IMO: World war 2: justified Korea: justified Cuban Missile Crisis: justified Vietnam: not justified Cambodia/Laos: I see why they did it so on the fence Grenada: justified Nicaragua: justified Kuwait/Iraq 91: justified Rwanda: justified but went in too late Serbia/Bosnia: justified Afghanistan: justified Iraq: not justified ISIS: justified based on a not justified war Syria: too soon to tell
Sorry McG but I only agree with maybe 8% of this.
say what? so you agreed with me on only two of these?
No McG, sorry, only 7/8. But then, I suck at math so...
No, seriously, only WWII only only partially. The others? No, can't say as I agree. We stick our nose where it doesn't belong. Only reason MAAAAYBE for war is if we are attacked and that only happened sort of in Hawaii (never would have if we hadn't armed HI).
Wow, so if Japan didn’t bomb Pearl Harbor, you’d be okay letting Hitler kill everybody jee, gypsy and gay? And that’s just to start, he would have moved on to other ethnicities from there, but as long as America never made the list there’d be no reason for us to stop him? Is that what you’re saying?
Afghanistan was the last time an American military intervention felt justified to me. Ever since Iraq everything else has felt wrong or at best misguided.
This is a very interesting discussion in my opinion. I certainly see Polaris’s point in the sameness game plan each time and people always buy it. My initial reaction to all of this was that Assad gased people and the missiles are justified. But I’m trying to look around a bit more. I will say it’s a huge freakin leap to declare the US/UK/France as evil empires and cast Assad as a humanitarian man of the people and Russia and Iran as protectors of all that is right.
As usual, it’s probably somewhere in the middle.
* the two previous alleged chemical attacks were debunked * the OPCW is about to do its investigation in Dhouma * if there is so much actual evidence of Assad atrocities ... gaining Congressional approval and UN Security council approval should be easy * these strikes are illegal on all fronts ... goes against UN charter
definitely please do look around ... i've posted a bunch of stuff and I welcome you to critically think about all of it ... question, as you have, everything ... if you do it with an open mind ... then that's all I could hope for ...
Russia used their veto 12 times in regards to Syria? I mean, being one of the only “no” votes and blocking so has to be part of the problem.
you mean like how the US vetoes everything related to Israel?
in any case - you have the US/UK and France ... known war mongers ... then you have China ... what is China's position on syria? ... here it is ...
Yes just like that. So why is it bad for the US and ok for Russia?
well ... it's not as simple as no one should veto because we know that each member state has their own interests ... it's why I mentioned china ... china would never approve of a military strike in Syria ... did you read the chinese statement? ... what part of it is potentially unreasonable to you?
I’m not sure China is my moral compass. I read it. I’m still not sure what I think, but I sure as shit don’t think China or Russia is going to be 100% honest and transparent and take them at face value, ever.
so the countries we know have lied are trustworthy but china and russia aren't ... at the end of the day - what is wrong or irrational with what they posted ... what if anything they wrote is unreasonable ...
isn't that what justice is founded on? ... get the evidence ... get the facts ... then decide? ... avoid war at all costs?
I’m not saying that. And if you don’t think we know russia and China have lied about things then I’m not sure what to say. My point is it’s pretty weird to me to go railing on how awful the us/uk/France are and pretending russia is a prom queen.
i think you are going way to far in your willingness to believe some of those sources...similar to what you are saying about others and their media.
dude .. remember all those years ago we debated global warming and wmd's in iraq ... i think i've shown over the years not only to be on the right side of the discussion but backing up my beliefs with information ... i've spent a lot of time on Syria as I did with everything else back then ...
no one here has countered any piece i've put forth ...
The research facility that was bombed was a cancer research facility ... for those who don't know ... cancer related medicines are part of the sanctions imposed on Syria ... we also know that the OPCW inspected the facility for the 2nd time in November 2017 and said there was no suspicious activity ...
IMO: World war 2: justified Korea: justified Cuban Missile Crisis: justified Vietnam: not justified Cambodia/Laos: I see why they did it so on the fence Grenada: justified Nicaragua: justified Kuwait/Iraq 91: justified Rwanda: justified but went in too late Serbia/Bosnia: justified Afghanistan: justified Iraq: not justified ISIS: justified based on a not justified war Syria: too soon to tell
Sorry McG but I only agree with maybe 8% of this.
say what? so you agreed with me on only two of these?
No McG, sorry, only 7/8. But then, I suck at math so...
No, seriously, only WWII only only partially. The others? No, can't say as I agree. We stick our nose where it doesn't belong. Only reason MAAAAYBE for war is if we are attacked and that only happened sort of in Hawaii (never would have if we hadn't armed HI).
Wow, so if Japan didn’t bomb Pearl Harbor, you’d be okay letting Hitler kill everybody jee, gypsy and gay? And that’s just to start, he would have moved on to other ethnicities from there, but as long as America never made the list there’d be no reason for us to stop him? Is that what you’re saying?
That's weak, If America cared so much about those who were systematically murdered by the Nazi's they would have not denied denied thousands fleeing Germany visa's and would have enter the war when Canada did. Americans give themselves far to much credit for the success of WW2...way too much.
The research facility that was bombed was a cancer research facility ... for those who don't know ... cancer related medicines are part of the sanctions imposed on Syria ... we also know that the OPCW inspected the facility for the 2nd time in November 2017 and said there was no suspicious activity ...
IMO: World war 2: justified Korea: justified Cuban Missile Crisis: justified Vietnam: not justified Cambodia/Laos: I see why they did it so on the fence Grenada: justified Nicaragua: justified Kuwait/Iraq 91: justified Rwanda: justified but went in too late Serbia/Bosnia: justified Afghanistan: justified Iraq: not justified ISIS: justified based on a not justified war Syria: too soon to tell
Sorry McG but I only agree with maybe 8% of this.
say what? so you agreed with me on only two of these?
No McG, sorry, only 7/8. But then, I suck at math so...
No, seriously, only WWII only only partially. The others? No, can't say as I agree. We stick our nose where it doesn't belong. Only reason MAAAAYBE for war is if we are attacked and that only happened sort of in Hawaii (never would have if we hadn't armed HI).
Wow, so if Japan didn’t bomb Pearl Harbor, you’d be okay letting Hitler kill everybody jee, gypsy and gay? And that’s just to start, he would have moved on to other ethnicities from there, but as long as America never made the list there’d be no reason for us to stop him? Is that what you’re saying?
That's weak, If America cared so much about those who were systematically murdered by the Nazi's they would have not denied denied thousands fleeing Germany visa's and would have enter the war when Canada did. Americans give themselves far to much credit for the success of WW2...way too much.
How is that weak? Without the effort of every major country, including the US, the allies likely would have lost, and the millions murdered would have been a drop in the bucket. Doesn’t US, along with their allies deserve credit? no one knew the extent of the Nazis until the end of the war, which could be the reason for the visas. So yeah, we didn’t enter the war to save Jews, but it was clear both Japan and Germany were world issues. It’s a shame we stayed out of it as long as we did, I don’t see how anyone could claim that war was not 100% justified
The research facility that was bombed was a cancer research facility ... for those who don't know ... cancer related medicines are part of the sanctions imposed on Syria ... we also know that the OPCW inspected the facility for the 2nd time in November 2017 and said there was no suspicious activity ...
"Regarding the actual nature of the buildings bombed, Syrian media, SANA, describes the Pharmaceutical and Chemical Industries Research Institute as developing “centered on preparing the chemical compositions for cancer drugs.” The destruction of this institute is particularly bitter, as, under the criminal western sanctions, cancer medicines sales to Syria are prohibited."
Note that SANA is Syrian State Media as well.
It seems that this building is colloquially called the Barzah Scientific Research Facility, and even then, I can't find any pre-two-days-ago information about it being used for pharmaceutical purposes. The only corroboration of its use is from a man named Saeed Saeed, the supposed head of the institution, who seems to have had interviews after the bombing to confirm what the building was used for. I can't find any information about this man other than a few pictures on Chinese news networks.
Now, we're left with a few options on what to believe: 1. The building was somehow related to the development of chemical weapons, and the contents were not volatile (since external parties are standing there without hazmat suits, etc.), and was bombed by three countries to halt the production of chemical weapons 2. The building was not related to the development of chemical weapons, which was (unbeknownst to anyone outside of Syria until its destruction) used as a pharmaceutical facility, and was bombed by three countries to exert pressure by limiting the internal production of cancer medications
I personally feel both of these are plausible, but based on the involvement of three countries in the bombing, I find it hard to believe that all three were on board for such nefarious actions.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
Afghanistan was the last time an American military intervention felt justified to me. Ever since Iraq everything else has felt wrong or at best misguided.
I felt a response was necessary; however, was Afghanistan the country that needed to feel it? 15 of the 19 terrorists were Saudi.
Afghanistan was the last time an American military intervention felt justified to me. Ever since Iraq everything else has felt wrong or at best misguided.
I felt a response was necessary; however, was Afghanistan the country that needed to feel it? 15 of the 19 terrorists were Saudi.
It's where Bin Laden was. Part of any response needed to include Afghanistan.
I don't disagree about Saudi involvement. Then or now.
IMO: World war 2: justified Korea: justified Cuban Missile Crisis: justified Vietnam: not justified Cambodia/Laos: I see why they did it so on the fence Grenada: justified Nicaragua: justified Kuwait/Iraq 91: justified Rwanda: justified but went in too late Serbia/Bosnia: justified Afghanistan: justified Iraq: not justified ISIS: justified based on a not justified war Syria: too soon to tell
Sorry McG but I only agree with maybe 8% of this.
say what? so you agreed with me on only two of these?
No McG, sorry, only 7/8. But then, I suck at math so...
No, seriously, only WWII only only partially. The others? No, can't say as I agree. We stick our nose where it doesn't belong. Only reason MAAAAYBE for war is if we are attacked and that only happened sort of in Hawaii (never would have if we hadn't armed HI).
Wow, so if Japan didn’t bomb Pearl Harbor, you’d be okay letting Hitler kill everybody jee, gypsy and gay? And that’s just to start, he would have moved on to other ethnicities from there, but as long as America never made the list there’d be no reason for us to stop him? Is that what you’re saying?
That's weak, If America cared so much about those who were systematically murdered by the Nazi's they would have not denied denied thousands fleeing Germany visa's and would have enter the war when Canada did. Americans give themselves far to much credit for the success of WW2...way too much.
Ugh canada entered ww2 the same day britain did because they were pretty much bound too by treaty. No country entered World War 2 to stop the holocaust. I like canada a lot but don't throw rocks in glass houses. Canada was very anti-semitic in the 1930's and barely brought in any jews from europe. The United States and Canada denied entry to the St. Louis.
“Much to our shame, King, who had many Jewish friends, didn’t force the matter,” said Lunn.
And Blair didn’t act alone. He was aided by public servants in Ottawa and the widespread anti-Semitism in Canada during the 1930s.
“Part of the concern in Nova Scotia was that coming out of the Depression or the waves of recessions this province had experienced, … a wave of immigration coming in would have been frightening to some people, concerned for the few jobs that were available,” said McNabb."
Damn the more I read the more I am finding out how racist Canada was too Jews in the 1930 and 40's. I just found out that (http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/holocaust/): signs that read “Gentiles Only” and “No Jews or Dogs Allowed” were posted well into the 1930s and 1940s, a time when discriminatory immigration policies denied sponsorship requests to nearly all Jewish applicants. To an overwhelming extent, Canadians supported government policy that classified Jews as inassimilable foreigners and potential threats to national health.
and yes America had a huge part in the success of World War 2. If America doesn't enter ww2 then probably all of europe is under communist control for decades and the pacific is under Japanese rule for quite sometime.
The research facility that was bombed was a cancer research facility ... for those who don't know ... cancer related medicines are part of the sanctions imposed on Syria ... we also know that the OPCW inspected the facility for the 2nd time in November 2017 and said there was no suspicious activity ...
source?
assuming you are referring to the inspection? ... lots of sources that the barzah research facility was bombed ...
here is the OPCW report on Syria ... search on barzah to find the specific statement from the OPCW
The research facility that was bombed was a cancer research facility ... for those who don't know ... cancer related medicines are part of the sanctions imposed on Syria ... we also know that the OPCW inspected the facility for the 2nd time in November 2017 and said there was no suspicious activity ...
"Regarding the actual nature of the buildings bombed, Syrian media, SANA, describes the Pharmaceutical and Chemical Industries Research Institute as developing “centered on preparing the chemical compositions for cancer drugs.” The destruction of this institute is particularly bitter, as, under the criminal western sanctions, cancer medicines sales to Syria are prohibited."
Note that SANA is Syrian State Media as well.
It seems that this building is colloquially called the Barzah Scientific Research Facility, and even then, I can't find any pre-two-days-ago information about it being used for pharmaceutical purposes. The only corroboration of its use is from a man named Saeed Saeed, the supposed head of the institution, who seems to have had interviews after the bombing to confirm what the building was used for. I can't find any information about this man other than a few pictures on Chinese news networks.
Now, we're left with a few options on what to believe: 1. The building was somehow related to the development of chemical weapons, and the contents were not volatile (since external parties are standing there without hazmat suits, etc.), and was bombed by three countries to halt the production of chemical weapons 2. The building was not related to the development of chemical weapons, which was (unbeknownst to anyone outside of Syria until its destruction) used as a pharmaceutical facility, and was bombed by three countries to exert pressure by limiting the internal production of cancer medications
I personally feel both of these are plausible, but based on the involvement of three countries in the bombing, I find it hard to believe that all three were on board for such nefarious actions.
i just provided the source that it was cleared by the OPCW in November ... here is an article about the sanctions on cancer drugs ...
if you need a source that the facility was doing research on cancer drugs ... i suspect there will only be syrian sources as i don't see any msm doing that kind of digging ...
Washington (CNN)A survivor of a Syrian chemical attack in 2013 wants to buy President Donald Trump a beer to share his experience on the conditions in the country.
Kassem Eid, who told CNN's Ana Cabrera he lived under two years of siege and bombardment by the Syrian government, said he was glad the President has attempted to do something for the Syrian people.
"I just want to tell Mr. Trump directly: I'm a Syrian refugee who survived chemical weapons attacks, who lived under two years of siege and bombardment by the government," Eid said. "I would love to, like, buy you a beer, and just sit in front of you and tell you how bad it is in Syria."
Eid also said he would tell Trump, that he "proved once again, yesterday, that you have a big heart. At least a lot more bigger than Obama because you actually tried to do something. We need real, long-term commitment to bring peace to Syria."
IMO: World war 2: justified Korea: justified Cuban Missile Crisis: justified Vietnam: not justified Cambodia/Laos: I see why they did it so on the fence Grenada: justified Nicaragua: justified Kuwait/Iraq 91: justified Rwanda: justified but went in too late Serbia/Bosnia: justified Afghanistan: justified Iraq: not justified ISIS: justified based on a not justified war Syria: too soon to tell
Sorry McG but I only agree with maybe 8% of this.
say what? so you agreed with me on only two of these?
No McG, sorry, only 7/8. But then, I suck at math so...
No, seriously, only WWII only only partially. The others? No, can't say as I agree. We stick our nose where it doesn't belong. Only reason MAAAAYBE for war is if we are attacked and that only happened sort of in Hawaii (never would have if we hadn't armed HI).
Wow, so if Japan didn’t bomb Pearl Harbor, you’d be okay letting Hitler kill everybody jee, gypsy and gay? And that’s just to start, he would have moved on to other ethnicities from there, but as long as America never made the list there’d be no reason for us to stop him? Is that what you’re saying?
That's weak, If America cared so much about those who were systematically murdered by the Nazi's they would have not denied denied thousands fleeing Germany visa's and would have enter the war when Canada did. Americans give themselves far to much credit for the success of WW2...way too much.
Ugh canada entered ww2 the same day britain did because they were pretty much bound too by treaty. No country entered World War 2 to stop the holocaust. I like canada a lot but don't throw rocks in glass houses. Canada was very anti-semitic in the 1930's and barely brought in any jews from europe. The United States and Canada denied entry to the St. Louis.
“Much to our shame, King, who had many Jewish friends, didn’t force the matter,” said Lunn.
And Blair didn’t act alone. He was aided by public servants in Ottawa and the widespread anti-Semitism in Canada during the 1930s.
“Part of the concern in Nova Scotia was that coming out of the Depression or the waves of recessions this province had experienced, … a wave of immigration coming in would have been frightening to some people, concerned for the few jobs that were available,” said McNabb."
Damn the more I read the more I am finding out how racist Canada was too Jews in the 1930 and 40's. I just found out that (http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/holocaust/): signs that read “Gentiles Only” and “No Jews or Dogs Allowed” were posted well into the 1930s and 1940s, a time when discriminatory immigration policies denied sponsorship requests to nearly all Jewish applicants. To an overwhelming extent, Canadians supported government policy that classified Jews as inassimilable foreigners and potential threats to national health.
and yes America had a huge part in the success of World War 2. If America doesn't enter ww2 then probably all of europe is under communist control for decades and the pacific is under Japanese rule for quite sometime.
Some Americans are a little sensitive at the moment. I don't blame them- I would be too. It's a very embarrassing thing this... 'Donald Trump' thing. Let's hope he doesn't get it in his mind to have his portrait carved into a mountain side.
Canada has a troubled past- our roots originated at a time of different values as well. I'd like to point out that when the US was enslaving black people... Canada was working to provide them freedom and passage to Canada. Now to be fair... the support offered to slaves fleeing their owners wasn't exactly smooth sailing. Once in Canada, there were varying levels of racism (outside of chains and whips) that blacks needed to deal with as well.
IMO: World war 2: justified Korea: justified Cuban Missile Crisis: justified Vietnam: not justified Cambodia/Laos: I see why they did it so on the fence Grenada: justified Nicaragua: justified Kuwait/Iraq 91: justified Rwanda: justified but went in too late Serbia/Bosnia: justified Afghanistan: justified Iraq: not justified ISIS: justified based on a not justified war Syria: too soon to tell
Sorry McG but I only agree with maybe 8% of this.
say what? so you agreed with me on only two of these?
No McG, sorry, only 7/8. But then, I suck at math so...
No, seriously, only WWII only only partially. The others? No, can't say as I agree. We stick our nose where it doesn't belong. Only reason MAAAAYBE for war is if we are attacked and that only happened sort of in Hawaii (never would have if we hadn't armed HI).
Wow, so if Japan didn’t bomb Pearl Harbor, you’d be okay letting Hitler kill everybody jee, gypsy and gay? And that’s just to start, he would have moved on to other ethnicities from there, but as long as America never made the list there’d be no reason for us to stop him? Is that what you’re saying?
That's weak, If America cared so much about those who were systematically murdered by the Nazi's they would have not denied denied thousands fleeing Germany visa's and would have enter the war when Canada did. Americans give themselves far to much credit for the success of WW2...way too much.
Ugh canada entered ww2 the same day britain did because they were pretty much bound too by treaty. No country entered World War 2 to stop the holocaust. I like canada a lot but don't throw rocks in glass houses. Canada was very anti-semitic in the 1930's and barely brought in any jews from europe. The United States and Canada denied entry to the St. Louis.
“Much to our shame, King, who had many Jewish friends, didn’t force the matter,” said Lunn.
And Blair didn’t act alone. He was aided by public servants in Ottawa and the widespread anti-Semitism in Canada during the 1930s.
“Part of the concern in Nova Scotia was that coming out of the Depression or the waves of recessions this province had experienced, … a wave of immigration coming in would have been frightening to some people, concerned for the few jobs that were available,” said McNabb."
Damn the more I read the more I am finding out how racist Canada was too Jews in the 1930 and 40's. I just found out that (http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/holocaust/): signs that read “Gentiles Only” and “No Jews or Dogs Allowed” were posted well into the 1930s and 1940s, a time when discriminatory immigration policies denied sponsorship requests to nearly all Jewish applicants. To an overwhelming extent, Canadians supported government policy that classified Jews as inassimilable foreigners and potential threats to national health.
and yes America had a huge part in the success of World War 2. If America doesn't enter ww2 then probably all of europe is under communist control for decades and the pacific is under Japanese rule for quite sometime.
Some Americans are a little sensitive at the moment. I don't blame them- I would be too. It's a very embarrassing thing this... 'Donald Trump' thing. Let's hope he doesn't get it in his mind to have his portrait carved into a mountain side.
Canada has a troubled past- our roots originated at a time of different values as well. I'd like to point out that when the US was enslaving black people... Canada was working to provide them freedom and passage to Canada. Now to be fair... the support offered to slaves fleeing their owners wasn't exactly smooth sailing. Once in Canada, there were varying levels of racism (outside of chains and whips) that blacks needed to deal with as well.
Why are you going tit for tat? I'm merely bringing up the Holocaust and treatment of jews based on another post. Who's sensitive and how does Donald Trump even fit into a discussion about World War 2?
IMO: World war 2: justified Korea: justified Cuban Missile Crisis: justified Vietnam: not justified Cambodia/Laos: I see why they did it so on the fence Grenada: justified Nicaragua: justified Kuwait/Iraq 91: justified Rwanda: justified but went in too late Serbia/Bosnia: justified Afghanistan: justified Iraq: not justified ISIS: justified based on a not justified war Syria: too soon to tell
Sorry McG but I only agree with maybe 8% of this.
say what? so you agreed with me on only two of these?
No McG, sorry, only 7/8. But then, I suck at math so...
No, seriously, only WWII only only partially. The others? No, can't say as I agree. We stick our nose where it doesn't belong. Only reason MAAAAYBE for war is if we are attacked and that only happened sort of in Hawaii (never would have if we hadn't armed HI).
Wow, so if Japan didn’t bomb Pearl Harbor, you’d be okay letting Hitler kill everybody jee, gypsy and gay? And that’s just to start, he would have moved on to other ethnicities from there, but as long as America never made the list there’d be no reason for us to stop him? Is that what you’re saying?
That's weak, If America cared so much about those who were systematically murdered by the Nazi's they would have not denied denied thousands fleeing Germany visa's and would have enter the war when Canada did. Americans give themselves far to much credit for the success of WW2...way too much.
Ugh canada entered ww2 the same day britain did because they were pretty much bound too by treaty. No country entered World War 2 to stop the holocaust. I like canada a lot but don't throw rocks in glass houses. Canada was very anti-semitic in the 1930's and barely brought in any jews from europe. The United States and Canada denied entry to the St. Louis.
“Much to our shame, King, who had many Jewish friends, didn’t force the matter,” said Lunn.
And Blair didn’t act alone. He was aided by public servants in Ottawa and the widespread anti-Semitism in Canada during the 1930s.
“Part of the concern in Nova Scotia was that coming out of the Depression or the waves of recessions this province had experienced, … a wave of immigration coming in would have been frightening to some people, concerned for the few jobs that were available,” said McNabb."
Damn the more I read the more I am finding out how racist Canada was too Jews in the 1930 and 40's. I just found out that (http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/holocaust/): signs that read “Gentiles Only” and “No Jews or Dogs Allowed” were posted well into the 1930s and 1940s, a time when discriminatory immigration policies denied sponsorship requests to nearly all Jewish applicants. To an overwhelming extent, Canadians supported government policy that classified Jews as inassimilable foreigners and potential threats to national health.
and yes America had a huge part in the success of World War 2. If America doesn't enter ww2 then probably all of europe is under communist control for decades and the pacific is under Japanese rule for quite sometime.
Some Americans are a little sensitive at the moment. I don't blame them- I would be too. It's a very embarrassing thing this... 'Donald Trump' thing. Let's hope he doesn't get it in his mind to have his portrait carved into a mountain side.
Canada has a troubled past- our roots originated at a time of different values as well. I'd like to point out that when the US was enslaving black people... Canada was working to provide them freedom and passage to Canada. Now to be fair... the support offered to slaves fleeing their owners wasn't exactly smooth sailing. Once in Canada, there were varying levels of racism (outside of chains and whips) that blacks needed to deal with as well.
Why are you going tit for tat? I'm merely bringing up the Holocaust and treatment of jews based on another post. Who's sensitive and how does Donald Trump even fit into a discussion about World War 2?
I'm just being a jackass with the Trump jab.
Tit for tat was only offered as part of the discussion. You asserted that you never realized how racist Canada was too. I guess I felt that such a comment places the two countries on par and- even with Canada's past that we are currently working on sorting out- I wouldn't be inclined to agree with that.
This is a very interesting discussion in my opinion. I certainly see Polaris’s point in the sameness game plan each time and people always buy it. My initial reaction to all of this was that Assad gased people and the missiles are justified. But I’m trying to look around a bit more. I will say it’s a huge freakin leap to declare the US/UK/France as evil empires and cast Assad as a humanitarian man of the people and Russia and Iran as protectors of all that is right.
As usual, it’s probably somewhere in the middle.
* the two previous alleged chemical attacks were debunked * the OPCW is about to do its investigation in Dhouma * if there is so much actual evidence of Assad atrocities ... gaining Congressional approval and UN Security council approval should be easy * these strikes are illegal on all fronts ... goes against UN charter
definitely please do look around ... i've posted a bunch of stuff and I welcome you to critically think about all of it ... question, as you have, everything ... if you do it with an open mind ... then that's all I could hope for ...
Russia used their veto 12 times in regards to Syria? I mean, being one of the only “no” votes and blocking so has to be part of the problem.
you mean like how the US vetoes everything related to Israel?
in any case - you have the US/UK and France ... known war mongers ... then you have China ... what is China's position on syria? ... here it is ...
Yes just like that. So why is it bad for the US and ok for Russia?
well ... it's not as simple as no one should veto because we know that each member state has their own interests ... it's why I mentioned china ... china would never approve of a military strike in Syria ... did you read the chinese statement? ... what part of it is potentially unreasonable to you?
I’m not sure China is my moral compass. I read it. I’m still not sure what I think, but I sure as shit don’t think China or Russia is going to be 100% honest and transparent and take them at face value, ever.
so the countries we know have lied are trustworthy but china and russia aren't ... at the end of the day - what is wrong or irrational with what they posted ... what if anything they wrote is unreasonable ...
isn't that what justice is founded on? ... get the evidence ... get the facts ... then decide? ... avoid war at all costs?
I’m not saying that. And if you don’t think we know russia and China have lied about things then I’m not sure what to say. My point is it’s pretty weird to me to go railing on how awful the us/uk/France are and pretending russia is a prom queen.
i think you are going way to far in your willingness to believe some of those sources...similar to what you are saying about others and their media.
dude .. remember all those years ago we debated global warming and wmd's in iraq ... i think i've shown over the years not only to be on the right side of the discussion but backing up my beliefs with information ... i've spent a lot of time on Syria as I did with everything else back then ...
no one here has countered any piece i've put forth ...
I remember. In regards to global warming our debate was on how much impact man had, not that it had none. I was questioning the dire predictions of a quick Earth death.
on wmd, my belief in the government and media was certainly misplaced. Learning from that I’m willing to look at all sources here, the ones you present. But i do not think that either is 100%. And I’m trying to decide what I think is the truth.
IMO: World war 2: justified Korea: justified Cuban Missile Crisis: justified Vietnam: not justified Cambodia/Laos: I see why they did it so on the fence Grenada: justified Nicaragua: justified Kuwait/Iraq 91: justified Rwanda: justified but went in too late Serbia/Bosnia: justified Afghanistan: justified Iraq: not justified ISIS: justified based on a not justified war Syria: too soon to tell
Sorry McG but I only agree with maybe 8% of this.
say what? so you agreed with me on only two of these?
No McG, sorry, only 7/8. But then, I suck at math so...
No, seriously, only WWII only only partially. The others? No, can't say as I agree. We stick our nose where it doesn't belong. Only reason MAAAAYBE for war is if we are attacked and that only happened sort of in Hawaii (never would have if we hadn't armed HI).
Wow, so if Japan didn’t bomb Pearl Harbor, you’d be okay letting Hitler kill everybody jee, gypsy and gay? And that’s just to start, he would have moved on to other ethnicities from there, but as long as America never made the list there’d be no reason for us to stop him? Is that what you’re saying?
That's weak, If America cared so much about those who were systematically murdered by the Nazi's they would have not denied denied thousands fleeing Germany visa's and would have enter the war when Canada did. Americans give themselves far to much credit for the success of WW2...way too much.
Ugh canada entered ww2 the same day britain did because they were pretty much bound too by treaty. No country entered World War 2 to stop the holocaust. I like canada a lot but don't throw rocks in glass houses. Canada was very anti-semitic in the 1930's and barely brought in any jews from europe. The United States and Canada denied entry to the St. Louis.
“Much to our shame, King, who had many Jewish friends, didn’t force the matter,” said Lunn.
And Blair didn’t act alone. He was aided by public servants in Ottawa and the widespread anti-Semitism in Canada during the 1930s.
“Part of the concern in Nova Scotia was that coming out of the Depression or the waves of recessions this province had experienced, … a wave of immigration coming in would have been frightening to some people, concerned for the few jobs that were available,” said McNabb."
Damn the more I read the more I am finding out how racist Canada was too Jews in the 1930 and 40's. I just found out that (http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/holocaust/): signs that read “Gentiles Only” and “No Jews or Dogs Allowed” were posted well into the 1930s and 1940s, a time when discriminatory immigration policies denied sponsorship requests to nearly all Jewish applicants. To an overwhelming extent, Canadians supported government policy that classified Jews as inassimilable foreigners and potential threats to national health.
and yes America had a huge part in the success of World War 2. If America doesn't enter ww2 then probably all of europe is under communist control for decades and the pacific is under Japanese rule for quite sometime.
Some Americans are a little sensitive at the moment. I don't blame them- I would be too. It's a very embarrassing thing this... 'Donald Trump' thing. Let's hope he doesn't get it in his mind to have his portrait carved into a mountain side.
Canada has a troubled past- our roots originated at a time of different values as well. I'd like to point out that when the US was enslaving black people... Canada was working to provide them freedom and passage to Canada. Now to be fair... the support offered to slaves fleeing their owners wasn't exactly smooth sailing. Once in Canada, there were varying levels of racism (outside of chains and whips) that blacks needed to deal with as well.
Why are you going tit for tat? I'm merely bringing up the Holocaust and treatment of jews based on another post. Who's sensitive and how does Donald Trump even fit into a discussion about World War 2?
I'm just being a jackass with the Trump jab.
Tit for tat was only offered as part of the discussion. You asserted that you never realized how racist Canada was too. I guess I felt that such a comment places the two countries on par and- even with Canada's past that we are currently working on sorting out- I wouldn't be inclined to agree with that.
it was supposed to be “towards” Jews not too. But yes, I didn’t realize Canadians were racists too towards the Jews during the 30’s and 40’s.
The research facility that was bombed was a cancer research facility ... for those who don't know ... cancer related medicines are part of the sanctions imposed on Syria ... we also know that the OPCW inspected the facility for the 2nd time in November 2017 and said there was no suspicious activity ...
source?
assuming you are referring to the inspection? ... lots of sources that the barzah research facility was bombed ...
here is the OPCW report on Syria ... search on barzah to find the specific statement from the OPCW
The report does not confirm what you state. In fact, the report states that the Syrian authorities weren’t completely forthcoming with answers to questions posed. See paragraph 10. Further, the report states that further inspections are required to confirm that the 25 of 27 sites remain non functional, inclusive of previously known underground facilities. Are there unknown underground facilities? Do the Russians not have chemical weapons capabilities? No wonder 3D wants you to work with him.
IMO: World war 2: justified Korea: justified Cuban Missile Crisis: justified Vietnam: not justified Cambodia/Laos: I see why they did it so on the fence Grenada: justified Nicaragua: justified Kuwait/Iraq 91: justified Rwanda: justified but went in too late Serbia/Bosnia: justified Afghanistan: justified Iraq: not justified ISIS: justified based on a not justified war Syria: too soon to tell
Sorry McG but I only agree with maybe 8% of this.
say what? so you agreed with me on only two of these?
No McG, sorry, only 7/8. But then, I suck at math so...
No, seriously, only WWII only only partially. The others? No, can't say as I agree. We stick our nose where it doesn't belong. Only reason MAAAAYBE for war is if we are attacked and that only happened sort of in Hawaii (never would have if we hadn't armed HI).
Wow, so if Japan didn’t bomb Pearl Harbor, you’d be okay letting Hitler kill every Jew, gypsy and gay? And that’s just to start, he would have moved on to other ethnicities from there, but as long as America never made the list there’d be no reason for us to stop him? Is that what you’re saying?
No. WWII could have been avoided. Here's an article that explains that:
"Woodrow
Wilson’s call to create the League of Nations and its epic failure is a
great allegory to explain why WWII exploded. Negligence and
indifference from the States involved in the international scene were
what prompted turmoil in Europe. A harsh Treaty of Versailles that sunk
Germany into debt and economic and social crisis was only allowed by a
bunch of countries that weren’t looking forward the future of Europe; or
even the world. The policy of isolationism taken by the United States
at the end of the war, which emphasized on not intervening in European
affairs any more, prevented the United States from joining the League on
Nations, weakening it considerably and leading it to its dissolution.
With a strong punishment, and no way nations could cooperate as a whole
(the League of Nations) the battleground was set for a greater conflict.
As Germany sunk in crisis, other countries started recovering
from the wounds of war. This gave Germany an image of an underdeveloped
country, or even worse, of a criminal receiving its punishment. Being
seen as the enemy, and also being helpless, drove Germany to seek a
quick turn table. The conditions created by the International community
made the Nazi party so appealing to people. Let’s consider how German
society felt after being named the responsible for the worst war ever.
If someone told them that Germany is great and shouldn’t be treated as a
criminal, they would believe him or her immediately. A nationalistic
feeling brewed into a chauvinism that not only praised German race but
also scorned any other race. This is why Hitler made it to power. If
anyone named Hitler the real problem that caused the WWII, still the
International Community’s indifference and indolence are the
responsibles. Who else created the conditions for Hitler to rise? It
isn’t Germany who put those harsh sanctions to itself.
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
The harshness of the treat of Versailles was a huuuuge reason for ww2 but there was no way to predict what was going to happen. if private tandey takes that shot than no hitler which could equate to no ww2. It is easy to play Monday morning quarterback.
The research facility that was bombed was a cancer research facility ... for those who don't know ... cancer related medicines are part of the sanctions imposed on Syria ... we also know that the OPCW inspected the facility for the 2nd time in November 2017 and said there was no suspicious activity ...
source?
assuming you are referring to the inspection? ... lots of sources that the barzah research facility was bombed ...
here is the OPCW report on Syria ... search on barzah to find the specific statement from the OPCW
The report does not confirm what you state. In fact, the report states that the Syrian authorities weren’t completely forthcoming with answers to questions posed. See paragraph 10. Further, the report states that further inspections are required to confirm that the 25 of 27 sites remain non functional, inclusive of previously known underground facilities. Are there unknown underground facilities? Do the Russians not have chemical weapons capabilities? No wonder 3D wants you to work with him.
seriously!??? ... you read the entire 3 page document and that's what you got?
first of all - it most definitely stated what I said ... NO chemical weapons in Bazrah ... sorry to everyone it does not copy and paste well ... if you read section 11 - it clearly states there are no chemical weapons in Bazrah ...
the fact that the Syrian delegation may not have answered fully all questions is subjective on how you interpret it ... also the report states that they verified that 25 of the 27 facilities were in fact destroyed ... the conclusion clearly states it will continue to monitor the 2 remaining and underground sites ... well, they don't need to monitor 1 of the 2 because it's been blown up ...
must watch ... left wing youtube channel agrees with fox news tucker carlson ... again - listen to what they say ... edit: play close attention to the subtext associated with Yemen and Libya ... something I've mentioned in other posts ...
IMO: World war 2: justified Korea: justified Cuban Missile Crisis: justified Vietnam: not justified Cambodia/Laos: I see why they did it so on the fence Grenada: justified Nicaragua: justified Kuwait/Iraq 91: justified Rwanda: justified but went in too late Serbia/Bosnia: justified Afghanistan: justified Iraq: not justified ISIS: justified based on a not justified war Syria: too soon to tell
Sorry McG but I only agree with maybe 8% of this.
say what? so you agreed with me on only two of these?
No McG, sorry, only 7/8. But then, I suck at math so...
No, seriously, only WWII only only partially. The others? No, can't say as I agree. We stick our nose where it doesn't belong. Only reason MAAAAYBE for war is if we are attacked and that only happened sort of in Hawaii (never would have if we hadn't armed HI).
Wow, so if Japan didn’t bomb Pearl Harbor, you’d be okay letting Hitler kill every Jew, gypsy and gay? And that’s just to start, he would have moved on to other ethnicities from there, but as long as America never made the list there’d be no reason for us to stop him? Is that what you’re saying?
No. WWII could have been avoided. Here's an article that explains that:
"Woodrow
Wilson’s call to create the League of Nations and its epic failure is a
great allegory to explain why WWII exploded. Negligence and
indifference from the States involved in the international scene were
what prompted turmoil in Europe. A harsh Treaty of Versailles that sunk
Germany into debt and economic and social crisis was only allowed by a
bunch of countries that weren’t looking forward the future of Europe; or
even the world. The policy of isolationism taken by the United States
at the end of the war, which emphasized on not intervening in European
affairs any more, prevented the United States from joining the League on
Nations, weakening it considerably and leading it to its dissolution.
With a strong punishment, and no way nations could cooperate as a whole
(the League of Nations) the battleground was set for a greater conflict.
As Germany sunk in crisis, other countries started recovering
from the wounds of war. This gave Germany an image of an underdeveloped
country, or even worse, of a criminal receiving its punishment. Being
seen as the enemy, and also being helpless, drove Germany to seek a
quick turn table. The conditions created by the International community
made the Nazi party so appealing to people. Let’s consider how German
society felt after being named the responsible for the worst war ever.
If someone told them that Germany is great and shouldn’t be treated as a
criminal, they would believe him or her immediately. A nationalistic
feeling brewed into a chauvinism that not only praised German race but
also scorned any other race. This is why Hitler made it to power. If
anyone named Hitler the real problem that caused the WWII, still the
International Community’s indifference and indolence are the
responsibles. Who else created the conditions for Hitler to rise? It
isn’t Germany who put those harsh sanctions to itself.
Yes, everyone who graduated high school knows the treaty that ended WWI caused WWII. But by the mid-late 30’s there was no stopping it at that point. and plenty of countries go into economic collapse without electing one of the most racist and evil people in history. The treaty is only part to blame. And none of that changes the fact that once hitler took power, that war was justified for the allies.
IMO: World war 2: justified Korea: justified Cuban Missile Crisis: justified Vietnam: not justified Cambodia/Laos: I see why they did it so on the fence Grenada: justified Nicaragua: justified Kuwait/Iraq 91: justified Rwanda: justified but went in too late Serbia/Bosnia: justified Afghanistan: justified Iraq: not justified ISIS: justified based on a not justified war Syria: too soon to tell
Sorry McG but I only agree with maybe 8% of this.
say what? so you agreed with me on only two of these?
No McG, sorry, only 7/8. But then, I suck at math so...
No, seriously, only WWII only only partially. The others? No, can't say as I agree. We stick our nose where it doesn't belong. Only reason MAAAAYBE for war is if we are attacked and that only happened sort of in Hawaii (never would have if we hadn't armed HI).
Wow, so if Japan didn’t bomb Pearl Harbor, you’d be okay letting Hitler kill everybody jee, gypsy and gay? And that’s just to start, he would have moved on to other ethnicities from there, but as long as America never made the list there’d be no reason for us to stop him? Is that what you’re saying?
That's weak, If America cared so much about those who were systematically murdered by the Nazi's they would have not denied denied thousands fleeing Germany visa's and would have enter the war when Canada did. Americans give themselves far to much credit for the success of WW2...way too much.
How is that weak? Without the effort of every major country, including the US, the allies likely would have lost, and the millions murdered would have been a drop in the bucket. Doesn’t US, along with their allies deserve credit? no one knew the extent of the Nazis until the end of the war, which could be the reason for the visas. So yeah, we didn’t enter the war to save Jews, but it was clear both Japan and Germany were world issues. It’s a shame we stayed out of it as long as we did, I don’t see how anyone could claim that war was not 100% justified
I doubt it. Like I said way too much credit. The Russians broke the back of the German Army in Stalingrad. I now wonder if most in the world wish the US didn't get involved ... once American politicians got the taste of war, they seem to enjoy sending young men off to die in foreign lands to harvest other countries resources...
I don't really care enough to hate any of them honestly. I was just trying to join in and make the thread a little bit more polemic for a while. Most people I've met from each of the 3 countries have been amazing people whose company I've really enjoyed. Having said that, there was one time that I was in London near Wembley after the football team had just been beaten and almost got killed for being from Ireland. Hmm.
Dublin 2006 Dublin 2010 Madrid 2018 Werchter 2022 London 1 2022 London 2 2022 Krakow 2022
IMO: World war 2: justified Korea: justified Cuban Missile Crisis: justified Vietnam: not justified Cambodia/Laos: I see why they did it so on the fence Grenada: justified Nicaragua: justified Kuwait/Iraq 91: justified Rwanda: justified but went in too late Serbia/Bosnia: justified Afghanistan: justified Iraq: not justified ISIS: justified based on a not justified war Syria: too soon to tell
Sorry McG but I only agree with maybe 8% of this.
say what? so you agreed with me on only two of these?
No McG, sorry, only 7/8. But then, I suck at math so...
No, seriously, only WWII only only partially. The others? No, can't say as I agree. We stick our nose where it doesn't belong. Only reason MAAAAYBE for war is if we are attacked and that only happened sort of in Hawaii (never would have if we hadn't armed HI).
Wow, so if Japan didn’t bomb Pearl Harbor, you’d be okay letting Hitler kill everybody jee, gypsy and gay? And that’s just to start, he would have moved on to other ethnicities from there, but as long as America never made the list there’d be no reason for us to stop him? Is that what you’re saying?
That's weak, If America cared so much about those who were systematically murdered by the Nazi's they would have not denied denied thousands fleeing Germany visa's and would have enter the war when Canada did. Americans give themselves far to much credit for the success of WW2...way too much.
How is that weak? Without the effort of every major country, including the US, the allies likely would have lost, and the millions murdered would have been a drop in the bucket. Doesn’t US, along with their allies deserve credit? no one knew the extent of the Nazis until the end of the war, which could be the reason for the visas. So yeah, we didn’t enter the war to save Jews, but it was clear both Japan and Germany were world issues. It’s a shame we stayed out of it as long as we did, I don’t see how anyone could claim that war was not 100% justified
I doubt it. Like I said way too much credit. The Russians broke the back of the German Army in Stalingrad. I now wonder if most in the world wish the US didn't get involved ... once American politicians got the taste of war, they seem to enjoy sending young men off to die in foreign lands to harvest other countries resources...
The Russians won Stalingrad because they brought in reserves from eastern Russia after they realized japan wasn’t going’s to invade the Soviet Union since Japanese forces were now fighting the Americans. i can say with certain that people living in North Africa, Italy, Western Europe and the pacific islands are glad the u.s got involved in world war 2. How many Germans fled to the American/uk front to avoid the Russians? America definitely wasn’t the sole reason the Axis powers lost but they were definItely a huge part of it.
I'll ride the wave where it takes me......
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,309
IMO: World war 2: justified Korea: justified Cuban Missile Crisis: justified Vietnam: not justified Cambodia/Laos: I see why they did it so on the fence Grenada: justified Nicaragua: justified Kuwait/Iraq 91: justified Rwanda: justified but went in too late Serbia/Bosnia: justified Afghanistan: justified Iraq: not justified ISIS: justified based on a not justified war Syria: too soon to tell
Sorry McG but I only agree with maybe 8% of this.
say what? so you agreed with me on only two of these?
No McG, sorry, only 7/8. But then, I suck at math so...
No, seriously, only WWII only only partially. The others? No, can't say as I agree. We stick our nose where it doesn't belong. Only reason MAAAAYBE for war is if we are attacked and that only happened sort of in Hawaii (never would have if we hadn't armed HI).
Wow, so if Japan didn’t bomb Pearl Harbor, you’d be okay letting Hitler kill every Jew, gypsy and gay? And that’s just to start, he would have moved on to other ethnicities from there, but as long as America never made the list there’d be no reason for us to stop him? Is that what you’re saying?
No. WWII could have been avoided. Here's an article that explains that:
"Woodrow
Wilson’s call to create the League of Nations and its epic failure is a
great allegory to explain why WWII exploded. Negligence and
indifference from the States involved in the international scene were
what prompted turmoil in Europe. A harsh Treaty of Versailles that sunk
Germany into debt and economic and social crisis was only allowed by a
bunch of countries that weren’t looking forward the future of Europe; or
even the world. The policy of isolationism taken by the United States
at the end of the war, which emphasized on not intervening in European
affairs any more, prevented the United States from joining the League on
Nations, weakening it considerably and leading it to its dissolution.
With a strong punishment, and no way nations could cooperate as a whole
(the League of Nations) the battleground was set for a greater conflict.
As Germany sunk in crisis, other countries started recovering
from the wounds of war. This gave Germany an image of an underdeveloped
country, or even worse, of a criminal receiving its punishment. Being
seen as the enemy, and also being helpless, drove Germany to seek a
quick turn table. The conditions created by the International community
made the Nazi party so appealing to people. Let’s consider how German
society felt after being named the responsible for the worst war ever.
If someone told them that Germany is great and shouldn’t be treated as a
criminal, they would believe him or her immediately. A nationalistic
feeling brewed into a chauvinism that not only praised German race but
also scorned any other race. This is why Hitler made it to power. If
anyone named Hitler the real problem that caused the WWII, still the
International Community’s indifference and indolence are the
responsibles. Who else created the conditions for Hitler to rise? It
isn’t Germany who put those harsh sanctions to itself.
Yes, everyone who graduated high school knows the treaty that ended WWI caused WWII. But by the mid-late 30’s there was no stopping it at that point. and plenty of countries go into economic collapse without electing one of the most racist and evil people in history. The treaty is only part to blame. And none of that changes the fact that once hitler took power, that war was justified for the allies.
The bottom line, Mace, is you can look to history for reasons to continue warring or you can look to the future for ways to make peace. I choose peace.
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
Comments
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
no one here has countered any piece i've put forth ...
The research facility that was bombed was a cancer research facility ... for those who don't know ... cancer related medicines are part of the sanctions imposed on Syria ... we also know that the OPCW inspected the facility for the 2nd time in November 2017 and said there was no suspicious activity ...
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
no one knew the extent of the Nazis until the end of the war, which could be the reason for the visas.
So yeah, we didn’t enter the war to save Jews, but it was clear both Japan and Germany were world issues. It’s a shame we stayed out of it as long as we did, I don’t see how anyone could claim that war was not 100% justified
"Regarding the actual nature of the buildings bombed, Syrian media, SANA, describes the Pharmaceutical and Chemical Industries Research Institute as developing “centered on preparing the chemical compositions for cancer drugs.” The destruction of this institute is particularly bitter, as, under the criminal western sanctions, cancer medicines sales to Syria are prohibited."
Note that SANA is Syrian State Media as well.
It seems that this building is colloquially called the Barzah Scientific Research Facility, and even then, I can't find any pre-two-days-ago information about it being used for pharmaceutical purposes. The only corroboration of its use is from a man named Saeed Saeed, the supposed head of the institution, who seems to have had interviews after the bombing to confirm what the building was used for. I can't find any information about this man other than a few pictures on Chinese news networks.
Now, we're left with a few options on what to believe:
1. The building was somehow related to the development of chemical weapons, and the contents were not volatile (since external parties are standing there without hazmat suits, etc.), and was bombed by three countries to halt the production of chemical weapons
2. The building was not related to the development of chemical weapons, which was (unbeknownst to anyone outside of Syria until its destruction) used as a pharmaceutical facility, and was bombed by three countries to exert pressure by limiting the internal production of cancer medications
I personally feel both of these are plausible, but based on the involvement of three countries in the bombing, I find it hard to believe that all three were on board for such nefarious actions.
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
I felt a response was necessary; however, was Afghanistan the country that needed to feel it? 15 of the 19 terrorists were Saudi.
I don't disagree about Saudi involvement. Then or now.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
http://thechronicleherald.ca/novascotia/1174272-canada-turned-away-jewish-refugees "But Blair, remembered by history for his race-based immigration policies that saw Canada only accept 5,000 Jewish immigrants (compared to 200,000 by the United States) during the 1930s and ’40s, fought the move.
“Much to our shame, King, who had many Jewish friends, didn’t force the matter,” said Lunn.
And Blair didn’t act alone. He was aided by public servants in Ottawa and the widespread anti-Semitism in Canada during the 1930s.
“Part of the concern in Nova Scotia was that coming out of the Depression or the waves of recessions this province had experienced, … a wave of immigration coming in would have been frightening to some people, concerned for the few jobs that were available,” said McNabb."
Damn the more I read the more I am finding out how racist Canada was too Jews in the 1930 and 40's. I just found out that (http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/holocaust/): signs that read “Gentiles Only” and “No Jews or Dogs Allowed” were posted well into the 1930s and 1940s, a time when discriminatory immigration policies denied sponsorship requests to nearly all Jewish applicants. To an overwhelming extent, Canadians supported government policy that classified Jews as inassimilable foreigners and potential threats to national health.
and yes America had a huge part in the success of World War 2. If America doesn't enter ww2 then probably all of europe is under communist control for decades and the pacific is under Japanese rule for quite sometime.
here is the OPCW report on Syria ... search on barzah to find the specific statement from the OPCW
https://www.opcw.org/fileadmin/OPCW/EC/88/en/ec88dg01_e_.pdf
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-sanctions/syria-sanctions-indirectly-hit-childrens-cancer-treatment-idUSKBN16M1UW
if you need a source that the facility was doing research on cancer drugs ... i suspect there will only be syrian sources as i don't see any msm doing that kind of digging ...
Washington (CNN)A survivor of a Syrian chemical attack in 2013 wants to buy President Donald Trump a beer to share his experience on the conditions in the country.
Some Americans are a little sensitive at the moment. I don't blame them- I would be too. It's a very embarrassing thing this... 'Donald Trump' thing. Let's hope he doesn't get it in his mind to have his portrait carved into a mountain side.
Canada has a troubled past- our roots originated at a time of different values as well. I'd like to point out that when the US was enslaving black people... Canada was working to provide them freedom and passage to Canada. Now to be fair... the support offered to slaves fleeing their owners wasn't exactly smooth sailing. Once in Canada, there were varying levels of racism (outside of chains and whips) that blacks needed to deal with as well.
http://www.blackhistorycanada.com/events.php?themeid=21&id=6
Who's sensitive and how does Donald Trump even fit into a discussion about World War 2?
I'm just being a jackass with the Trump jab.
Tit for tat was only offered as part of the discussion. You asserted that you never realized how racist Canada was too. I guess I felt that such a comment places the two countries on par and- even with Canada's past that we are currently working on sorting out- I wouldn't be inclined to agree with that.
on wmd, my belief in the government and media was certainly misplaced. Learning from that I’m willing to look at all sources here, the ones you present. But i do not think that either is 100%. And I’m trying to decide what I think is the truth.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
https://www.munplanet.com/articles/interesting-questions/could-world-war-ii-have-been-prevented
"Woodrow Wilson’s call to create the League of Nations and its epic failure is a great allegory to explain why WWII exploded. Negligence and indifference from the States involved in the international scene were what prompted turmoil in Europe. A harsh Treaty of Versailles that sunk Germany into debt and economic and social crisis was only allowed by a bunch of countries that weren’t looking forward the future of Europe; or even the world. The policy of isolationism taken by the United States at the end of the war, which emphasized on not intervening in European affairs any more, prevented the United States from joining the League on Nations, weakening it considerably and leading it to its dissolution. With a strong punishment, and no way nations could cooperate as a whole (the League of Nations) the battleground was set for a greater conflict.
As Germany sunk in crisis, other countries started recovering from the wounds of war. This gave Germany an image of an underdeveloped country, or even worse, of a criminal receiving its punishment. Being seen as the enemy, and also being helpless, drove Germany to seek a quick turn table. The conditions created by the International community made the Nazi party so appealing to people. Let’s consider how German society felt after being named the responsible for the worst war ever. If someone told them that Germany is great and shouldn’t be treated as a criminal, they would believe him or her immediately. A nationalistic feeling brewed into a chauvinism that not only praised German race but also scorned any other race. This is why Hitler made it to power. If anyone named Hitler the real problem that caused the WWII, still the International Community’s indifference and indolence are the responsibles. Who else created the conditions for Hitler to rise? It isn’t Germany who put those harsh sanctions to itself.-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
if private tandey takes that shot than no hitler which could equate to no ww2. It is easy to play Monday morning quarterback.
first of all - it most definitely stated what I said ... NO chemical weapons in Bazrah ... sorry to everyone it does not copy and paste well ... if you read section 11 - it clearly states there are no chemical weapons in Bazrah ...
the fact that the Syrian delegation may not have answered fully all questions is subjective on how you interpret it ... also the report states that they verified that 25 of the 27 facilities were in fact destroyed ... the conclusion clearly states it will continue to monitor the 2 remaining and underground sites ... well, they don't need to monitor 1 of the 2 because it's been blown up ...
https://storify.com/elleprovocateur/truth-unfiltered-the-global-south-assessment-of-we#publicize
and plenty of countries go into economic collapse without electing one of the most racist and evil people in history. The treaty is only part to blame. And none of that changes the fact that once hitler took power, that war was justified for the allies.
Dublin 2010
Madrid 2018
Werchter 2022
London 1 2022
London 2 2022
Krakow 2022
i can say with certain that people living in North Africa, Italy, Western Europe and the pacific islands are glad the u.s got involved in world war 2. How many Germans fled to the American/uk front to avoid the Russians? America definitely wasn’t the sole reason the Axis powers lost but they were definItely a huge part of it.
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"