Syria attack: Activists says dozens, including children, killed by gas

#151
#151
therealUT said:
Mattis is, very obviously, using "evidence" in a very specific and qualified manner in that interview. That is, anybody who says, "We have reports from multiple sources and agencies, but we don't have evidence" is using "evidence" in an abnormal way, since reports and testimony are evidence.

Mattis is most likely saying that the US Military does not have its hands on samples.

In the same interview, Mattis very firmly says that Syria has repeatedly used chlorine gas.

As for motive, hmm...Oh, yes, supremely narcissistic dictator hates and abhors those that rebel and speak out against him and his regime.
Click to expand...

If he really hated them and that’s his motive, wouldn’t he be better off letting us withdraw so he can easily crush them? This is obviously counterproductive to his stated motive.

What do you base all your characterizations of Assad on?

And you don’t believe we should seek evidence before killing thousands of their people, hundreds of ours, and spending billions?
 
#152
#152
Vol0725 said:
This all reeks of Trump-Putin collusion, Mueller needs to raid the oval office immediately.


[twitter]984022625440747520[/twitter]
Click to expand...

I like the “nice and new and smart” part of the tweet. He needs to stop with this **** and worry about more important things like locking her up and funding from Mexico for that big beautiful wall
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#154
#154
Vol8188 said:
If he really hated them and that’s his motive, wouldn’t he be better off letting us withdraw so he can easily crush them? This is obviously counterproductive to his stated motive.

What do you base all your characterizations of Assad on?

And you don’t believe we should seek evidence before killing thousands of their people, hundreds of ours, and spending billions?
Click to expand...

1. Are you implying that narcissistic dictators often act for their long term self interest and are not impulsive? History says otherwise.

2. "Wins" "elections" with 90% of the vote in a nation with an active and viable anti regime movement. That's a clear mark of narcissistic dictators.

3. I don't think the US should be involved in Syria. I don't need to buy into Russian conspiracy theories to hold this stance.
 
#155
#155
Sin City Vol said:
I like the “nice and new and smart” part of the tweet. He needs to stop with this **** and worry about more important things like locking her up and funding from Mexico for that big beautiful wall
Click to expand...

If Trump isn't careful, he'll be setting himself up for a tragic military embarrassment that would make Jimmy Carter's Operation Eagle Claw look mild. In spite of the attack, the Syrians were able to intercept 5 of the 8 missiles from Israel.
 
#156
#156
Vol0725 said:
This all reeks of Trump-Putin collusion, Mueller needs to raid the oval office immediately.


[twitter]984022625440747520[/twitter]
Click to expand...

Please, for the love of all that is holy, square that tweet with what he said in the past:

[twitter]372943068267573249[/twitter]


[twitter]373581528405905408[/twitter]

The blind defense of his tweets is past stupid at this point. Most are reckless, dumb, and mired in hypocrisy from his previous statements.

Attack the mainstream media, Mueller investigation, and other leftist stupidity, sure...I agree....but please, the tweets are borderline retarded. Especially from a sitting president.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#159
#159
Pacer92 said:
U.S. Can Attack Syria Even If OPCW Finds No Evidence Of Chemical Weapons Use By Assad Government

Lunatics running this country...
Click to expand...

The President has had the authority to send our military into any country and carry out any engagement, so long as his administration says, "Well, terrorists might be harbored there", since 2001.

That authorization for the use of force is open-ended and so incredibly vague as to be laughable...if the situation weren't such a serious matter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#160
#160
therealUT said:
1. Are you implying that narcissistic dictators often act for their long term self interest and are not impulsive? History says otherwise.

2. "Wins" "elections" with 90% of the vote in a nation with an active and viable anti regime movement. That's a clear mark of narcissistic dictators.

3. I don't think the US should be involved in Syria. I don't need to buy into Russian conspiracy theories to hold this stance.
Click to expand...

I’m implying that you’re basing your characterization on very smalls amounts of biased info. That’s for him and most of these dictators.

My theory has 0 to do with Russia.
 
#161
#161
Vol8188 said:
I’m implying that you’re basing your characterization on very smalls amounts of biased info. That’s for him and most of these dictators.

My theory has 0 to do with Russia.
Click to expand...

He also plastered his face on their money. That's pretty damn narcissistic.

That's not biased info. The "election" results are not biased info.
 
#162
#162
rjd970 said:
Please, for the love of all that is holy, square that tweet with what he said in the past:

[twitter]372943068267573249[/twitter]


[twitter]373581528405905408[/twitter]

The blind defense of his tweets is past stupid at this point. Most are reckless, dumb, and mired in hypocrisy from his previous statements.

Attack the mainstream media, Mueller investigation, and other leftist stupidity, sure...I agree....but please, the tweets are borderline retarded. Especially from a sitting president.
Click to expand...
Maybe there's some hope for you Trump cultists after all.
 
#165
#165
therealUT said:
He also plastered his face on their money. That's pretty damn narcissistic.

That's not biased info. The "election" results are not biased info.
Click to expand...

Right. His face is on their money. Doesn’t mean he gassed his own people.
 
#167
#167
Vol8188 said:
Right. His face is on their money. Doesn’t mean he gassed his own people.
Click to expand...

It points to him being a supremely narcissistic dictator. As such, we can evaluate the situation with that in mind.

The biggest reason you have offered against him being the culprit is that he would not do this because it doesn't serve his long-term interest. But, narcissists often act impulsive, in ways that go against their long-term interest, and act with great vengeance against those who do not like them. Part of this is that they think they are just so great that, in the long run, they will prevail, no matter the odds.

Your theory relies on what, exactly?

Amnesty International cares about protecting the US or Russia? Amnesty International wants to provide the US Government with reasons for the US Government to go to war in Syria?

Basically, your theory relies on placing trust in the state controlled media of Syria and Russia (and, a handful of idiot bloggers on the blogosphere, who almost always link back to RT). Your theory denies placing trust in the free press of the free world, most of whom are anti-Trump and anti-US aggression. Your theory denies placing trust in a variety of NGOs, who also have a tendency to be anti-US and anti-US aggression.

That is, your theory makes patsies out of the most unlikely of candidates while declaring that the state-propaganda machines of Syria and Russia are beacons of truth and light.

So, yeah, your theory can be easily discarded. The most reasonable interpretation of these attacks is that chemical weapons were used, that they were used by Syria, and that Assad either directly authorized them or knew they were going to occur and did not step in to prevent it.

But...but....but...there's no "proof".

There's enough evidence to connect the ****ing dots.

And, I say this as someone who is opposed to US involvement in Syria. That is, it would serve my cause to actually say that Syria and Assad are not using chemical weapons on Syrians.

But, I'm not a moron.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#169
#169
If you think it is asinine to believe that a leader of a nation would do something that the rest of the world can see as clearly a mistake while that leader is winning a war, then you must think it is asinine to believe that Hitler ordered the invasion of Russia in 1941.

Because, after all, why would he split his forces when if he just continued to concentrate them in France he could have easily invaded and conquered Britain, kept the US completely out of the European theatre forever, and then, when the western front was completely pacified, he could have turned the entire might of the Nazi war machine against Stalin.

Stop trying to act like these narcissists are always in some brilliant mode of strategic thinking and planning. They aren't.

Assad cannot stand the fact that his own people abhor him. For that, he decides to kill them and make them suffer awful deaths. It's not a difficult concept.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#171
#171
therealUT said:
It points to him being a supremely narcissistic dictator. As such, we can evaluate the situation with that in mind.

The biggest reason you have offered against him being the culprit is that he would not do this because it doesn't serve his long-term interest. But, narcissists often act impulsive, in ways that go against their long-term interest, and act with great vengeance against those who do not like them. Part of this is that they think they are just so great that, in the long run, they will prevail, no matter the odds.

Your theory relies on what, exactly?

Amnesty International cares about protecting the US or Russia? Amnesty International wants to provide the US Government with reasons for the US Government to go to war in Syria?

Basically, your theory relies on placing trust in the state controlled media of Syria and Russia (and, a handful of idiot bloggers on the blogosphere, who almost always link back to RT). Your theory denies placing trust in the free press of the free world, most of whom are anti-Trump and anti-US aggression. Your theory denies placing trust in a variety of NGOs, who also have a tendency to be anti-US and anti-US aggression.

That is, your theory makes patsies out of the most unlikely of candidates while declaring that the state-propaganda machines of Syria and Russia are beacons of truth and light.

So, yeah, your theory can be easily discarded. The most reasonable interpretation of these attacks is that chemical weapons were used, that they were used by Syria, and that Assad either directly authorized them or knew they were going to occur and did not step in to prevent it.

But...but....but...there's no "proof".

There's enough evidence to connect the ****ing dots.

And, I say this as someone who is opposed to US involvement in Syria. That is, it would serve my cause to actually say that Syria and Assad are not using chemical weapons on Syrians.

But, I'm not a moron.
Click to expand...

Replace Syria with Iraq and this argument sounds really familiar. “Trust the media!”
 
#172
#172
Darkman said:
Trump warns missiles 'will be coming' in Syria

Trump warns missiles 'will be coming' in Syria
Click to expand...


hqdefault.jpg
 
#174
#174
therealUT said:
It points to him being a supremely narcissistic dictator. As such, we can evaluate the situation with that in mind.

The biggest reason you have offered against him being the culprit is that he would not do this because it doesn't serve his long-term interest. But, narcissists often act impulsive, in ways that go against their long-term interest, and act with great vengeance against those who do not like them. Part of this is that they think they are just so great that, in the long run, they will prevail, no matter the odds.

Your theory relies on what, exactly?
Click to expand...
Well his capricious and reckless nature seems to come at odd times. The last two gas attack events occurred not too long after Trump made comments about reducing forces or pulling troops out.
 
#175
#175
therealUT said:
If you think it is asinine to believe that a leader of a nation would do something that the rest of the world can see as clearly a mistake while that leader is winning a war, then you must think it is asinine to believe that Hitler ordered the invasion of Russia in 1941.

Because, after all, why would he split his forces when if he just continued to concentrate them in France he could have easily invaded and conquered Britain, kept the US completely out of the European theatre forever, and then, when the western front was completely pacified, he could have turned the entire might of the Nazi war machine against Stalin.

Stop trying to act like these narcissists are always in some brilliant mode of strategic thinking and planning. They aren't.

Assad cannot stand the fact that his own people abhor him. For that, he decides to kill them and make them suffer awful deaths. It's not a difficult concept.
Click to expand...
I think you are missing the overall point. No one can really argue what you are saying about narcissists and rogue dictators. The argument comes when you make the claim that Assad is one of those type of leaders.

And to be honest, with your fears and concerns about narcissists being in control of a country, how can you sleep knowing that Trump is your president?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top