERYONE who wanted to know VIA THE UN REPORTS found out that it was the rebels and NOT Assad.

But hey you can pretend it's false if you like.
believe whatever makes you feel good here BD , also make more jokes, and assumptions about bad motives .
that'll make all the facts go away.
maybe


:rolleyes:

[revelarts]

My last post on this .. until next time.
earlier I posted the commentary from Col Wilkerson, Colin Powell's former chief of Staff under George Bush
He said HIS Contacts at the pentagon told him.

3:56..

... in accordance with the deconfliction agreement we have with Russia that they (Syria) hit a warehouse that they intended to hit and had told both sides, russia and the united states, that they were going to hit this, the a syrian air force of course, and this warehouse was alleged to have Isis supplies in it and indeed it probably did and some of those supplies were precursors for chemicals or possibly an alternative they were phosphates for the cotton growing fertilizing the cotton region that's adjacent to this area and the bombs hit, conventional bombs hit, the warehouse and because of a very strong wind and because of the explosive power of the bombs they dispersed these ingredients and killed some people and incidentally as Paul Pillar pointed out in a good article that I just read we have killed more people incidentally to our strikes and Assad has a number of ways.. that they were killed in this incident and Assad has a number of ways, including his artillery which by the way a no-fly zone would not stop of killing people and killing people in much greater numbers than this is he has demonstrated over the past years so this is this is nonsense to call this the kind of provocation of what we did for what we did unless one considers the rationale but I just suggested ....

.... I agree with the Russian ambassador that it would be good if we had an internationally sponsored hosted UN for example investigation and the forensic team that would accompany that but I don't think we're going to get that. And by and large I would think that the people who perpetrated this, shall we say hoax, would have the area cleaned up as much as possible before such a team got there so I'm not sure that would do anything. As i said in the in the bigger scheme of things Paul we kill more people with our airstrikes 'incidental collateral damage' if you will and we did in Mosul recently. yeah and besides Assad has killed tens of thousands of people with his barrel bombs and his artillery and so forth so this is really not that significant an incident and that and yet look what we did Paul we made it a 'Tonkin Gulf' we made it an 'Iraq WMD' so that we could make our strike we had no concern with whether it was a genuine provocation or not we just wanted something on which we could base our strike and we got it..."


Here is British Journalist that lives In Damascus, Syria
"Duggan is a British journalist that is now in Damascus. Duggan sat down to explain in this exclusive interview that the strike that happened at the hands of the Syrian Air Force was not a deliberate attack against the people, it was an attack on a rebel munitions factory that happened to have chemical weapons."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjOSZ6QgGgY

http://waynedupree.com/exclusive-british-journalist-syrian-air-force-hit-terrorist-munition-factory-which-released-gas-video/
other reports by Duggan
https://youtu.be/q8Jy2G-IgAY


FORMER UK Ambassador to SYRIA on Alleged Chemical Weapons Attack:
-It EXTREMELY UNLIKELY it was Assad-
You Tube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pS6Oa_aDS6E)

[revelarts]

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/c3/c6/bc/c3c6bc3af70978bfaa5b6e543bc22891.jpg

[Balu]

My last post on this .. until next time.
earlier I posted the commentary from Col Wilkerson, Colin Powell's former chief of Staff under George Bush
He said HIS Contacts at the pentagon told him.


Here is British Journalist that lives In Damascus, Syria
"Duggan is a British journalist that is now in Damascus. Duggan sat down to explain in this exclusive interview that the strike that happened at the hands of the Syrian Air Force was not a deliberate attack against the people, it was an attack on a rebel munitions factory that happened to have chemical weapons."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjOSZ6QgGgY

http://waynedupree.com/exclusive-british-journalist-syrian-air-force-hit-terrorist-munition-factory-which-released-gas-video/
other reports by Duggan
https://youtu.be/q8Jy2G-IgAY


FORMER UK Ambassador to SYRIA on Alleged Chemical Weapons Attack:
-It EXTREMELY UNLIKELY it was Assad-
You Tube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pS6Oa_aDS6E)

I don't think that Americans are so stupid not to understand and accept evident things. It seems that everything looks much worse - they accuse Assad intentionally being aware of a real state of facts. Why? - Their purpose is to dismiss Assad. Why? - He doesn't agree to construct a pipeline via Syria enabling the Qatar gas to be transported to Mediterranean for further destination to West Europe. The participation of Americans in this gas deal is very profitable from one side and it is weakening Russian positions on the European gas market from the other.
Think over, when Syrian "opposition" raised their heads. This is the key point. A clue to the conflict and the problem.

[sear]

"I don't think that Americans are so stupid not to understand and accept evident things." B #306

Then how did Trump get elected?

[Balu]

"I don't think that Americans are so stupid not to understand and accept evident things." B #306

Then how did Trump get elected?
He was elected by reasonable people understanding that his program was in the interests of the USA (the increase of working places, fighting against illegal emigration and terrorists, decrease of international tension). But who and how managed to effect him later, it is another pair of shoes. I have an answer to this question, but it is not for this, engaged audience.

[Kathianne]

He was elected by reasonable people understanding that his program was in the interests of the USA (the increase of working places, fighting against illegal emigration and terrorists, decrease of international tension). But who and how managed to effect him later, it is another pair of shoes. I have an answer to this question, but it is not for this, engaged audience.
NightTrain

See what I meant in my response to yours? http://hotair.com/archives/2017/04/09/trump-supporting-hackers-claim-to-release-nsa-archive-of-some-kind/

[NightTrain]

If they come to take your firearms i suspect you'll fully comply and not hide any. because it's the law.

I would not comply as it is my right as an American under the Constitution. That one is spelled out plainly so that even a simple man such as myself can understand it.



...Arar, a thirty-four-year-old graduate of McGill University whose family emigrated to Canada when he was a teen-ager, was arrested on September 26, 2002, at John F. Kennedy Airport. He was changing planes; he had been on vacation with his family in Tunisia, and was returning to Canada. Arar was detained because his name had been placed on the United States Watch List of terrorist suspects. He was held for the next thirteen days, as American officials questioned him about possible links to another suspected terrorist. Arar said that he barely knew the suspect, although he had worked with the man’s brother. Arar, who was not formally charged, was placed in handcuffs and leg irons by plainclothes officials and transferred to an executive jet. The plane flew to Washington, continued to Portland, Maine, stopped in Rome, Italy, then landed in Amman, Jordan.

During the flight, Arar said, he heard the pilots and crew identify themselves in radio communications as members of “the Special Removal Unit.” The Americans, he learned, planned to take him next to Syria. Having been told by his parents about the barbaric practices of the police in Syria, Arar begged crew members not to send him there, arguing that he would surely be tortured. His captors did not respond to his request; instead, they invited him to watch a spy thriller that was aired on board.
Ten hours after landing in Jordan, Arar said, he was driven to Syria, where interrogators, after a day of threats, “just began beating on me.” They whipped his hands repeatedly with two-inch-thick electrical cables, and kept him in a windowless underground cell that he likened to a grave. “Not even animals could withstand it,” he said. Although he initially tried to assert his innocence, he eventually confessed to anything his tormentors wanted him to say. “You just give up,” he said. “You become like an animal.”
A year later, in October, 2003, Arar was released without charges, after the Canadian government took up his cause. Imad Moustapha, the Syrian Ambassador in Washington, announced that his country had found no links between Arar and terrorism. Arar, it turned out, had been sent to Syria on orders from the U.S. government, under a secretive program known as “extraordinary rendition.”
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2005/02/14/outsourcing-torture

Lots of allegations but I don't see any proof that this happened.






On February 13 2017, Kim Jong-nam—the half-brother of North Korean leader Kim Jong-un—was killed (http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/08/asia/malaysia-north-korea-blame-kim-jong-nam/) at the airport in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Malaysian investigators have determined that two women, who have since been charged with murder, used VX nerve agent—a chemical weapon—in the assassination. Attribution has not yet been confirmed, but Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak has directly blamed North Korea (DPRK) for the assassination. In addition, U.S. and South Korean officials reportedly (http://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-malaysia-un-idUSKBN16F2NS) believe DPRK is responsible for the killing.
https://www.lawfareblog.com/did-north-koreas-use-vx-nerve-agent-violate-international-law

This was an assassination, not a chemical weapon attack.





March 4 2017
ISIS launches chemical weapon attack on women and children, including a two-month-old baby, in Mosul Iraq




The tiny baby is one of 12 people being treated in hospital after the attack
The 12, including women and children show signs of exposure to chemical weapons
Mortars are thought to have been fired from ISIS held west Mosul into the east
An emergency response plan has been activated by the UN World Health



http://conservativetribune.com/new-low-isis-uses-chemical/
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4281070/ISIS-guilty-war-crime-chemical-weapon-attack.html#ixzz4dnwinj3w

Yeah, and we're killing ISIS as we can. They're paying for it.


From January to August of 2016 the Sudanese gov't was accused of using Chemical weapons against it's people. Anyone shooting missile at them? nope. As a matter of fact the U.N. put reps of the Sudanese gov't onto the board OVERSEEING the use of chemical weapons. the Chemoc-l weapons watchdog executive council.
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2017/03/sudan-elevation-to-opcws-governing-body-a-slap-in-the-face-for-victims-of-chemical-attacks/

The Sudanese incidents happened, allegedly, in 2016 under 0bama's watch. I'm not interested in discussing his failures, they are too numerous to count and we already know he was an incompetent buffoon.


well OK if you think it's the best policy to let the gov't self police. And know that the U.S. military (brass or enlisted) never lie, make mistake, has bad members or commit atrocities. fine sure that makes sense.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/08/sides-using-illegal-white-phosphorus-firebombs-residents-donetsk-ukraine.html
the Battle Book, published by the U.S. Command and General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, contains the following sentence: “It is against the law of land warfare to employ WP against personnel targets.” (http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/army/docs/st100-3/c5/5sect3.htm)

U.S and Britian Evidence use here (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/20/iraq-war-anniversary-birth-defects-cancer_n_2917701.html), here (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/army-to-be-sued-for-war-crimes-over-its-role-in-fallujah-attacks-1961475.html), here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/4440664.stm), here (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/10/fallujah-birth-defects-ra_n_571119.html), here (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2005/nov/15/usa.iraq), here (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/us-forces-used-chemical-weapons-during-assault-on-city-of-fallujah-514433.html).
Saudi Arabia appears to be using U.S.-supplied white phosphorus ...
(https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2016/09/19/saudi-arabia-appears-to-be-using-u-s-supplied-white-phosphorus-in-its-war-in-yemen/)Seymour Hersh Says Hillary Clinton Approved Sending Libya's Sarin To Syrian Rebels Link (http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-05-01/seymour-hersh-says-hillary-approved-sending-libyas-sarin-syrian-rebels)
Israel also used white phosphorous (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/25/israel-white-phosphorus-gaza) in 2009 during “Operation Cast Lead” (and perhaps subsequently (http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=fda_1353192244)). Israel ratified Protocol III of Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (“Protocol III”) – which outlaws the use of incendiary devices in war – in 2007 (http://www.geneva-academy.ch/RULAC/international_treaties.php?id_state=113). So this was a war crime.

but you're right it is legal to use it

Legal in some applications, illegal in others. Journalists frequently call a Ruger 10/22 an AR-15, so I don't expect them to understand grenades, rockets, artillery rounds and other munitions uses & applications. Our military does, however, better than anyone.



you got me I should have said Treaties
link (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjoqcSV-5jTAhUC2GMKHWlJBUoQFgg0MAQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.latimes.com%2Fnation%2Fnation now%2Fla-na-un-torture-committee-police-shootings-20141128-story.html&usg=AFQjCNEUSvWaCn6Qog9DTP1FECm6NscadQ&bvm=bv.152174688,d.cGc), link (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjoqcSV-5jTAhUC2GMKHWlJBUoQFggnMAI&url=https%3A%2F%2Ftheintercept.com%2F2014%2F10%2F1 5%2Fun-investigator-report-condemns-mass-surveillance%2F&usg=AFQjCNFPJwaJulJ5nlsBoPunFHR-gVBIQg&bvm=bv.152174688,d.cGc),
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/leslie-griffith/us-quietly-breaks-un-trea_b_88347.html
https://newrepublic.com/article/119928/us-violates-un-convention-against-torture-signed-20-years-ago

However Israel has in fact broken "hundreds of resolutions", for good reason. but when's the last time we fired 56 missiles at them? never. we sell them arms.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/11/israel-has-violated-hundreds-of-un-resolutions.html
NKorea has broken several U.N. Resolutions, our response since Bush .. 'cough well, let china handle it.' any Chinese missiles?
Sudan, and Iran as well.
what we have here is Selective enforcement, And i have wonder about the real motives.

On one hand, you're railing against action taken against Syria's use of Chem Weapons, and on the other demanding we take action against NK?

Israel is another matter altogether.

You need to stay focused on the topic at hand, Rev. Tossing 48 balls up in the air makes for a very messy conversation and the result is that we don't get anywhere.




'depends on your point of view.'
and then there this ..where we support or a least don't shot 56 missiles at out Saudi Allies that are causing starvation of Children in Yemen by their military actions. not much news about that either.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/04/yemen-famine-feared-as-starving-children-fight-for-lives-in-hospital

There's a lot said about it. Look up Houthi rebels. They're backed by Iran and need to be exterminated.





thank you, yes.

Shooting missile at any sovereign nations military (or civilians) is an act of war.
that's a plain fact. the reason for attacking another nation that HAS NOT attacked you may justified as some AD HOC retaliation on others behalf but it's STILL an act of war.

No, that's not what I said. From the perspective of the hypothetical dictator it is an act of war, but from my perspective it is needed & justified assistance to remove a bloody killer.



If the alternatives were fighting a Scum Bag American dictator but if he's defeated Muslim extremist were almost guaranteed to replace him. Or fighting WITH the scum bag dictator to defeat the muslims extremist. Well Sadly i'd have to fight with or at least fight AGAINST the muslim extremist. If Putin came in and started attacking the Scum Bag American Dictator I might like it little but mostly i'd be pissed.

do you agree?

I played along with your hypothetical to indulge you, and I think I proved my point. Introducing more variables into the hypothetical isn't going to get us anywhere - it's preposterous to begin with.


And invoking an idiot like Seymour Hersch doesn't do you any favors. You may as well quote some Noam Chomsky while you're at it. Or the idiot at globalresearch.

I'll discuss with you all day long as long as we refrain from sourcing nutters.

[NightTrain]

I don't want and will not stop you to live in the world of own illusions...
As to Chemicals you first present the PROOFS. Then we'll talk. Otherwise your strike remains unfounded aggression against the sovereign country. ( speaking between us rather worthless and unskillful because less than 24 hours the flights resumed)
Such proofs of YOURS which costed MILLIONS lifes of INNOCENT people already doesn't satisfy anybody.



Proof? We tracked the 2 Syrian aircraft from that airfield to the site of the CW attack. The payload detonated, then we watched them return.

That's why we attacked that particular airfield.

[Balu]

Proof? We tracked the 2 Syrian aircraft from that airfield to the site of the CW attack. The payload detonated, then we watched them return.

That's why we attacked that particular airfield.
May be you misunderstood me? I spoke about the PROOFS that these fighters/bombers conducted CHEMICAL attack, but NOT the ordinary bombardment against terrorists. Are you prepared to present the MATERIAL evidence and data (fragments of the chemical bombs/missiles bodies, traces of chemicals from the terrain and from the bodies of victims, the samples and the analyses of their blood and skin, etc) proving it or not?

[NightTrain]

May be you misunderstood me? I spoke about the PROOFS that these fighters/bombers conducted CHEMICAL attack, but NOT the ordinary bombardment against terrorists. Are you prepared to present the MATERIAL evidence and data (fragments of the chemical bombs/missiles bodies, traces of chemicals from the terrain and from the bodies of victims, the samples and the analyses of their blood and skin, etc) proving it or not?

Oh, that's coming very soon indeed.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/world/middleeast/chemical-attack-syria.html

[jimnyc]

I'll still trust the survivors that were there when this happened, and watched the planes come in and drop bombs and then leave - and it wasn't hitting a terrorist warehouse. Both Assad, Russia and the USA "may" have reasons to lie - but I don't see why survivors would invent stories - that magically were the same as other survivors.

[jimnyc]

Let's also not forget Assad bombing the clinic trying to help the victims of the attack.

---

Bashar al-Assad just gassed his own people, then bombed the clinic treating victims

A suspected poison gas attack by the Syrian regime on the rebel-held town of Khan Sheikhoun has killed at least 74 people — including 16 women and 23 children — and wounded over 350, according to the Syrian American Medical Society. Videos and photos taken by activists and medics on the scene showed victims choking and fainting, some with foam coming out of their mouths. These videos and photos have not been independently verified.

A few hours later, Syrian warplanes launched another airstrike on one of the medical clinics where victims of the first attack were being treated, the New York Times reports. Let that sink in for a moment: Bashar al-Assad gassed his own people, then bombed those desperately trying to save the lives of those suffering and dying from the chemicals.

The European Union and President Recep Tayyip Erdoǧan of Turkey have condemned the attack and blamed the Syrian government. European Union diplomatic chief Federica Mogherini said the Assad regime bears "primary responsibility" for the attack. France has called for an emergency meeting of the United Nations Security Council, and the UN office responsible for chemical weapons is reportedly investigating the attack.

The White House condemned the attack as "heinous" and "reprehensible" and blamed the Obama administration for failing to be tougher on Assad.

"These heinous actions by the Bashar Assad regime are a consequence of the past administration’s weakness and irresolution," press secretary Sean Spicer said. "President Obama said in 2012 that he would establish a ‘red line’ against the use of chemical weapons and then did nothing."

http://www.vox.com/world/2017/4/4/15177166/bashar-al-assad-syria-poison-gas-attack-idlib-chemical-weapons-khan-sheikhoun

[Balu]

Oh, that's coming very soon indeed.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/world/middleeast/chemical-attack-syria.html
I enjoyed THE WORDS which were to be convincing. But... the pictures spoiled everything again. :laugh:

https://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/04/07/world/07Syria1/07Syria1-master768.jpg

A victim of an attack in the Syrian province of Idlib at a hospital in Reyhanli, Turkey, on Tuesday. Justice Minister Bekir Bozdag of Turkey was quoted as saying that autopsies conducted on three Syrians brought to his country after the attack showed they had been subjected to a chemical agent.

https://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/04/05/world/05Syria2/05Syria2-master1050.jpg

Evidence From Victims Points to Nerve Gas in Syria Attack

Beautiful composition. Straight a still life. http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/standart/good.gif
For your information the CONTAMINATION of the area remains at least for EIGHT HOURS (!!!). So, where were those from the second picture buried. The didn't say? :laugh: :slap:

Well, jokes apart. Once again - can you present PROOFS but not words under the pictures from Lord knows where? Show the shell-crater at least. By the dept and square it can be determined if it was a Chemical or HE bomb. btw this is a place were the fragments of bomb bodies or their fuses may be found. :laugh: :slap:

[Kathianne]

Oh, that's coming very soon indeed.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/world/middleeast/chemical-attack-syria.html


NT, you gotta learn commie propaganda speech, he demands you give proof he'll accept, though he never will. Meanwhile all his proof is via the Kremlin press.

[Abbey Marie]

Oh, that's coming very soon indeed.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/world/middleeast/chemical-attack-syria.html

:clap:

[Gunny]

He's an idiot. I would try the Sear quote, but I'm not going to look for the post number. Balu says there's no proof. I guess those dead bodies just miracled themselves there. WAIT! I GOT IT! They gassed themselves just to get Assad in trouble.:rolleyes: No THERE's a plan.

Shut the F- up you stupid commie blithering idiot propaganda idiot. You're about as much of an officer as I have hair.

[Kathianne]

He's an idiot. I would try the Sear quote, but I'm not going to look for the post number. Balu says there's no proof. I guess those dead bodies just miracled themselves there. WAIT! I GOT IT! They gassed themselves just to get Assad in trouble.:rolleyes: No THERE's a plan.

Shut the F- up you stupid commie blithering idiot propaganda idiot. You're about as much of an officer as I have hair.

Yep, for Balu the Turkish autopsies would not be 'proof.' Obviously they would just be part of the false flag to blame Assad and thereby impugn Russia's reputation. It's all a conspiracy.

[Gunny]

Yep, for Balu the Turkish autopsies would not be 'proof.' Obviously they would just be part of the false flag to blame Assad and thereby impugn Russia's reputation. It's all a conspiracy.Well you know pinning the tail on a known dictatorial despot and Russia lackey is proving he's a known dictatorial despot and Russian lackey. I'm quite sure there's some genius somewhere in THAT theory.:rolleyes:

Balu is the one impugning Russia's reputation with me. I used to consider them a competent foe. Now I know why they made us run all those miles in combat boots. So we could keep up with the Russians running away from us.

[Kathianne]

Well you know pinning the tail on a known dictatorial despot and Russia lackey is proving he's a known dictatorial despot and Russian lackey. I'm quite sure there's some genius somewhere in THAT theory.:rolleyes:

Balu is the one impugning Russia's reputation with me. I used to consider them a competent foe. Now I know why they made us run all those miles in combat boots. So we could keep up with the Russians running away from us.

I'd bet though that their real soldiers are not so big on running, indeed WWII and even Afghanistan showed that. He's a mouthpiece, nothing more.

[Black Diamond]

I'd bet though that their real soldiers are not so big on running, indeed WWII and even Afghanistan showed that. He's a mouthpiece, nothing more.
Stalin had a rule: anyone who retreats gets shot. Maybe if someone held a gun to Balu's head, he'd take people off ignore.

[Gunny]

I'd bet though that their real soldiers are not so big on running, indeed WWII and even Afghanistan showed that. He's a mouthpiece, nothing more.No, the real ones don't run. They come out and fight. Unlike a certain toy soldier (hope I didn't just offend Laurel n Hardy).

[Drummond]

I enjoyed THE WORDS which were to be convincing. But... the pictures spoiled everything again. :laugh:

https://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/04/07/world/07Syria1/07Syria1-master768.jpg

A victim of an attack in the Syrian province of Idlib at a hospital in Reyhanli, Turkey, on Tuesday. Justice Minister Bekir Bozdag of Turkey was quoted as saying that autopsies conducted on three Syrians brought to his country after the attack showed they had been subjected to a chemical agent.

https://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/04/05/world/05Syria2/05Syria2-master1050.jpg

Evidence From Victims Points to Nerve Gas in Syria Attack

Beautiful composition. Straight a still life. http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/standart/good.gif
For your information the CONTAMINATION of the area remains at least for EIGHT HOURS (!!!). So, where were those from the second picture buried. The didn't say? :laugh: :slap:

Well, jokes apart. Once again - can you present PROOFS but not words under the pictures from Lord knows where? Show the shell-crater at least. By the dept and square it can be determined if it was a Chemical or HE bomb. btw this is a place were the fragments of bomb bodies or their fuses may be found. :laugh: :slap:

It's true, isn't it, Balu. You'll only listen to anything that happens to agree with your own propaganda. Anything else, you'll try to deride, or ignore.

In this case, it's a matter of ignoring an inconvenient truth.

I have already posted my own link, TWICE OVER, which shows an authoritative source saying that if subjected to an explosion, Sarin would be unlikely to remain a viably active chemical. Therefore, your claim it would remain as a contaminant for a minimum eight hours is bogus.

I've seen NightTrain's link. From it, I found another link which independently says the same thing ...

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/05/world/middleeast/russia-account-syria-chemical-attack.html?action=click&contentCollection=Middle%20East&module=RelatedCoverage&region=Marginalia&pgtype=article


There is no independent evidence that a chemical weapons facility existed in that area. Several witnesses who described the early morning attack said a second airstrike hit a clinic treating victims.

Also, if a chemical weapons facility had been hit, the resulting explosion would most likely have caused the chemical to burn up, international weapons experts say. And a nerve agent like sarin is not likely to be stored in its active form in such a facility, and its components would need to be mixed to be lethal.

So, Balu, if Sarin killed or harmed those nearby, this could only have credibly occurred as a direct result from an airstrike, WHERE SARIN HAD BEEN DROPPED BY PLANES OVERFLYING THE AREA.

The Russian account just isn't credible, Balu. You people will go to any lengths to protect your buddy, Assad, from culpability for his actions.

[Drummond]

Marvelous! Especially that there WERE NO proofs that Syrians made this chemical attack. I am applauding standing! :clap::clap:

... OK. If not the Syrians, then ... are you claiming that your own airforce was responsible ?

It's an interesting situation, if so. The scenario of Russia using a chemical WMD, on a foreign territory it doesn't govern or have any direct political responsibility for, other than that of an 'ally' to those who 'do'.

That very act is terrible enough in itself. To do so against a foreign territory, one you're not - strictly speaking - even in a state of war against .... I'd say is orders of magnitude worse. [You may not, but I would.]

Shocking stuff, eh, Balu ?

Of course, you COULD admit that Assad's people were responsible.

Try it.

They say (well, in my part of the world they do, anyway ..) that 'confession is good for the soul'.

[Drummond]

I would recommend you to read our Military Doctrine and think about your holey Missile Defense system. No, he wouldn't escalate. He WILL START with nuke strike as a DEFENSIVE measure against USA aggressor, according to DOCTRINE. So don't treat our kindness for our weakness.
And do pay attention that once Putin named you an aggressor and Putin is not an emotional person. He always thinks before talking.

... 'Sorry' ... but I'm not sure I'm following this. Because if I am, Balu, you've just admitted that Putin is likely to start a nuclear war ?

So. 'Doctrine' is going to determine Putin's deployment of nukes ? You said 'HE WILL START'. So, he won't deploy according to a reaction to anything ? He'll INITIATE an attack ?? Just from the excuse of choosing to see the US as an aggressor, this ALONE will see him start a nuclear war ??

Putin may not be an emotional person. But if your account is accurate, he may well be dangerously insane. It's as I've said before .. Putin is a big threat to world security. The West trusts him at its peril.

After all, he's already tried to move mountains to defend a nation's leader's deployment of a WMD. Such a mentality must be capable of anything. Except, that is, being a reliable role model for decent human conduct !

[Kathianne]

I would recommend you to read our Military Doctrine and think about your holey Missile Defense system. No, he wouldn't escalate. He WILL START with nuke strike as a DEFENSIVE measure against USA aggressor, according to DOCTRINE. So don't treat our kindness for our weakness.
And do pay attention that once Putin named you an aggressor and Putin is not an emotional person. He always thinks before talking.

However, it appears you don't. First strike is not something to talk about without the Kremlin's approval. This is one of those posts that does need to be reported to the authorities. I don't know how I missed it earlier.

You are likely to have your posting history, along with all the propaganda scrutinized by more than the likes of us.

[aboutime]

Since part of my life was dedicated to, and used successfully to change my life. I suggest that BALU needs to become familiar with a 12 Step plan. The most important step being DENIAL.
Balu has obviously been SPOON FED all of the PUTIN propaganda Soup, mixed with threats of Extermination...if he ever agree's with any of us who continue to tell him...we are not fooled by his propaganda.

Comrad Balu. You need to find a Russian Forum where EVERYONE agree's with you, because of your MUTUAL BRAINWASHING.

[revelarts]

Any information that comes from the Turks is suspect in when it comes to Assad and Syria.

Turkey has been supplying, training, "Syrian rebel" and acting as the staging base into Syria.
And are a 100% by any means neccecary enemy of Assad since the beginning of the "civil war".

They've consistently and lavishly helped ANYONE who's fighting to topple Assad, including Al Nusra, ISIS and AQ (http://www.rt.com/news/192880-biden-isis-us-allies/). (the Sadia, Jordanian, Quatares and othe ME nations plus the New AQ L led ibyain are also backing and supplying troops calling themselves "SYRIAN rebels")
And Turkey Is somewhat a surrogate for the U.S..
So can anyone say with any real confidence (not born of blind faith) that we aren't purposely supporting terrorist?
Can anyone say with any hard confidence that what we are told by Turkish doctors is TRUE about Sarin gas?
Is it possible that the "rebels" might have Sarin gas ... or other chemical weapons and used it to set Assad up?

here's an old bit of news to consider.


CNN
December 9th, 2012

Sources: U.S. helping underwrite Syrian rebel training on securing chemical weapons
By Elise Labott

The United States and some European allies are using defense contractors to train Syrian rebels on how to secure chemical weapons stockpiles in Syria, a senior U.S. official and several senior diplomats told CNN Sunday.

The training, which is taking place in Jordan and Turkey, involves how to monitor and secure stockpiles and handle weapons sites and materials, according to the sources. Some of the contractors are on the ground in Syria working with the rebels to monitor some of the sites, according to one of the officials.

The nationality of the trainers was not disclosed, though the officials cautioned against assuming all are American.

One of the aims, the sources said, is to try to get real time surveillance of the sites because the international community would not have time to prevent the use of the weapons otherwise. The program could explain how U.S. intelligence was able to learn what U.S. officials said was evidence the Assad government is mixing precursors for chemical weapons and loading those compounds into bombs. The intelligence, one U.S. official told CNN last week, came not just from satellite surveillance, but also from information provided by people. The official would not say whether the human intelligence came from telephone intercepts, defectors or people inside Syria.

The U.S. military is also working with neighboring Jordan's military to train for the potential need to secure chemical weapons sites. But U.S. troops cannot train rebel forces because the United States has only authorized nonlethal aid for the opposition.

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad seems to be backing off, at least for now, on the possible use of chemical weapons, after the major international outcry over the military activity, according to several sources. CNN reported Friday that the bombs are not being moved to any delivery devices and that the United States was not aware of any significant additional movement of chemical materials.

The Russians, who have allied with Syria, sent several strong messages to the Assad government over the past week against using chemical weapons, saying doing so would be a red line and Assad would lose Russia's support if he did. However, the sources said that the lull in activity could be short-lived and they believe that, if desperate enough, Assad would not hesitate to use such weapons.Sources: U.S. helping underwrite Syrian rebel training on securing chemical weapons – CNN Security Clearance - CNN.com Blogs (http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/12/09/sources-defense-contractors-training-syrian-rebels-in-chemical-weapons/?hpt=hp_t3)

But sure,

the U.S. Gov't NEVER gets it wrong.... and never lies
ASSAD is a bad guy, he's just lying.
Russia always lies and U.S. official and intel agencies always tell the truth in military matters.
and there's NO WAY the rebels could have done it.
it's not like they didn't overrun several cities where Chemical munitions were stored and made in Syria.

[revelarts]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmfVs3WaE9Y


Nayirah al-Ṣabaḥ (Arabic: نيره الصباح‎), called "Nurse Nayirah" in the media, was a fifteen-year-old Kuwaiti girl, who alleged that she had witnessed the murder of infant children by Iraqi soldiers in Kuwait, in verbal testimony to the U.S. Congress, in the run up to the 1991 Gulf War. Her testimony, which was regarded as credible at the time, has since come to be regarded as wartime propaganda. The public relations firm Hill & Knowlton, which was in the employ of Citizens for a Free Kuwait, had arranged the testimony. Nayirah's testimony was widely publicized. Hill & Knowlton, which had filmed the hearing, sent out a video news release to Medialink, a firm which served about 700 television stations in the United States. That night, portions of the testimony aired on ABC's Nightline and NBC Nightly News reaching an estimated audience between 35 and 53 million Americans. Seven senators cited Nayirah's testimony in their speeches backing the use of force. President George Bush repeated the story at least ten times in the following weeks. (Wikipedia)

She Did not SEE JACK.

But HEY the Gov't wouldn't "make a mistake" on what others country's military do.
that's just CRAZY TALK.
RUSSIAN PROPAGANDA!!!

[Gunny]

Good thing you got 2 run-on posts of psycho-babble that no one's going to read .... Do you and balu buy ech other rounds?

[Balu]

However, it appears you don't. First strike is not something to talk about without the Kremlin's approval. This is one of those posts that does need to be reported to the authorities. I don't know how I missed it earlier.

You are likely to have your posting history, along with all the propaganda scrutinized by more than the likes of us.
You'd better cook the cakes in the kitchen if you know how, rather than speaking about air attacks, types of bombs and chemicals you have NO clue about. So, go and start. http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/light_skin/bye.gif
Before you go, DO enjoy the latest fashion of the suits for the rescuers working at areas CONTAMINATED by Sarin.

http://kapterka.su/published/publicdata/KAPTERKADB/attachments/SC/products_pictures/2088093_enl.jpg

[Balu]

Any information that comes from the Turks is suspect in when it comes to Assad and Syria.

Turkey has been supplying, training, "Syrian rebel" and acting as the staging base into Syria.
And are a 100% by any means neccecary enemy of Assad since the beginning of the "civil war".

They've consistently and lavishly helped ANYONE who's fighting to topple Assad, including Al Nusra, ISIS and AQ (http://www.rt.com/news/192880-biden-isis-us-allies/). (the Sadia, Jordanian, Quatares and othe ME nations plus the New AQ L led ibyain are also backing and supplying troops calling themselves "SYRIAN rebels")
And Turkey Is somewhat a surrogate for the U.S..
So can anyone say with any real confidence (not born of blind faith) that we aren't purposely supporting terrorist?
Can anyone say with any hard confidence that what we are told by Turkish doctors is TRUE about Sarin gas?
Is it possible that the "rebels" might have Sarin gas ... or other chemical weapons and used it to set Assad up?

here's an old bit of news to consider.



But sure,

the U.S. Gov't NEVER gets it wrong.... and never lies
ASSAD is a bad guy, he's just lying.
Russia always lies and U.S. official and intel agencies always tell the truth in military matters.
and there's NO WAY the rebels could have done it.
it's not like they didn't overrun several cities where Chemical munitions were stored and made in Syria.
Thank you for you will to start THINKING and ANALYZING. :slap:

[Balu]

This may be interesting for smart but not stupid Americans of this board. There are too many words to understand, besides they'll be forced to think concentrating attention and following the line for unacceptably long time. So, without their habit for this process to understand the content is an unsolvable task for them to my great regret. http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/light_skin/sorry.gif


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f42SDfT4eT8

P.S.
For local dummies - I am extremely happy that finally Putin let me have an access to this info. Today is my day! http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/standart/dance3.gif

[Drummond]

This may be interesting for smart but not stupid Americans of this board. There are too many words to understand, besides they'll be forced to think concentrating attention and following the line for unacceptably long time. So, without their habit for this process to understand the content is an unsolvable task for them to my great regret. http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/light_skin/sorry.gif


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f42SDfT4eT8

P.S.
For local dummies - I am extremely happy that finally Putin let me have an access to this info. Today is my day! http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/standart/dance3.gif

Wow. Your information about Myco-ZX is a lifechanger .. so vital to know !!! Please pass on our grateful appreciation to President Putin ... :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

So, Balu. I've posted at least THREE times, now, that if a Sarin stockpike had been bombed, it wouldn't have survived that as an active chemical. I've still yet to see a direct reply from you about that.

.. Because, surely, this simple fact proves how bogus the Syrian / Russian claims are ?

Balu, be sensible and finally give it up. ADMIT Assad's culpability .. ADMIT he launched a chemical attack !!

[Drummond]

Wow. Your information about Myco-ZX is a lifechanger .. so vital to know !!! Please pass on our grateful appreciation to President Putin ... :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

So, Balu. I've posted at least THREE times, now, that if a Sarin stockpike had been bombed, it wouldn't have survived that as an active chemical. I've still yet to see a direct reply from you about that.

.. Because, surely, this simple fact proves how bogus the Syrian / Russian claims are ?

Balu, be sensible and finally give it up. ADMIT Assad's culpability .. ADMIT he launched a chemical attack !!

By the way ...on 'InfoWars' ... I understand that there's a piece there claiming a 'false flag' report ?

Its author turns out to be a Scott Adams.

See this ..

https://www.infowars.com/scott-adams-syria-gas-attack-a-false-flag/


Scott Raymond Adams (born June 8, 1957) is the creator of the Dilbert comic strip and the author of several nonfiction works of satire, commentary, business, and general speculation.

He's a satirist and cartoonist, Balu !! I used to enjoy seeing his 'Dilbert' cartoons ... and the megolomaniacal 'Dogbert' was a favourite character of mine ...

Well, Balu, I'd say you're getting a tad desperate .. if you need to call upon an American cartoonist to back you up !!

http://www.debatepolicy.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=9840&stc=1

[debater]

One wonders if US wars lead to terrorism, refugees, debt, and tyranny.

[aboutime]

One wonders if US wars lead to terrorism, refugees, debt, and tyranny.


How's it feel to know YOU are in our thoughts when we sit to take a DEBATER?
<img src="https://i.pinimg.com/736x/34/a2/7f/34a27fc1933c3bde2e3c8ff078708da4--funny-military-military-memes.jpg">

[debater]

War is peace; freedom is slavery; ignorance is strength.

[Black Diamond]

War is peace; freedom is slavery; ignorance is strength.
You must be Charles Atlas

[Gunny]

War is peace; freedom is slavery; ignorance is strength.Ignorance is bliss.

[debater]

When the tyrant has disposed of foreign enemies by conquest or treaty, and there is nothing to fear from them, then he is always stirring up some war or other, in order that the people may require a leader.

[Black Diamond]

stop this MFer. he's crazy.

[debater]

Most people would prefer to ignore a hard fact rather than face it.

[darin]

debater removed from thread.

[Drummond]

One wonders if US wars lead to terrorism, refugees, debt, and tyranny.

Nobody sane would 'wonder' any such thing.

But maybe a propagandist adversary 'would'.

[Drummond]

Most people would prefer to ignore a hard fact rather than face it.

Try, then, facing some facts about the repressive nature of the country you're from. You might like to begin with an examination of your own Government's human rights record.

[Black Diamond]

War is when your government tells you who the enemy is. A revolution is when you figure it out yourself.
You.....

sound familiar.