Syria and the US's Motive
Comments
-
another good summation of how people need to view the information ...
https://sciscomedia.co.uk/sarin-gas-assad-fake-news/
if you're gonna decry the source - then I challenge you to find any faulty information and evidence of such ...0 -
Paralysis by analysis thinking.HughFreakingDillon said:
I agree.Degeneratefk said:
I really don't care if it had a 90% approval rating from the country. It's an illegal act. That sort of military action requires congressional approval.HughFreakingDillon said:
of course it doesn't. but it makes it more difficult to impeach a president on an event when it has widespread local and international approval.polaris_x said:
i didn't say you did or didn't ... i'm just pointing out that support from those nations doesn't necessarily legitimize it ...HughFreakingDillon said:
did I say I agree with it? it's an observation, and I was very surprised that it got support.polaris_x said:
the same allied nations that went into iraq? ... the same ones that continue to lend undying support for israel?HughFreakingDillon said:
from what I've read, he has received a lot of bi-partisan support and also from most allied nations.Degeneratefk said:
Who's everyone?HughFreakingDillon said:
not when everyone seems to be on board with the strike.Degeneratefk said:I have yet to find or see any proof that it was Assad that ordered the chemical attack. Does anyone have any? Furthermore, Trump launching a strike of that caliber without congressional approval is illegal. The president is allowed discretion to carry out acts of war without congressional approval ONLY when national security or the nation itself is under immanent attack. Syria clearly did not represent an immanent danger to the US. Impeachment hearings should start soon.
0 -
Wow, an entire article of: "I don't know anything, I'm just asking questions here!" It's like the broken clock method of 'journalism': if I write about enough conspiracy theories, one of them is bound to hit!polaris_x said:another good summation of how people need to view the information ...
https://sciscomedia.co.uk/sarin-gas-assad-fake-news/
if you're gonna decry the source - then I challenge you to find any faulty information and evidence of such ...
Who is this author, what makes him an authority on anything? How many shitty news orgs does he write for?
https://sciscomedia.co.uk/author/danielmargrain/
https://cultureandpolitics.org/author/cultpolitical/
https://bsnews.info/author/daniel-margrain/
http://mondoweiss.net/author/daniel-margrain/
https://normanpilon.com/tag/daniel-margrain/
http://www.renegadetribune.com/author/danielmargrain/
http://guerillawire.org/author/daniel-margrain/
http://russia-insider.com/en/daniel-margrain
https://astutenews.com/tag/daniel-margrain/
None of them appear to have any credibility. Sometimes I think the critical reading skills are worse than the critical thinking skills around here.0 -
How, specifically?PJfanwillneverleave1 said:
Paralysis by analysis thinking.HughFreakingDillon said:
I agree.Degeneratefk said:
I really don't care if it had a 90% approval rating from the country. It's an illegal act. That sort of military action requires congressional approval.HughFreakingDillon said:
of course it doesn't. but it makes it more difficult to impeach a president on an event when it has widespread local and international approval.polaris_x said:
i didn't say you did or didn't ... i'm just pointing out that support from those nations doesn't necessarily legitimize it ...HughFreakingDillon said:
did I say I agree with it? it's an observation, and I was very surprised that it got support.polaris_x said:
the same allied nations that went into iraq? ... the same ones that continue to lend undying support for israel?HughFreakingDillon said:
from what I've read, he has received a lot of bi-partisan support and also from most allied nations.Degeneratefk said:
Who's everyone?HughFreakingDillon said:
not when everyone seems to be on board with the strike.Degeneratefk said:I have yet to find or see any proof that it was Assad that ordered the chemical attack. Does anyone have any? Furthermore, Trump launching a strike of that caliber without congressional approval is illegal. The president is allowed discretion to carry out acts of war without congressional approval ONLY when national security or the nation itself is under immanent attack. Syria clearly did not represent an immanent danger to the US. Impeachment hearings should start soon.
will myself to find a home, a home within myself
we will find a way, we will find our place0 -
uhhh ... talk about lack of critical reading skills ... i specifically said if you are gonna gripe about the source to then actually provide proof that anything is not factual ...CM189191 said:
Wow, an entire article of: "I don't know anything, I'm just asking questions here!" It's like the broken clock method of 'journalism': if I write about enough conspiracy theories, one of them is bound to hit!polaris_x said:another good summation of how people need to view the information ...
https://sciscomedia.co.uk/sarin-gas-assad-fake-news/
if you're gonna decry the source - then I challenge you to find any faulty information and evidence of such ...
Who is this author, what makes him an authority on anything? How many shitty news orgs does he write for?
https://sciscomedia.co.uk/author/danielmargrain/
https://cultureandpolitics.org/author/cultpolitical/
https://bsnews.info/author/daniel-margrain/
http://mondoweiss.net/author/daniel-margrain/
https://normanpilon.com/tag/daniel-margrain/
http://www.renegadetribune.com/author/danielmargrain/
http://guerillawire.org/author/daniel-margrain/
http://russia-insider.com/en/daniel-margrain
https://astutenews.com/tag/daniel-margrain/
None of them appear to have any credibility. Sometimes I think the critical reading skills are worse than the critical thinking skills around here.
did your critical reading skills read the part about hans blixt who said there is no proof of syria launching a chemical attack? ... the same guy who kept saying there was no WMD in iraq?
any interest in actually learning about syrian history, poliltics and geography before continuing the buy the unsubstantiated lies the msm is peddling? ... because if assad falls - we have another country run by terrorists ...
where are the terrorists controlling more and more land and resources now? ... iraq, libya and syria ... all places the US has decided to intervene in ...0 -
I somewhat agree with you.gimmesometruth27 said:it is iraq all over again. stay awake and don't fall for it.
Investigating doesn't mean no proof, it means looking for more info.polaris_x said:so ... the russians and americans agree today to investigate what happened the other day ... further cementing that there is no proof that assad dropped chemical weapons ... yet, everyone continues to peddle this myth ...
0 -
So why not link directly to the Blixt quote? Instead of this hack job?polaris_x said:
uhhh ... talk about lack of critical reading skills ... i specifically said if you are gonna gripe about the source to then actually provide proof that anything is not factual ...CM189191 said:
Wow, an entire article of: "I don't know anything, I'm just asking questions here!" It's like the broken clock method of 'journalism': if I write about enough conspiracy theories, one of them is bound to hit!polaris_x said:another good summation of how people need to view the information ...
https://sciscomedia.co.uk/sarin-gas-assad-fake-news/
if you're gonna decry the source - then I challenge you to find any faulty information and evidence of such ...
Who is this author, what makes him an authority on anything? How many shitty news orgs does he write for?
https://sciscomedia.co.uk/author/danielmargrain/
https://cultureandpolitics.org/author/cultpolitical/
https://bsnews.info/author/daniel-margrain/
http://mondoweiss.net/author/daniel-margrain/
https://normanpilon.com/tag/daniel-margrain/
http://www.renegadetribune.com/author/danielmargrain/
http://guerillawire.org/author/daniel-margrain/
http://russia-insider.com/en/daniel-margrain
https://astutenews.com/tag/daniel-margrain/
None of them appear to have any credibility. Sometimes I think the critical reading skills are worse than the critical thinking skills around here.
did your critical reading skills read the part about hans blixt who said there is no proof of syria launching a chemical attack? ... the same guy who kept saying there was no WMD in iraq?
any interest in actually learning about syrian history, poliltics and geography before continuing the buy the unsubstantiated lies the msm is peddling? ... because if assad falls - we have another country run by terrorists ...
where are the terrorists controlling more and more land and resources now? ... iraq, libya and syria ... all places the US has decided to intervene in ...
"In an interview with DW, the Swedish diplomat said he could appreciate that most of world opinion, having been "rightly indignant" about the gas attack on Syrian civilians, will approve of the missile strikes. Blix says he thinks the retaliation was "measured" and specific, and he doesn't think the Trump administration is planning an "all-out war" in Syria. But he did, however, criticize the fact that the US made the decision to carry out the strikes unilaterally, hastily and without making a legal case that they were justified, which he refers to as the US acting like the "world's sheriff."
"I don't know whether in Washington they presented any evidence, but I did not see that in the Security Council," Blix said. "Merely pictures of victims that were held up, that the whole world can see with horror, such pictures are not necessarily evidence of who did it."
Blix says the problem with this situation is that while it's natural to jump to the conclusion that the regime is far more likely than the rebels to have the means to carry out an attack of this magnitude with a substance such as sarin gas, it is far from proven that it did so.
And those distinctions matter, Blix insists. "If you had a murder and you strongly suspect one fellow, do you go to judgment and execution straight away?" he asked. "Three days after the murder?""
Proof of nothing is not evidence of something.0 -
'Misdirected' Airstrike By U.S.-Led Coalition Kills 18 Allied Fighters In Syria
http://n.pr/2o94wxe0 -
So ...CM189191 said:
So why not link directly to the Blixt quote? Instead of this hack job?polaris_x said:
uhhh ... talk about lack of critical reading skills ... i specifically said if you are gonna gripe about the source to then actually provide proof that anything is not factual ...CM189191 said:
Wow, an entire article of: "I don't know anything, I'm just asking questions here!" It's like the broken clock method of 'journalism': if I write about enough conspiracy theories, one of them is bound to hit!polaris_x said:another good summation of how people need to view the information ...
https://sciscomedia.co.uk/sarin-gas-assad-fake-news/
if you're gonna decry the source - then I challenge you to find any faulty information and evidence of such ...
Who is this author, what makes him an authority on anything? How many shitty news orgs does he write for?
https://sciscomedia.co.uk/author/danielmargrain/
https://cultureandpolitics.org/author/cultpolitical/
https://bsnews.info/author/daniel-margrain/
http://mondoweiss.net/author/daniel-margrain/
https://normanpilon.com/tag/daniel-margrain/
http://www.renegadetribune.com/author/danielmargrain/
http://guerillawire.org/author/daniel-margrain/
http://russia-insider.com/en/daniel-margrain
https://astutenews.com/tag/daniel-margrain/
None of them appear to have any credibility. Sometimes I think the critical reading skills are worse than the critical thinking skills around here.
did your critical reading skills read the part about hans blixt who said there is no proof of syria launching a chemical attack? ... the same guy who kept saying there was no WMD in iraq?
any interest in actually learning about syrian history, poliltics and geography before continuing the buy the unsubstantiated lies the msm is peddling? ... because if assad falls - we have another country run by terrorists ...
where are the terrorists controlling more and more land and resources now? ... iraq, libya and syria ... all places the US has decided to intervene in ...
"In an interview with DW, the Swedish diplomat said he could appreciate that most of world opinion, having been "rightly indignant" about the gas attack on Syrian civilians, will approve of the missile strikes. Blix says he thinks the retaliation was "measured" and specific, and he doesn't think the Trump administration is planning an "all-out war" in Syria. But he did, however, criticize the fact that the US made the decision to carry out the strikes unilaterally, hastily and without making a legal case that they were justified, which he refers to as the US acting like the "world's sheriff."
"I don't know whether in Washington they presented any evidence, but I did not see that in the Security Council," Blix said. "Merely pictures of victims that were held up, that the whole world can see with horror, such pictures are not necessarily evidence of who did it."
Blix says the problem with this situation is that while it's natural to jump to the conclusion that the regime is far more likely than the rebels to have the means to carry out an attack of this magnitude with a substance such as sarin gas, it is far from proven that it did so.
And those distinctions matter, Blix insists. "If you had a murder and you strongly suspect one fellow, do you go to judgment and execution straight away?" he asked. "Three days after the murder?""
Proof of nothing is not evidence of something.
* Same claims made against Assad in 2013 - proven false then
* Syria dismantled all chemical weapons as overseen by UN organization
factor in sources which the attack was reported .. white helmets = terrorist group started by former British military and funded by US gov't ...
we are a week after and there is STILL NO proof Assad engaged in a chemical attack ... NONE ... only the same lies that were put forth in 2013 ...0 -
not taking this the wrong way at all. my only issue with what you wrote (and maybe i read it wrong) is that you seem to say that is that if you believe that the syrian government did this then you are just believing what MSM is saying to us. you don't know if I or others read other Non-MSM news sites. Again I may have read your post wrong and if I did then I am sorry for thatpolaris_x said:
don't take this the wrong way but as I recommended to people - do a bit of objective research on Syria ... if you will only believe things from msm sites - then there really isn't much to add ... but there are a lot of independent media that is telling not only a different story ... but also showing direct evidence of the fraud being perpetrated there ... check out the video I posted at the beginning of this thread ... this is a delegation of the US Peace Council and their independent investigation into Syria ...fife said:
I agree that technically this is not a civil war but at the same time it is a civil war that the people are dealing with. yes the people are not uprising but can you expect that when one side you have a governemnt that is dropping bombs on them and on the other side they also have ISIS is attacking the people also?polaris_x said:
exactly ... there is none ... and I guarantee you no one has any ... it was the same in 2013 ... the same people went into iraq with no proof either ...Degeneratefk said:I have yet to find or see any proof that it was Assad that ordered the chemical attack. Does anyone have any? Furthermore, Trump launching a strike of that caliber without congressional approval is illegal. The president is allowed discretion to carry out acts of war without congressional approval ONLY when national security or the nation itself is under immanent attack. Syria clearly did not represent an immanent danger to the US. Impeachment hearings should start soon.
furthermore ... do you peeps who believe the msm line on syria actually know who the syrian gov't is fighting? ... it's Al Qaeda and ISIS ... there is no civil war there ... there is no uprising from the people ... russia/syria are fighting extremists ... the supposed chemical attack in idlib is an al qaeda strong hold ...
soo ... by supporting action against syria now - you are basically supporting terrorists ...
I don't think it is as simple as to say that if you support action against the Syrian government you are supporting the terrorist.
if the Syrian gov't falls - the country will be overun by terrorists ... it's similar to what is happening in iraq and basically every other country the US has orchestrated regime change ...0 -
Still, proof of nothing is not evidence of something.polaris_x said:
So ...CM189191 said:
So why not link directly to the Blixt quote? Instead of this hack job?polaris_x said:
uhhh ... talk about lack of critical reading skills ... i specifically said if you are gonna gripe about the source to then actually provide proof that anything is not factual ...CM189191 said:
Wow, an entire article of: "I don't know anything, I'm just asking questions here!" It's like the broken clock method of 'journalism': if I write about enough conspiracy theories, one of them is bound to hit!polaris_x said:another good summation of how people need to view the information ...
https://sciscomedia.co.uk/sarin-gas-assad-fake-news/
if you're gonna decry the source - then I challenge you to find any faulty information and evidence of such ...
Who is this author, what makes him an authority on anything? How many shitty news orgs does he write for?
https://sciscomedia.co.uk/author/danielmargrain/
https://cultureandpolitics.org/author/cultpolitical/
https://bsnews.info/author/daniel-margrain/
http://mondoweiss.net/author/daniel-margrain/
https://normanpilon.com/tag/daniel-margrain/
http://www.renegadetribune.com/author/danielmargrain/
http://guerillawire.org/author/daniel-margrain/
http://russia-insider.com/en/daniel-margrain
https://astutenews.com/tag/daniel-margrain/
None of them appear to have any credibility. Sometimes I think the critical reading skills are worse than the critical thinking skills around here.
did your critical reading skills read the part about hans blixt who said there is no proof of syria launching a chemical attack? ... the same guy who kept saying there was no WMD in iraq?
any interest in actually learning about syrian history, poliltics and geography before continuing the buy the unsubstantiated lies the msm is peddling? ... because if assad falls - we have another country run by terrorists ...
where are the terrorists controlling more and more land and resources now? ... iraq, libya and syria ... all places the US has decided to intervene in ...
"In an interview with DW, the Swedish diplomat said he could appreciate that most of world opinion, having been "rightly indignant" about the gas attack on Syrian civilians, will approve of the missile strikes. Blix says he thinks the retaliation was "measured" and specific, and he doesn't think the Trump administration is planning an "all-out war" in Syria. But he did, however, criticize the fact that the US made the decision to carry out the strikes unilaterally, hastily and without making a legal case that they were justified, which he refers to as the US acting like the "world's sheriff."
"I don't know whether in Washington they presented any evidence, but I did not see that in the Security Council," Blix said. "Merely pictures of victims that were held up, that the whole world can see with horror, such pictures are not necessarily evidence of who did it."
Blix says the problem with this situation is that while it's natural to jump to the conclusion that the regime is far more likely than the rebels to have the means to carry out an attack of this magnitude with a substance such as sarin gas, it is far from proven that it did so.
And those distinctions matter, Blix insists. "If you had a murder and you strongly suspect one fellow, do you go to judgment and execution straight away?" he asked. "Three days after the murder?""
Proof of nothing is not evidence of something.
* Same claims made against Assad in 2013 - proven false then
* Syria dismantled all chemical weapons as overseen by UN organization
factor in sources which the attack was reported .. white helmets = terrorist group started by former British military and funded by US gov't ...
we are a week after and there is STILL NO proof Assad engaged in a chemical attack ... NONE ... only the same lies that were put forth in 2013 ...
0 -
fife said:
not taking this the wrong way at all. my only issue with what you wrote (and maybe i read it wrong) is that you seem to say that is that if you believe that the syrian government did this then you are just believing what MSM is saying to us. you don't know if I or others read other Non-MSM news sites. Again I may have read your post wrong and if I did then I am sorry for thatpolaris_x said:
don't take this the wrong way but as I recommended to people - do a bit of objective research on Syria ... if you will only believe things from msm sites - then there really isn't much to add ... but there are a lot of independent media that is telling not only a different story ... but also showing direct evidence of the fraud being perpetrated there ... check out the video I posted at the beginning of this thread ... this is a delegation of the US Peace Council and their independent investigation into Syria ...fife said:
I agree that technically this is not a civil war but at the same time it is a civil war that the people are dealing with. yes the people are not uprising but can you expect that when one side you have a governemnt that is dropping bombs on them and on the other side they also have ISIS is attacking the people also?polaris_x said:
exactly ... there is none ... and I guarantee you no one has any ... it was the same in 2013 ... the same people went into iraq with no proof either ...Degeneratefk said:I have yet to find or see any proof that it was Assad that ordered the chemical attack. Does anyone have any? Furthermore, Trump launching a strike of that caliber without congressional approval is illegal. The president is allowed discretion to carry out acts of war without congressional approval ONLY when national security or the nation itself is under immanent attack. Syria clearly did not represent an immanent danger to the US. Impeachment hearings should start soon.
furthermore ... do you peeps who believe the msm line on syria actually know who the syrian gov't is fighting? ... it's Al Qaeda and ISIS ... there is no civil war there ... there is no uprising from the people ... russia/syria are fighting extremists ... the supposed chemical attack in idlib is an al qaeda strong hold ...
soo ... by supporting action against syria now - you are basically supporting terrorists ...
I don't think it is as simple as to say that if you support action against the Syrian government you are supporting the terrorist.
if the Syrian gov't falls - the country will be overun by terrorists ... it's similar to what is happening in iraq and basically every other country the US has orchestrated regime change ...
my assumption, right or wrong, is that most are getting their info from msm sites simply because the rhetoric is the same and no one has actually posted any counterpoints to the ones I've put forth ... like there is a whole video from an Australian academic who's visited syria just on this page ... i doubt anyone is actually gonna view it and provide any counter arguments ... which has lead me to ask people to do their own objective research to actually come forth with a position or counter argument ... because right now - I keep posting information and all i get is those are conspiracy sites or square hole round peg positions ...fife said:
not taking this the wrong way at all. my only issue with what you wrote (and maybe i read it wrong) is that you seem to say that is that if you believe that the syrian government did this then you are just believing what MSM is saying to us. you don't know if I or others read other Non-MSM news sites. Again I may have read your post wrong and if I did then I am sorry for thatpolaris_x said:
don't take this the wrong way but as I recommended to people - do a bit of objective research on Syria ... if you will only believe things from msm sites - then there really isn't much to add ... but there are a lot of independent media that is telling not only a different story ... but also showing direct evidence of the fraud being perpetrated there ... check out the video I posted at the beginning of this thread ... this is a delegation of the US Peace Council and their independent investigation into Syria ...fife said:
I agree that technically this is not a civil war but at the same time it is a civil war that the people are dealing with. yes the people are not uprising but can you expect that when one side you have a governemnt that is dropping bombs on them and on the other side they also have ISIS is attacking the people also?polaris_x said:
exactly ... there is none ... and I guarantee you no one has any ... it was the same in 2013 ... the same people went into iraq with no proof either ...Degeneratefk said:I have yet to find or see any proof that it was Assad that ordered the chemical attack. Does anyone have any? Furthermore, Trump launching a strike of that caliber without congressional approval is illegal. The president is allowed discretion to carry out acts of war without congressional approval ONLY when national security or the nation itself is under immanent attack. Syria clearly did not represent an immanent danger to the US. Impeachment hearings should start soon.
furthermore ... do you peeps who believe the msm line on syria actually know who the syrian gov't is fighting? ... it's Al Qaeda and ISIS ... there is no civil war there ... there is no uprising from the people ... russia/syria are fighting extremists ... the supposed chemical attack in idlib is an al qaeda strong hold ...
soo ... by supporting action against syria now - you are basically supporting terrorists ...
I don't think it is as simple as to say that if you support action against the Syrian government you are supporting the terrorist.
if the Syrian gov't falls - the country will be overun by terrorists ... it's similar to what is happening in iraq and basically every other country the US has orchestrated regime change ...
0 -
feel free to offer some evidence ... or provide ANY reasoning besides assad is a bad man and he must've did it ... you would think with your rant on critical reading and thinking - you could come up with something of substance ...CM189191 said:
Still, proof of nothing is not evidence of something.polaris_x said:
So ...CM189191 said:
So why not link directly to the Blixt quote? Instead of this hack job?polaris_x said:
uhhh ... talk about lack of critical reading skills ... i specifically said if you are gonna gripe about the source to then actually provide proof that anything is not factual ...CM189191 said:
Wow, an entire article of: "I don't know anything, I'm just asking questions here!" It's like the broken clock method of 'journalism': if I write about enough conspiracy theories, one of them is bound to hit!polaris_x said:another good summation of how people need to view the information ...
https://sciscomedia.co.uk/sarin-gas-assad-fake-news/
if you're gonna decry the source - then I challenge you to find any faulty information and evidence of such ...
Who is this author, what makes him an authority on anything? How many shitty news orgs does he write for?
https://sciscomedia.co.uk/author/danielmargrain/
https://cultureandpolitics.org/author/cultpolitical/
https://bsnews.info/author/daniel-margrain/
http://mondoweiss.net/author/daniel-margrain/
https://normanpilon.com/tag/daniel-margrain/
http://www.renegadetribune.com/author/danielmargrain/
http://guerillawire.org/author/daniel-margrain/
http://russia-insider.com/en/daniel-margrain
https://astutenews.com/tag/daniel-margrain/
None of them appear to have any credibility. Sometimes I think the critical reading skills are worse than the critical thinking skills around here.
did your critical reading skills read the part about hans blixt who said there is no proof of syria launching a chemical attack? ... the same guy who kept saying there was no WMD in iraq?
any interest in actually learning about syrian history, poliltics and geography before continuing the buy the unsubstantiated lies the msm is peddling? ... because if assad falls - we have another country run by terrorists ...
where are the terrorists controlling more and more land and resources now? ... iraq, libya and syria ... all places the US has decided to intervene in ...
"In an interview with DW, the Swedish diplomat said he could appreciate that most of world opinion, having been "rightly indignant" about the gas attack on Syrian civilians, will approve of the missile strikes. Blix says he thinks the retaliation was "measured" and specific, and he doesn't think the Trump administration is planning an "all-out war" in Syria. But he did, however, criticize the fact that the US made the decision to carry out the strikes unilaterally, hastily and without making a legal case that they were justified, which he refers to as the US acting like the "world's sheriff."
"I don't know whether in Washington they presented any evidence, but I did not see that in the Security Council," Blix said. "Merely pictures of victims that were held up, that the whole world can see with horror, such pictures are not necessarily evidence of who did it."
Blix says the problem with this situation is that while it's natural to jump to the conclusion that the regime is far more likely than the rebels to have the means to carry out an attack of this magnitude with a substance such as sarin gas, it is far from proven that it did so.
And those distinctions matter, Blix insists. "If you had a murder and you strongly suspect one fellow, do you go to judgment and execution straight away?" he asked. "Three days after the murder?""
Proof of nothing is not evidence of something.
* Same claims made against Assad in 2013 - proven false then
* Syria dismantled all chemical weapons as overseen by UN organization
factor in sources which the attack was reported .. white helmets = terrorist group started by former British military and funded by US gov't ...
we are a week after and there is STILL NO proof Assad engaged in a chemical attack ... NONE ... only the same lies that were put forth in 2013 ...0 -
Of the 47 major editorial boards of Newspapers across the country, only the Houston Chronicle had a piece opposed to the strike. So I think Hugh's observation makes sense. When you have 83% of the major editorials supporting the strike, that definitely seems as if everyone is on board.Degeneratefk said:
Who's everyone?HughFreakingDillon said:
not when everyone seems to be on board with the strike.Degeneratefk said:I have yet to find or see any proof that it was Assad that ordered the chemical attack. Does anyone have any? Furthermore, Trump launching a strike of that caliber without congressional approval is illegal. The president is allowed discretion to carry out acts of war without congressional approval ONLY when national security or the nation itself is under immanent attack. Syria clearly did not represent an immanent danger to the US. Impeachment hearings should start soon.
http://fair.org/home/out-of-46-major-editorials-on-trumps-syria-strikes-only-one-opposed/
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/080 -
I think a more telling piece of information to assess would be to tally up the letters to the editor in response to those editorials and whether they leaned for or against. Newspapers are owned by media conglomerates and often time direct the view of their said editorial boards under a cloak of "independence." Polls show, I think, 54% of Americans approved of the strike. While a majority, it's not "vast" or "overwhelming." I for one didn't approve of it. Everyone is not on board. Wag the dog.09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©0 -
No argument here. I think letters to the editors, and comments sections on the websites of those publications would be interesting to analyze this way. I'm just saying that Hugh was not out of line in saying that it "seemed" that everyone was on board. The cable news shows talked about how presidential Drumpf suddenly was. The newpapers all came out in favor. There were congresscritters from both parties praising the strike. So while many of us peons are opposed, the loudest voices with the longest reach sure seem(ed) to be supportive.Halifax2TheMax said:I think a more telling piece of information to assess would be to tally up the letters to the editor in response to those editorials and whether they leaned for or against. Newspapers are owned by media conglomerates and often time direct the view of their said editorial boards under a cloak of "independence." Polls show, I think, 54% of Americans approved of the strike. While a majority, it's not "vast" or "overwhelming." I for one didn't approve of it. Everyone is not on board. Wag the dog.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/080 -
I didn't claim Assad did it.polaris_x said:
feel free to offer some evidence ... or provide ANY reasoning besides assad is a bad man and he must've did it ... you would think with your rant on critical reading and thinking - you could come up with something of substance ...CM189191 said:
Still, proof of nothing is not evidence of something.polaris_x said:
So ...CM189191 said:
So why not link directly to the Blixt quote? Instead of this hack job?polaris_x said:
uhhh ... talk about lack of critical reading skills ... i specifically said if you are gonna gripe about the source to then actually provide proof that anything is not factual ...CM189191 said:
Wow, an entire article of: "I don't know anything, I'm just asking questions here!" It's like the broken clock method of 'journalism': if I write about enough conspiracy theories, one of them is bound to hit!polaris_x said:another good summation of how people need to view the information ...
https://sciscomedia.co.uk/sarin-gas-assad-fake-news/
if you're gonna decry the source - then I challenge you to find any faulty information and evidence of such ...
Who is this author, what makes him an authority on anything? How many shitty news orgs does he write for?
https://sciscomedia.co.uk/author/danielmargrain/
https://cultureandpolitics.org/author/cultpolitical/
https://bsnews.info/author/daniel-margrain/
http://mondoweiss.net/author/daniel-margrain/
https://normanpilon.com/tag/daniel-margrain/
http://www.renegadetribune.com/author/danielmargrain/
http://guerillawire.org/author/daniel-margrain/
http://russia-insider.com/en/daniel-margrain
https://astutenews.com/tag/daniel-margrain/
None of them appear to have any credibility. Sometimes I think the critical reading skills are worse than the critical thinking skills around here.
did your critical reading skills read the part about hans blixt who said there is no proof of syria launching a chemical attack? ... the same guy who kept saying there was no WMD in iraq?
any interest in actually learning about syrian history, poliltics and geography before continuing the buy the unsubstantiated lies the msm is peddling? ... because if assad falls - we have another country run by terrorists ...
where are the terrorists controlling more and more land and resources now? ... iraq, libya and syria ... all places the US has decided to intervene in ...
"In an interview with DW, the Swedish diplomat said he could appreciate that most of world opinion, having been "rightly indignant" about the gas attack on Syrian civilians, will approve of the missile strikes. Blix says he thinks the retaliation was "measured" and specific, and he doesn't think the Trump administration is planning an "all-out war" in Syria. But he did, however, criticize the fact that the US made the decision to carry out the strikes unilaterally, hastily and without making a legal case that they were justified, which he refers to as the US acting like the "world's sheriff."
"I don't know whether in Washington they presented any evidence, but I did not see that in the Security Council," Blix said. "Merely pictures of victims that were held up, that the whole world can see with horror, such pictures are not necessarily evidence of who did it."
Blix says the problem with this situation is that while it's natural to jump to the conclusion that the regime is far more likely than the rebels to have the means to carry out an attack of this magnitude with a substance such as sarin gas, it is far from proven that it did so.
And those distinctions matter, Blix insists. "If you had a murder and you strongly suspect one fellow, do you go to judgment and execution straight away?" he asked. "Three days after the murder?""
Proof of nothing is not evidence of something.
* Same claims made against Assad in 2013 - proven false then
* Syria dismantled all chemical weapons as overseen by UN organization
factor in sources which the attack was reported .. white helmets = terrorist group started by former British military and funded by US gov't ...
we are a week after and there is STILL NO proof Assad engaged in a chemical attack ... NONE ... only the same lies that were put forth in 2013 ...
The statement from the source that you referenced said it wasn't proven one way or the other.
You interpreted that to mean Assad didn't do it and the terrorist/rebels did without any concrete evidence, and said that's how people should be viewing the information. Again, with no substance to back it up. The impetus is on you to provide evidence to support your beliefs and you haven't done that here by linking to some crockpot tinfoil opinion blog.0 -
by everyone, I wasn't talking general population. sorry if that wasn't clear. i was meaning world leaders of allied nations and even democrats in the US.jeffbr said:
No argument here. I think letters to the editors, and comments sections on the websites of those publications would be interesting to analyze this way. I'm just saying that Hugh was not out of line in saying that it "seemed" that everyone was on board. The cable news shows talked about how presidential Drumpf suddenly was. The newpapers all came out in favor. There were congresscritters from both parties praising the strike. So while many of us peons are opposed, the loudest voices with the longest reach sure seem(ed) to be supportive.Halifax2TheMax said:I think a more telling piece of information to assess would be to tally up the letters to the editor in response to those editorials and whether they leaned for or against. Newspapers are owned by media conglomerates and often time direct the view of their said editorial boards under a cloak of "independence." Polls show, I think, 54% of Americans approved of the strike. While a majority, it's not "vast" or "overwhelming." I for one didn't approve of it. Everyone is not on board. Wag the dog.
By The Time They Figure Out What Went Wrong, We'll Be Sitting On A Beach, Earning Twenty Percent.0 -
that was one aspect of the link ... there was many more points to consider ...CM189191 said:
I didn't claim Assad did it.polaris_x said:
feel free to offer some evidence ... or provide ANY reasoning besides assad is a bad man and he must've did it ... you would think with your rant on critical reading and thinking - you could come up with something of substance ...CM189191 said:
Still, proof of nothing is not evidence of something.polaris_x said:
So ...CM189191 said:
So why not link directly to the Blixt quote? Instead of this hack job?polaris_x said:
uhhh ... talk about lack of critical reading skills ... i specifically said if you are gonna gripe about the source to then actually provide proof that anything is not factual ...CM189191 said:
Wow, an entire article of: "I don't know anything, I'm just asking questions here!" It's like the broken clock method of 'journalism': if I write about enough conspiracy theories, one of them is bound to hit!polaris_x said:another good summation of how people need to view the information ...
https://sciscomedia.co.uk/sarin-gas-assad-fake-news/
if you're gonna decry the source - then I challenge you to find any faulty information and evidence of such ...
Who is this author, what makes him an authority on anything? How many shitty news orgs does he write for?
https://sciscomedia.co.uk/author/danielmargrain/
https://cultureandpolitics.org/author/cultpolitical/
https://bsnews.info/author/daniel-margrain/
http://mondoweiss.net/author/daniel-margrain/
https://normanpilon.com/tag/daniel-margrain/
http://www.renegadetribune.com/author/danielmargrain/
http://guerillawire.org/author/daniel-margrain/
http://russia-insider.com/en/daniel-margrain
https://astutenews.com/tag/daniel-margrain/
None of them appear to have any credibility. Sometimes I think the critical reading skills are worse than the critical thinking skills around here.
did your critical reading skills read the part about hans blixt who said there is no proof of syria launching a chemical attack? ... the same guy who kept saying there was no WMD in iraq?
any interest in actually learning about syrian history, poliltics and geography before continuing the buy the unsubstantiated lies the msm is peddling? ... because if assad falls - we have another country run by terrorists ...
where are the terrorists controlling more and more land and resources now? ... iraq, libya and syria ... all places the US has decided to intervene in ...
"In an interview with DW, the Swedish diplomat said he could appreciate that most of world opinion, having been "rightly indignant" about the gas attack on Syrian civilians, will approve of the missile strikes. Blix says he thinks the retaliation was "measured" and specific, and he doesn't think the Trump administration is planning an "all-out war" in Syria. But he did, however, criticize the fact that the US made the decision to carry out the strikes unilaterally, hastily and without making a legal case that they were justified, which he refers to as the US acting like the "world's sheriff."
"I don't know whether in Washington they presented any evidence, but I did not see that in the Security Council," Blix said. "Merely pictures of victims that were held up, that the whole world can see with horror, such pictures are not necessarily evidence of who did it."
Blix says the problem with this situation is that while it's natural to jump to the conclusion that the regime is far more likely than the rebels to have the means to carry out an attack of this magnitude with a substance such as sarin gas, it is far from proven that it did so.
And those distinctions matter, Blix insists. "If you had a murder and you strongly suspect one fellow, do you go to judgment and execution straight away?" he asked. "Three days after the murder?""
Proof of nothing is not evidence of something.
* Same claims made against Assad in 2013 - proven false then
* Syria dismantled all chemical weapons as overseen by UN organization
factor in sources which the attack was reported .. white helmets = terrorist group started by former British military and funded by US gov't ...
we are a week after and there is STILL NO proof Assad engaged in a chemical attack ... NONE ... only the same lies that were put forth in 2013 ...
The statement from the source that you referenced said it wasn't proven one way or the other.
You interpreted that to mean Assad didn't do it and the terrorist/rebels did without any concrete evidence, and said that's how people should be viewing the information. Again, with no substance to back it up. The impetus is on you to provide evidence to support your beliefs and you haven't done that here by linking to some crockpot tinfoil opinion blog.
how is the impetus on me to prove that the syrian gov't didn't do it? ... why is that the standard? ... bomb first, ask questions later? ... is that how democracy works? ... since when is the burden of proof to be provided by the defense?
also, if the fact this tactic was used in 2013 and was debunked, the fact the UN inspected that Syria has dismantled its chemical weapons programs or the fact that the evidence being used is from a terrorist group is not good enough for you ... then there is nothing that will be ...
so, to be clear - you do not have a counter to any of the points presented ... only that you don't believe it ... so, fail on both your critical reading and critical thinking rant ...
0 -
but there's no proof as it stands right now, only evidence of what you believe took/didn't take place. but you are equating that with proof. you are correct, the onus is not on you to prove a negative, however, just because proof doesn't exist that Assad did it, it's a bit of a leap to talk about it as if it's fact.polaris_x said:
that was one aspect of the link ... there was many more points to consider ...CM189191 said:
I didn't claim Assad did it.polaris_x said:
feel free to offer some evidence ... or provide ANY reasoning besides assad is a bad man and he must've did it ... you would think with your rant on critical reading and thinking - you could come up with something of substance ...CM189191 said:
Still, proof of nothing is not evidence of something.polaris_x said:
So ...CM189191 said:
So why not link directly to the Blixt quote? Instead of this hack job?polaris_x said:
uhhh ... talk about lack of critical reading skills ... i specifically said if you are gonna gripe about the source to then actually provide proof that anything is not factual ...CM189191 said:
Wow, an entire article of: "I don't know anything, I'm just asking questions here!" It's like the broken clock method of 'journalism': if I write about enough conspiracy theories, one of them is bound to hit!polaris_x said:another good summation of how people need to view the information ...
https://sciscomedia.co.uk/sarin-gas-assad-fake-news/
if you're gonna decry the source - then I challenge you to find any faulty information and evidence of such ...
Who is this author, what makes him an authority on anything? How many shitty news orgs does he write for?
https://sciscomedia.co.uk/author/danielmargrain/
https://cultureandpolitics.org/author/cultpolitical/
https://bsnews.info/author/daniel-margrain/
http://mondoweiss.net/author/daniel-margrain/
https://normanpilon.com/tag/daniel-margrain/
http://www.renegadetribune.com/author/danielmargrain/
http://guerillawire.org/author/daniel-margrain/
http://russia-insider.com/en/daniel-margrain
https://astutenews.com/tag/daniel-margrain/
None of them appear to have any credibility. Sometimes I think the critical reading skills are worse than the critical thinking skills around here.
did your critical reading skills read the part about hans blixt who said there is no proof of syria launching a chemical attack? ... the same guy who kept saying there was no WMD in iraq?
any interest in actually learning about syrian history, poliltics and geography before continuing the buy the unsubstantiated lies the msm is peddling? ... because if assad falls - we have another country run by terrorists ...
where are the terrorists controlling more and more land and resources now? ... iraq, libya and syria ... all places the US has decided to intervene in ...
"In an interview with DW, the Swedish diplomat said he could appreciate that most of world opinion, having been "rightly indignant" about the gas attack on Syrian civilians, will approve of the missile strikes. Blix says he thinks the retaliation was "measured" and specific, and he doesn't think the Trump administration is planning an "all-out war" in Syria. But he did, however, criticize the fact that the US made the decision to carry out the strikes unilaterally, hastily and without making a legal case that they were justified, which he refers to as the US acting like the "world's sheriff."
"I don't know whether in Washington they presented any evidence, but I did not see that in the Security Council," Blix said. "Merely pictures of victims that were held up, that the whole world can see with horror, such pictures are not necessarily evidence of who did it."
Blix says the problem with this situation is that while it's natural to jump to the conclusion that the regime is far more likely than the rebels to have the means to carry out an attack of this magnitude with a substance such as sarin gas, it is far from proven that it did so.
And those distinctions matter, Blix insists. "If you had a murder and you strongly suspect one fellow, do you go to judgment and execution straight away?" he asked. "Three days after the murder?""
Proof of nothing is not evidence of something.
* Same claims made against Assad in 2013 - proven false then
* Syria dismantled all chemical weapons as overseen by UN organization
factor in sources which the attack was reported .. white helmets = terrorist group started by former British military and funded by US gov't ...
we are a week after and there is STILL NO proof Assad engaged in a chemical attack ... NONE ... only the same lies that were put forth in 2013 ...
The statement from the source that you referenced said it wasn't proven one way or the other.
You interpreted that to mean Assad didn't do it and the terrorist/rebels did without any concrete evidence, and said that's how people should be viewing the information. Again, with no substance to back it up. The impetus is on you to provide evidence to support your beliefs and you haven't done that here by linking to some crockpot tinfoil opinion blog.
how is the impetus on me to prove that the syrian gov't didn't do it? ... why is that the standard? ... bomb first, ask questions later? ... is that how democracy works? ... since when is the burden of proof to be provided by the defense?
also, if the fact this tactic was used in 2013 and was debunked, the fact the UN inspected that Syria has dismantled its chemical weapons programs or the fact that the evidence being used is from a terrorist group is not good enough for you ... then there is nothing that will be ...
so, to be clear - you do not have a counter to any of the points presented ... only that you don't believe it ... so, fail on both your critical reading and critical thinking rant ...By The Time They Figure Out What Went Wrong, We'll Be Sitting On A Beach, Earning Twenty Percent.0
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