Syria and the US's Motive
Comments
-
Wow...a massive rip on Obama from one of Clinton's people
0 -
if he's fighting al qaeda and isis - the last thing he needs is having his people turn on him ... gassing his own people is not only impossible because he has no chemical weapons - it is totally illogical ... watch interviews of assad - he is not some raging dictator lunatic trope ...Jason P said:
Once the body count goes past 400K, I don't think being endeared by your people is near the top of your to-do list. He has Russia backing him, ready to lie. Just tell the people he has under control that terrorist did it (like he is), so he isn't losing any shame to them.polaris_x said:
you got to be kidding me ...Jason P said:
Assad was testing a new leader and how Trump would respond. One week after Trump Administration say hands off and we have a chemical weapons attack. It makes sense. Water held.polaris_x said:
uhhh ... this doesn't make any sense ... chemical attack just happened = US intervention ... so, your theory holds absolutely no water ...Jason P said:If all the past chemical attacks were done by the terrorists / rebels in hopes of pullling the west into action and the all failed .... why would the terrorists / rebels try doing it again after the White House indicated they were not going to interfere with Syria.
You would have to be a pretty stupid terrorist / rebel to think that would work.
But if your a brutal dictator that maybe didn't turn over all of your chemical weapons and just heard the White House say they were going to be hands off, I'd think that would be a good time to go shooting some chemical weapons.
syria is finally winning the war, they even have a US congresswoman supporting them, trump has stated that they don't want to intervene ... so, the smart thing to do is then gas your own people!?? ... c'mon ... this is not thinking critically ... what does assad gain? ... does he endear himself to his people - no ... does he garner more international support - no ... international support he desperately needs because he is fighting fucking al qaeda AND ISIS ...0 -
do you even know who syria the syrian gov't is fighting?BS44325 said:
Because maybe they were not "finally winning the war". The Arab states have banded together and have been pushing back against the Syrian/Iranian axis. Iran has spent a lot of money (Obama money) and lost a lot of fighters during this battle. The US has begun to back up the Arab states and Syria/Iran will run out of time.polaris_x said:
you got to be kidding me ...Jason P said:
Assad was testing a new leader and how Trump would respond. One week after Trump Administration say hands off and we have a chemical weapons attack. It makes sense. Water held.polaris_x said:
uhhh ... this doesn't make any sense ... chemical attack just happened = US intervention ... so, your theory holds absolutely no water ...Jason P said:If all the past chemical attacks were done by the terrorists / rebels in hopes of pullling the west into action and the all failed .... why would the terrorists / rebels try doing it again after the White House indicated they were not going to interfere with Syria.
You would have to be a pretty stupid terrorist / rebel to think that would work.
But if your a brutal dictator that maybe didn't turn over all of your chemical weapons and just heard the White House say they were going to be hands off, I'd think that would be a good time to go shooting some chemical weapons.
syria is finally winning the war, they even have a US congresswoman supporting them, trump has stated that they don't want to intervene ... so, the smart thing to do is then gas your own people!?? ... c'mon ... this is not thinking critically ... what does assad gain? ... does he endear himself to his people - no ... does he garner more international support - no ... international support he desperately needs because he is fighting fucking al qaeda AND ISIS ...0 -
"Watch interviews of Assad"? Wow.polaris_x said:
if he's fighting al qaeda and isis - the last thing he needs is having his people turn on him ... gassing his own people is not only impossible because he has no chemical weapons - it is totally illogical ... watch interviews of assad - he is not some raging dictator lunatic trope ...Jason P said:
Once the body count goes past 400K, I don't think being endeared by your people is near the top of your to-do list. He has Russia backing him, ready to lie. Just tell the people he has under control that terrorist did it (like he is), so he isn't losing any shame to them.polaris_x said:
you got to be kidding me ...Jason P said:
Assad was testing a new leader and how Trump would respond. One week after Trump Administration say hands off and we have a chemical weapons attack. It makes sense. Water held.polaris_x said:
uhhh ... this doesn't make any sense ... chemical attack just happened = US intervention ... so, your theory holds absolutely no water ...Jason P said:If all the past chemical attacks were done by the terrorists / rebels in hopes of pullling the west into action and the all failed .... why would the terrorists / rebels try doing it again after the White House indicated they were not going to interfere with Syria.
You would have to be a pretty stupid terrorist / rebel to think that would work.
But if your a brutal dictator that maybe didn't turn over all of your chemical weapons and just heard the White House say they were going to be hands off, I'd think that would be a good time to go shooting some chemical weapons.
syria is finally winning the war, they even have a US congresswoman supporting them, trump has stated that they don't want to intervene ... so, the smart thing to do is then gas your own people!?? ... c'mon ... this is not thinking critically ... what does assad gain? ... does he endear himself to his people - no ... does he garner more international support - no ... international support he desperately needs because he is fighting fucking al qaeda AND ISIS ...0 -
maybe ... that's possible ... it's just another piece that I use to come to my conclusions ... along with reading independent reports ... which despite what you may think, do exist ...mrussel1 said:
I know you're mad about Amnesty not returning your complaints, but the fact that they didn't care about your money doesn't mean they are nefarious. It means it wasn't important to the the person that got the message.polaris_x said:
it's the definition of critical thinking ... it's how I know global warming is real and not ... by your accounts - no one knows if global is warming is real because no matter where you go there are biases ... that's simply not the case ... if that was true - there would be no such thing as truths ...mrussel1 said:
That's hopelessly naive to believe that bias doesn't infiltrate reporting and there was a time when that was more generally true. So Amnesty posts its methodology and you think it is weak. But then some other source posts theirs and you think it's more solid. How do you know the more solid one is intellectually honest? Maybe the 'weaker' one is the more accurate because they are more transparent?polaris_x said:
this is sad ...HughFreakingDillon said:
I was just about to say pretty much the same thing. everything has a source. everyone has their opinions on what sources are credible and which aren't, and it runs the gamut. everything is owned by someone, nothing is independent or non-partisan. it just doesn't exist anymore.mrussel1 said:
The problem here is that both sides will spin whatever evidence they have to make their point. There are zero publications you can read to achieve what you are advocating here. It all comes down to which sources you believe to be more accurate (which unfortunately is usually confirmation bias). The only way to know is to be on the ground. I know that I never believe jack shit about what a Russian publication says.polaris_x said:again ... why don't y'all spend the weekend and do some research and figure this thing out on your own ... read from all the sources ... see which ones have more evidence and facts to back up the claims ...
so ... there is no such thing as truth anymore to anyone because so many people are willing to distort it for their own beliefs? ...
honestly, if you don't really care what's going on there and you don't want to take the time ... just say so ... but pulling this shit is pathetic ...
in your example - i would tell which is more believable based on the information provided me ... as objectively as possible ... i was a donor to amnesty for a good 20 years up until recently ... i emailed everyone and called them about their reporting on syria and i got nothing back ... so, it's not like I refuted amnesty's claims because it posted something I didn't like ...0 -
why wow? ... please explain ... can't wait to hear this ...BS44325 said:
"Watch interviews of Assad"? Wow.polaris_x said:
if he's fighting al qaeda and isis - the last thing he needs is having his people turn on him ... gassing his own people is not only impossible because he has no chemical weapons - it is totally illogical ... watch interviews of assad - he is not some raging dictator lunatic trope ...Jason P said:
Once the body count goes past 400K, I don't think being endeared by your people is near the top of your to-do list. He has Russia backing him, ready to lie. Just tell the people he has under control that terrorist did it (like he is), so he isn't losing any shame to them.polaris_x said:
you got to be kidding me ...Jason P said:
Assad was testing a new leader and how Trump would respond. One week after Trump Administration say hands off and we have a chemical weapons attack. It makes sense. Water held.polaris_x said:
uhhh ... this doesn't make any sense ... chemical attack just happened = US intervention ... so, your theory holds absolutely no water ...Jason P said:If all the past chemical attacks were done by the terrorists / rebels in hopes of pullling the west into action and the all failed .... why would the terrorists / rebels try doing it again after the White House indicated they were not going to interfere with Syria.
You would have to be a pretty stupid terrorist / rebel to think that would work.
But if your a brutal dictator that maybe didn't turn over all of your chemical weapons and just heard the White House say they were going to be hands off, I'd think that would be a good time to go shooting some chemical weapons.
syria is finally winning the war, they even have a US congresswoman supporting them, trump has stated that they don't want to intervene ... so, the smart thing to do is then gas your own people!?? ... c'mon ... this is not thinking critically ... what does assad gain? ... does he endear himself to his people - no ... does he garner more international support - no ... international support he desperately needs because he is fighting fucking al qaeda AND ISIS ...0 -
you didn't "strike a nerve". god I hate that passive agressive shit.polaris_x said:
i'm sorry ... but what's going on in syria are massive crimes against humanity ... so, when I ask people to do a little bit of research so that they better understand the issue - all I get is that there is no way of finding out the truth there because everyone is biased .... do you know how frustrating that is to hear? ... the fucking terrorists groups there (al qaeda, isis, etc..) are using children in propoganda campaigns ... and no one is reporting the truth in western media ...HughFreakingDillon said:
gee, thanks. have a wonderful fucking day.polaris_x said:
this is sad ...HughFreakingDillon said:
I was just about to say pretty much the same thing. everything has a source. everyone has their opinions on what sources are credible and which aren't, and it runs the gamut. everything is owned by someone, nothing is independent or non-partisan. it just doesn't exist anymore.mrussel1 said:
The problem here is that both sides will spin whatever evidence they have to make their point. There are zero publications you can read to achieve what you are advocating here. It all comes down to which sources you believe to be more accurate (which unfortunately is usually confirmation bias). The only way to know is to be on the ground. I know that I never believe jack shit about what a Russian publication says.polaris_x said:again ... why don't y'all spend the weekend and do some research and figure this thing out on your own ... read from all the sources ... see which ones have more evidence and facts to back up the claims ...
so ... there is no such thing as truth anymore to anyone because so many people are willing to distort it for their own beliefs? ...
honestly, if you don't really care what's going on there and you don't want to take the time ... just say so ... but pulling this shit is pathetic ...
so, i'm sorry if i struck a nerve with you but I say if you don't want to do a little research on a topic - then just say so ... but don't use biases as a reason for not ...
I just have zero patience for the tower-dwellers who constantly shout down to the idiots "do your research!" then say "but only my sources, yours are wrong!"
I never said I didn't want to do research. that is an incorrect assumption you made. what I said was that all sources have SOME bias, whether you want to believe that or not is your issue.By The Time They Figure Out What Went Wrong, We'll Be Sitting On A Beach, Earning Twenty Percent.0 -
0
-
I thought western media didn't report the truth?polaris_x said:By The Time They Figure Out What Went Wrong, We'll Be Sitting On A Beach, Earning Twenty Percent.0 -
No. You please explain how you can fall for the refined talk of a lying murderous thug.polaris_x said:
why wow? ... please explain ... can't wait to hear this ...BS44325 said:
"Watch interviews of Assad"? Wow.polaris_x said:
if he's fighting al qaeda and isis - the last thing he needs is having his people turn on him ... gassing his own people is not only impossible because he has no chemical weapons - it is totally illogical ... watch interviews of assad - he is not some raging dictator lunatic trope ...Jason P said:
Once the body count goes past 400K, I don't think being endeared by your people is near the top of your to-do list. He has Russia backing him, ready to lie. Just tell the people he has under control that terrorist did it (like he is), so he isn't losing any shame to them.polaris_x said:
you got to be kidding me ...Jason P said:
Assad was testing a new leader and how Trump would respond. One week after Trump Administration say hands off and we have a chemical weapons attack. It makes sense. Water held.polaris_x said:
uhhh ... this doesn't make any sense ... chemical attack just happened = US intervention ... so, your theory holds absolutely no water ...Jason P said:If all the past chemical attacks were done by the terrorists / rebels in hopes of pullling the west into action and the all failed .... why would the terrorists / rebels try doing it again after the White House indicated they were not going to interfere with Syria.
You would have to be a pretty stupid terrorist / rebel to think that would work.
But if your a brutal dictator that maybe didn't turn over all of your chemical weapons and just heard the White House say they were going to be hands off, I'd think that would be a good time to go shooting some chemical weapons.
syria is finally winning the war, they even have a US congresswoman supporting them, trump has stated that they don't want to intervene ... so, the smart thing to do is then gas your own people!?? ... c'mon ... this is not thinking critically ... what does assad gain? ... does he endear himself to his people - no ... does he garner more international support - no ... international support he desperately needs because he is fighting fucking al qaeda AND ISIS ...0 -
Well Assad is a British trained ophthalmologist, so I would not expect him to act like Joseph Stalin.polaris_x said:
why wow? ... please explain ... can't wait to hear this ...BS44325 said:
"Watch interviews of Assad"? Wow.polaris_x said:
if he's fighting al qaeda and isis - the last thing he needs is having his people turn on him ... gassing his own people is not only impossible because he has no chemical weapons - it is totally illogical ... watch interviews of assad - he is not some raging dictator lunatic trope ...Jason P said:
Once the body count goes past 400K, I don't think being endeared by your people is near the top of your to-do list. He has Russia backing him, ready to lie. Just tell the people he has under control that terrorist did it (like he is), so he isn't losing any shame to them.polaris_x said:
you got to be kidding me ...Jason P said:
Assad was testing a new leader and how Trump would respond. One week after Trump Administration say hands off and we have a chemical weapons attack. It makes sense. Water held.polaris_x said:
uhhh ... this doesn't make any sense ... chemical attack just happened = US intervention ... so, your theory holds absolutely no water ...Jason P said:If all the past chemical attacks were done by the terrorists / rebels in hopes of pullling the west into action and the all failed .... why would the terrorists / rebels try doing it again after the White House indicated they were not going to interfere with Syria.
You would have to be a pretty stupid terrorist / rebel to think that would work.
But if your a brutal dictator that maybe didn't turn over all of your chemical weapons and just heard the White House say they were going to be hands off, I'd think that would be a good time to go shooting some chemical weapons.
syria is finally winning the war, they even have a US congresswoman supporting them, trump has stated that they don't want to intervene ... so, the smart thing to do is then gas your own people!?? ... c'mon ... this is not thinking critically ... what does assad gain? ... does he endear himself to his people - no ... does he garner more international support - no ... international support he desperately needs because he is fighting fucking al qaeda AND ISIS ...0 -
Even more scary that Assad isn't a raging lunatic. He keeps his pulse under 60 while carpet bombing Aleppo. Demoralize the population by giving zero fucks on if your enemy or your citizens are killed and herd them out. Siege the city and starve everyone out.polaris_x said:
if he's fighting al qaeda and isis - the last thing he needs is having his people turn on him ... gassing his own people is not only impossible because he has no chemical weapons - it is totally illogical ... watch interviews of assad - he is not some raging dictator lunatic trope ...Jason P said:
Once the body count goes past 400K, I don't think being endeared by your people is near the top of your to-do list. He has Russia backing him, ready to lie. Just tell the people he has under control that terrorist did it (like he is), so he isn't losing any shame to them.polaris_x said:
you got to be kidding me ...Jason P said:
Assad was testing a new leader and how Trump would respond. One week after Trump Administration say hands off and we have a chemical weapons attack. It makes sense. Water held.polaris_x said:
uhhh ... this doesn't make any sense ... chemical attack just happened = US intervention ... so, your theory holds absolutely no water ...Jason P said:If all the past chemical attacks were done by the terrorists / rebels in hopes of pullling the west into action and the all failed .... why would the terrorists / rebels try doing it again after the White House indicated they were not going to interfere with Syria.
You would have to be a pretty stupid terrorist / rebel to think that would work.
But if your a brutal dictator that maybe didn't turn over all of your chemical weapons and just heard the White House say they were going to be hands off, I'd think that would be a good time to go shooting some chemical weapons.
syria is finally winning the war, they even have a US congresswoman supporting them, trump has stated that they don't want to intervene ... so, the smart thing to do is then gas your own people!?? ... c'mon ... this is not thinking critically ... what does assad gain? ... does he endear himself to his people - no ... does he garner more international support - no ... international support he desperately needs because he is fighting fucking al qaeda AND ISIS ...
And to claim Assad doesn't have any chemical weapons but the Jihads do is totally illogical. Even if he did turn over every chemical weapon he had (doubtful), he has had around 4 years to make some more.
Be Excellent To Each OtherParty On, Dudes!0 -
Carpet bombing of cities, towns, villages, or other areas containing a concentration of civilians is considered a war crime[6] as of the 1977 Protocol I of the Geneva Conventions.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpet_bombing
But he does give nice interviews, so he has that going for him.Be Excellent To Each OtherParty On, Dudes!0 -
Nothing in that Protocol mentions bombing military bases.Jason P said:Carpet bombing of cities, towns, villages, or other areas containing a concentration of civilians is considered a war crime[6] as of the 1977 Protocol I of the Geneva Conventions.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpet_bombing
But he does give nice interviews, so he has that going for him.0 -
Canada prime minister supports US action....Didn't expect thathippiemom = goodness0
-
Every western leader supports the move so far. Trump the unifier!cincybearcat said:Canada prime minister supports US action....Didn't expect that
0 -
where did I say from my sources? ... i didn't ... in fact, I said to do research from all sources ...HughFreakingDillon said:
you didn't "strike a nerve". god I hate that passive agressive shit.polaris_x said:
i'm sorry ... but what's going on in syria are massive crimes against humanity ... so, when I ask people to do a little bit of research so that they better understand the issue - all I get is that there is no way of finding out the truth there because everyone is biased .... do you know how frustrating that is to hear? ... the fucking terrorists groups there (al qaeda, isis, etc..) are using children in propoganda campaigns ... and no one is reporting the truth in western media ...HughFreakingDillon said:
gee, thanks. have a wonderful fucking day.polaris_x said:
this is sad ...HughFreakingDillon said:
I was just about to say pretty much the same thing. everything has a source. everyone has their opinions on what sources are credible and which aren't, and it runs the gamut. everything is owned by someone, nothing is independent or non-partisan. it just doesn't exist anymore.mrussel1 said:
The problem here is that both sides will spin whatever evidence they have to make their point. There are zero publications you can read to achieve what you are advocating here. It all comes down to which sources you believe to be more accurate (which unfortunately is usually confirmation bias). The only way to know is to be on the ground. I know that I never believe jack shit about what a Russian publication says.polaris_x said:again ... why don't y'all spend the weekend and do some research and figure this thing out on your own ... read from all the sources ... see which ones have more evidence and facts to back up the claims ...
so ... there is no such thing as truth anymore to anyone because so many people are willing to distort it for their own beliefs? ...
honestly, if you don't really care what's going on there and you don't want to take the time ... just say so ... but pulling this shit is pathetic ...
so, i'm sorry if i struck a nerve with you but I say if you don't want to do a little research on a topic - then just say so ... but don't use biases as a reason for not ...
I just have zero patience for the tower-dwellers who constantly shout down to the idiots "do your research!" then say "but only my sources, yours are wrong!"
I never said I didn't want to do research. that is an incorrect assumption you made. what I said was that all sources have SOME bias, whether you want to believe that or not is your issue.
also mrussel said that there there is bias everywhere and that people ultimately will believe what they want to believe and you agreed ... so, if you believe that the truth is ultimately indiscernible then there is no point in doing any research ...0 -
it's not illogical ... did you read the articles pointing to ISIS and chemical weapons? ... where is your response? ... the UN organization oversaw the dismantling of syria's chemical weapons ... that oversight doesn't just end after it's over ... it continues to present day ...Jason P said:
Even more scary that Assad isn't a raging lunatic. He keeps his pulse under 60 while carpet bombing Aleppo. Demoralize the population by giving zero fucks on if your enemy or your citizens are killed and herd them out. Siege the city and starve everyone out.polaris_x said:
if he's fighting al qaeda and isis - the last thing he needs is having his people turn on him ... gassing his own people is not only impossible because he has no chemical weapons - it is totally illogical ... watch interviews of assad - he is not some raging dictator lunatic trope ...Jason P said:
Once the body count goes past 400K, I don't think being endeared by your people is near the top of your to-do list. He has Russia backing him, ready to lie. Just tell the people he has under control that terrorist did it (like he is), so he isn't losing any shame to them.polaris_x said:
you got to be kidding me ...Jason P said:
Assad was testing a new leader and how Trump would respond. One week after Trump Administration say hands off and we have a chemical weapons attack. It makes sense. Water held.polaris_x said:
uhhh ... this doesn't make any sense ... chemical attack just happened = US intervention ... so, your theory holds absolutely no water ...Jason P said:If all the past chemical attacks were done by the terrorists / rebels in hopes of pullling the west into action and the all failed .... why would the terrorists / rebels try doing it again after the White House indicated they were not going to interfere with Syria.
You would have to be a pretty stupid terrorist / rebel to think that would work.
But if your a brutal dictator that maybe didn't turn over all of your chemical weapons and just heard the White House say they were going to be hands off, I'd think that would be a good time to go shooting some chemical weapons.
syria is finally winning the war, they even have a US congresswoman supporting them, trump has stated that they don't want to intervene ... so, the smart thing to do is then gas your own people!?? ... c'mon ... this is not thinking critically ... what does assad gain? ... does he endear himself to his people - no ... does he garner more international support - no ... international support he desperately needs because he is fighting fucking al qaeda AND ISIS ...
And to claim Assad doesn't have any chemical weapons but the Jihads do is totally illogical. Even if he did turn over every chemical weapon he had (doubtful), he has had around 4 years to make some more.0 -
really!?? ... c'mon ... so, if I post an article from an independent news site - it gets shit on ... if i post from the times ... this is what I get ... this is why I ask people to do their own research from ALL sites ...HughFreakingDillon said:
I thought western media didn't report the truth?polaris_x said:0 -
ok ... so, officially you know nothing about syria ... or assad ... no longer need to reply to you ...BS44325 said:
No. You please explain how you can fall for the refined talk of a lying murderous thug.polaris_x said:
why wow? ... please explain ... can't wait to hear this ...BS44325 said:
"Watch interviews of Assad"? Wow.polaris_x said:
if he's fighting al qaeda and isis - the last thing he needs is having his people turn on him ... gassing his own people is not only impossible because he has no chemical weapons - it is totally illogical ... watch interviews of assad - he is not some raging dictator lunatic trope ...Jason P said:
Once the body count goes past 400K, I don't think being endeared by your people is near the top of your to-do list. He has Russia backing him, ready to lie. Just tell the people he has under control that terrorist did it (like he is), so he isn't losing any shame to them.polaris_x said:
you got to be kidding me ...Jason P said:
Assad was testing a new leader and how Trump would respond. One week after Trump Administration say hands off and we have a chemical weapons attack. It makes sense. Water held.polaris_x said:
uhhh ... this doesn't make any sense ... chemical attack just happened = US intervention ... so, your theory holds absolutely no water ...Jason P said:If all the past chemical attacks were done by the terrorists / rebels in hopes of pullling the west into action and the all failed .... why would the terrorists / rebels try doing it again after the White House indicated they were not going to interfere with Syria.
You would have to be a pretty stupid terrorist / rebel to think that would work.
But if your a brutal dictator that maybe didn't turn over all of your chemical weapons and just heard the White House say they were going to be hands off, I'd think that would be a good time to go shooting some chemical weapons.
syria is finally winning the war, they even have a US congresswoman supporting them, trump has stated that they don't want to intervene ... so, the smart thing to do is then gas your own people!?? ... c'mon ... this is not thinking critically ... what does assad gain? ... does he endear himself to his people - no ... does he garner more international support - no ... international support he desperately needs because he is fighting fucking al qaeda AND ISIS ...0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-VuasUUTQA
Categories
- All Categories
- 148.8K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110K The Porch
- 274 Vitalogy
- 35K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.1K Flea Market
- 39.1K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.7K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help