Syria
Comments
-
you mean like how the US vetoes everything related to Israel?cincybearcat said:
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.polaris_x said:
* the two previous alleged chemical attacks were debunkedcincybearcat said: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 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 ...
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 ...
http://bw.china-embassy.org/eng/xwdt/t1076201.htm
0 -
Yes just like that. So why is it bad for the US and ok for Russia?polaris_x said:
you mean like how the US vetoes everything related to Israel?cincybearcat said:
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.polaris_x said:
* the two previous alleged chemical attacks were debunkedcincybearcat said: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 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 ...
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 ...
http://bw.china-embassy.org/eng/xwdt/t1076201.htmhippiemom = goodness0 -
Fuck the U.S government. Fuck the French government, FUCK THE BRITISH government hardest of all.Dublin 2006
Dublin 2010
Madrid 2018
Werchter 2022
London 1 2022
London 2 2022
Krakow 20220 -
Syria is only on the US radar because of an oil piplinebrianlux said:OK, so while you're thinking about or ignoring my other question (no problem there) what about this: Why is it any of our business to be involved in Syria in the first place? If you say, "Because this faction did such and such and we don't agree with that so we are going to bomb the shit out of someone", then other countries will say, "Yeah, well we don't agree so we're going to start bombing the shit out of you" and pretty soon everybody is bombing the shit out of everybody and in 2018 THIS IS NOT A FUCKING GOOD IDEA!will myself to find a home, a home within myself
we will find a way, we will find our place0 -
ConorKavanagh said:Fuck the U.S government. Fuck the French government, FUCK THE BRITISH government hardest of all.
You must be Irish lol. Why all the hate?I'll ride the wave where it takes me......0 -
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?cincybearcat said:
Yes just like that. So why is it bad for the US and ok for Russia?polaris_x said:
you mean like how the US vetoes everything related to Israel?cincybearcat said:
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.polaris_x said:
* the two previous alleged chemical attacks were debunkedcincybearcat said: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 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 ...
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 ...
http://bw.china-embassy.org/eng/xwdt/t1076201.htm
0 -
mcgruff10 said: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
Rwanda... never went at all.
Clinton made an appearance after things had settled down and apologized for western indifference, but he did so as Air Force One idled on the runway- which he hopped in immediately after speaking and flew home.
"My brain's a good brain!"0 -
I didn’t know that. For some reason I thought a few hundred troops were sent in.Thirty Bills Unpaid said:mcgruff10 said: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
Rwanda... never went at all.
Clinton made an appearance after things had settled down and apologized for western indifference, but he did so as Air Force One idled on the runway- which he hopped in immediately after speaking and flew home.I'll ride the wave where it takes me......0 -
I guess Trump's airstrike were constitutional after all:
"The president has asserted authority under Article II of the Constitution for these strikes, but any sustained military action in Syria would require congressional authorization," Senator Melendez (D) said. "I expect the Trump administration to promptly brief Congress on these strikes, their plan for Syria, including countering Russian and Iranian support for the regime, and any future use of military force."
http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2018/04/how_njs_senators_reacted_to_trumps_air_strikes_in.html
I guess if it is one and done it is cool but anything else needs to be authorized by congress.I'll ride the wave where it takes me......0 -
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.polaris_x said:
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?cincybearcat said:
Yes just like that. So why is it bad for the US and ok for Russia?polaris_x said:
you mean like how the US vetoes everything related to Israel?cincybearcat said:
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.polaris_x said:
* the two previous alleged chemical attacks were debunkedcincybearcat said: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 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 ...
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 ...
http://bw.china-embassy.org/eng/xwdt/t1076201.htm
hippiemom = goodness0 -
Add North Korea to that sentence.cincybearcat said:
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.polaris_x said:
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?cincybearcat said:
Yes just like that. So why is it bad for the US and ok for Russia?polaris_x said:
you mean like how the US vetoes everything related to Israel?cincybearcat said:
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.polaris_x said:
* the two previous alleged chemical attacks were debunkedcincybearcat said: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 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 ...
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 ...
http://bw.china-embassy.org/eng/xwdt/t1076201.htmI'll ride the wave where it takes me......0 -
Sorry McG but I only agree with maybe 8% of this.mcgruff10 said: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
"It's a sad and beautiful world"-Roberto Benigni0 -
I'm not normally anti-war. I'm always anti-war.polaris_x said:remember ... everyone ...
people who would normally be anti-war would not support intervening against a country unless it is believed that the country is evil and/or the leader is satan reborn ... the so called humanitarian cause for war ...
"It's a sad and beautiful world"-Roberto Benigni0 -
say what? so you agreed with me on only two of these?brianlux said:
Sorry McG but I only agree with maybe 8% of this.mcgruff10 said: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 tellI'll ride the wave where it takes me......0 -
I just saw this. A common phrase used by both democrat and republican.Halifax2TheMax said:
“Our number one priority is to see this president fail.”mcgruff10 said:My point being, presidents do what they want and then the opposite party ridicules and complains. A few years later, a different political party does the same type of complaining when the same issue occur. Double standard. You can’t be a Democrat and bitch and moan about trump s Syrian strikes but support Obama’s just a few years before. Same can be said of Republicans.I'll ride the wave where it takes me......0 -
No McG, sorry, only 7/8. But then, I suck at math so...mcgruff10 said:
say what? so you agreed with me on only two of these?brianlux said:
Sorry McG but I only agree with maybe 8% of this.mcgruff10 said: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
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).
"It's a sad and beautiful world"-Roberto Benigni0 -
so Afghanistan 01 was ok?brianlux said:
No McG, sorry, only 7/8. But then, I suck at math so...mcgruff10 said:
say what? so you agreed with me on only two of these?brianlux said:
Sorry McG but I only agree with maybe 8% of this.mcgruff10 said: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
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).
and going with pearl harbor...remember the japanese invaded china first which resulted in the u.s. cutting japan's oil supply. they needed oil in the dutch east indies so they thought they could take america out by a sneak attack. however japan was ignored during the treaty of versailles so we could actually put blame on the english and french.I'll ride the wave where it takes me......0 -
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 ...cincybearcat said:
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.polaris_x said:
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?cincybearcat said:
Yes just like that. So why is it bad for the US and ok for Russia?polaris_x said:
you mean like how the US vetoes everything related to Israel?cincybearcat said:
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.polaris_x said:
* the two previous alleged chemical attacks were debunkedcincybearcat said: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 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 ...
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 ...
http://bw.china-embassy.org/eng/xwdt/t1076201.htm
isn't that what justice is founded on? ... get the evidence ... get the facts ... then decide? ... avoid war at all costs?
0 -
0
-
mainstream media source ... haha
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5616533/Former-head-Britains-special-forces-says-Assad-doesnt-need-use-gas.html
0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6FFReCibdMMThis discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 149K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110.2K The Porch
- 279 Vitalogy
- 35.1K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.3K Flea Market
- 39.3K 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
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help