U.S. Launches Millitary Strike Against Syria (merged)

Do you agree with Trump's decision to strike Syria?

  • Total voters
    0
  • Poll closed .
#601
#601
Pacer92 said:
I don't understand this reasoning either...

In 2013 the US government and western media immediately ran with reports that Assad had gassed civilians in Eastern Ghouta. Government officials were chomping at the bit to bomb Assad immediately, without delay..."we have to bomb Assad"..."he did it"..."he did it"...without a thorough and impartial investigation...

An international investigation was launched and it concluded without a doubt that the attack did not come from Assad, yet western funded Al-Queda affiliates...why not wait on an investigation this time, knowing reports were wrong in the almost identical act the first time?

This looks no different to me. Assad hasn't the motive. The emotion tugging propaganda of children and women was there the first time. The false claims and eye witnesses were there. The rush to judgement...

Americans are being duped...
Click to expand...
Link showing the results of the international investigation?
 
#603
#603
#605
#605
Velo Vol said:
There's more to it than that. Bad things happen all over the globe every day. Do we have an obligation to act?
Click to expand...

How do you propose we rid these countries of guns? We can't stop violence, but we can act when WMDs are deployed. Personally, I think NATO should have been the one to act, but it doesn't change the fact a WMD was used.
 
#606
#606
InVOLuntary said:
What makes you think it is likely? Like I said, you guys make things too complicated. It's seldom more complicated than it appears. What would isis have to gain? Make Assad look like a bad guy? Everybody knows Assad is a pos.
Click to expand...

You have to be ****ing with us.

The thing that makes me suspicious that ISIS did it istbat Assad literally has nothing to gain.

Are you seriously asking what ISIS has to gain by making Assad look bad?

You oversimplify things so that they are easy to digest, not because it's right way to go about a problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#607
#607
Last edited:
#608
#608
JFreak said:
No, I want the results from the UN investigation stating that attacks unequivocally came from rebel forces as you claimed you had. Not someone's ridiculously biased blog. Seriously, have you been to the front page of that Washington's Blog website?
Click to expand...

There are multiple links at the bottom of the article...
 
#610
#610
n_huffhines said:
You have to be ****ing with us.

The thing that makes me suspicious that ISIS did it istbat Assad literally has nothing to gain.

Are you seriously asking what ISIS has to gain by making Assad look bad?

You oversimplify things so that they are easy to digest, not because it's right way to go about a problem.
Click to expand...

Look. Neither of us know what happened. I think it is less likely that isis did while evidently you think it was some elaborate attempt to make one if the most hated dictators in the world look worse, which I happen to find laughable. You realize our military has 1000 times more knowledge than you or I do? There is evidence that Assad did it. Where is the evidence isis did it? I think you need to run off and make a run to wall Mart and start on the cap.
 
#611
#611
InVOLuntary said:
Look. Neither of us know what happened. I think it is less likely that isis did while evidently you think it was some elaborate attempt to make one if the most hated dictators in the world look worse, which I happen to find laughable. You realize our military has 1000 times more knowledge than you or I do? There is evidence that Assad did it. Where is the evidence isis did it? I think you need to run off and make a run to wall Mart and start on the cap.
Click to expand...

Assad is one of the most hated dictators in the world? He's an ophthalmologist, not some blood thirsty savage. I mean, really?

Why not the same level of outrage for The House of Saud?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#612
#612
InVOLuntary said:
Look. Neither of us know what happened. I think it is less likely that isis did while evidently you think it was some elaborate attempt to make one if the most hated dictators in the world look worse, which I happen to find laughable. You realize our military has 1000 times more knowledge than you or I do? There is evidence that Assad did it. Where is the evidence isis did it? I think you need to run off and make a run to wall Mart and start on the cap.
Click to expand...

I am not taking a position either way. I'm saying don't take a position until we know for sure. I am saying there is reason to be skeptical that it wasn't Assad.

Stop attributing false positions to me.

And you're doubling down on your "what does ISIS have to gain?" nonsense.
 
#613
#613
n_huffhines said:
I am not taking a position either way. I'm saying don't take a position until we know for sure. I am saying there is reason to be skeptical that it wasn't Assad.

Stop attributing false positions to me.

And you're doubling down on your "what does ISIS have to gain?" nonsense.
Click to expand...

Then tell me old wise one, what does isis have to gain? Make Assad look bad? My opinion there's not much lower than he can go. And, there is no way they would have calculated that Trump would have responded the way he did. My opinion takes into the evidence we have available now. You have zero, nada, zilch evidence to the contrary. I think it is more likely what we see is actually what happened.

Your the one doubling down on nonsense.
 
#614
#614
JFreak said:
None of which support what you said. Thanks for playing. Please stop spreading lies on this forum. Does no one any good.
Click to expand...

I shall rephrase then. There was no evidence that supported that Assad or the SAA were behind the chemical attack in the Damascus suburbs in the UN report...

Most all of evidence in the aforementioned links supports this as well...
 
#615
#615
Rasputin_Vol said:
Assad is one of the most hated dictators in the world? He's an ophthalmologist, not some blood thirsty savage. I mean, really?

Why not the same level of outrage for The House of Saud?
Click to expand...

He is a world renown ruthless dictator that everyone in the civilized world but the Russians would like to see gone.
 
#616
#616
InVOLuntary said:
Then tell me old wise one, what does isis have to gain? Make Assad look bad? My opinion there's not much lower than he can go. And, there is no way they would have calculated that Trump would have responded the way he did. My opinion takes into the evidence we have available now. You have zero, nada, zilch evidence to the contrary. I think it is more likely what we see is actually what happened.

Your the one doubling down on nonsense.
Click to expand...

Well, the obvious answer is that the US just bombed one of his airfields in response.

It doesn't take any wisdom to come up with that conclusion. I'm just not a dumbass.
 
#617
#617
Pacer92 said:
I shall rephrase then. There was no evidence that supported that Assad or the SAA were behind the chemical attack in the Damascus suburbs in the UN report...

Most all of evidence in the aforementioned links supports this as well...
Click to expand...
Wrong again. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-23927399
Some quotes from the article.
Human Rights Watch said the Syrian military was believed to have M-14 rockets, and one of the three warheads produced for them can carry 2.2kg (4.8lb) of sarin. Rebel forces were not believed to possess M-14s nor the associated BM-14 launching system, it added.
Click to expand...
Opposition forces are also not believed to have been in possession of the amount of Sarin used in the attack - hundreds of kilograms, according to Human Rights Watch's calculations - nor to have expertise in the specialised procedures required to load chemical warheads.
Click to expand...
The French intelligence assessment concluded that the attack "could not have been ordered and carried out by anyone but the Syrian government". It said "the launch zone for the rockets was held by the regime while the strike zone was held by the rebels", and that at the time commanders feared a wider attack on Damascus from the opposition.
Click to expand...
 
#618
#618
n_huffhines said:
Well, the obvious answer is that the US just bombed one of his airfields in response.

It doesn't take any wisdom to come up with that conclusion. I'm just not a dumbass.
Click to expand...

That's a pretty big stretch. After all the statements that Trump has made and for isis to count on Trump to make 180 degree change from his previous positions. But hey, let's stretch this twin size sheet on to a king size mattress.
 
Last edited:
#620
#620
InVOLuntary said:
That's a pretty big stretch. After all the statements that Trump has made and for isis to count on Trump to make 180 degree change from his previous positions. But hey, let's stretch this twin size sheet on to a kink size mattress.
Click to expand...

Did ISIS know exactly how the west would respond? No. Does that mean they wouldn't/shouldn't try to frame Assad? Of course it doesn't.

If they did frame him, it was very obviously a good frame job.

You're grasping at straws. Just accept that it's a possibility worth considering so we can move on with our lives. Or don't. I'm moving on.
 
Last edited:
#621
#621
Pacer92 said:
Human RIghts Watch isn't the UN...

And the only thing this article confirms is that sarin gas was used in the attack...not who used it..
Click to expand...
You won't find a report from the UN attributing responsibility because their mission was never to find who did it. That's why I called you out in the first place. French intelligence, US intelligence, and HRW are all in agreement that the Syrian government was responsible. All have ample evidence and telemetry data backing up their claim. The Russians and Syrian government claim the rebels are responsible. With no evidence at all. Might be time to reconsider your position.
 
#622
#622
n_huffhines said:
Did ISIS now exactly how the west would respond? No. Does that mean they wouldn't/shouldn't try to frame Assad? Of course it doesn't.

If they did frame him, it was very obviously frame job.

You're grasping at straws. Just accept that it's a possibility worth considering so we can move on with our lives. Or don't. I'm moving on.
Click to expand...

Lol, I'm grasping at straws? Show me one piece of evidence that isis did this.

You and many on here try their damnist to paint the US in as bad a light as possible. You're as predictable as the sun rising.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#623
#623
JFreak said:
You won't find a report from the UN attributing responsibility because their mission was never to find who did it. That's why I called you out in the first place. French intelligence, US intelligence, and HRW are all in agreement that the Syrian government was responsible. All have ample evidence and telemetry data backing up their claim. The Russians and Syrian government claim the rebels are responsible. With no evidence at all. Might be time to reconsider your position.
Click to expand...

There is plenty of evidence that supports the rebels using gas on multiple occasions...plenty of links..
 
#624
#624
n_huffhines said:
I am not taking a position either way. I'm saying don't take a position until we know for sure. I am saying there is reason to be skeptical that it wasn't Assad.
Click to expand...
The problem with that idea is that we will never know FOR SURE. There still is no proof on who conducted the attacks in 2013. However, there is a hell of a lot of evidence showing that Syrian government forces were responsible. Same thing in 2017..
Case for Syrian government forces being responsible (only unclassified information included): Aerial dispersal patterns which could only be possible from an air drop. Rebel forces do not have this capability. Syrian government known to possess Syrin gas and the capability to weaponize. Not believed that rebel forces are capable of the same. Radar imagery showing Syrian planes taking off from the airfield before the attack and returning shortly after.
Case for Syrian government not being responsible: A claim that the rebels were storing Syrin gas (which they are not know to have the capabilities to make) and that specific stockpile suffered a direct hit in an airstrike. There is no evidence to back up this claim.

While it is good to always be cautious, in cases such as this the unclassified evidence is overwhelmingly pointing in one direction. And if you're waiting for 100% solid proof, you'll never get it because it's impossible. There is no DNA evidence linking the killer to the crime scene so to speak.
 
#625
#625
Pacer92 said:
There is plenty of evidence that supports the rebels using gas on multiple occasions...plenty of links..
Click to expand...
Sarin? Please provide links. Dude, I seriously can't believe you're still trying to go down this rabbit hole. You've been proven wrong at least 5 posts in a row.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top