The Syrian "Revolution": A Farce from Beginning to End

wegs said:
.....
And this begs the question…If the US strikes Syria or not…will the US still end up in a major conflict with Iran? In my mind’s eye, the answer is yes…it’s just a matter of when and for how long. In other words…I think there’s no way out of going to war with Iran. :(
Click to expand...
I have seen Iran make progress toward democracy, women's rights and concessions to the West. These should be encouraged so that any war is prevented.
I like the Iranians and hate the thought of fighting them. Build friendships not hatred is what I would encourage.
Whereas Assad has always left me feeling like we are looking at another Hitler.
 
Robittybob1 said:
I have seen Iran make progress toward democracy, women's rights and concessions to the West. These should be encouraged so that any war is prevented.
I like the Iranians and hate the thought of fighting them. Build friendships not hatred is what I would encourage.
Whereas Assad has always left me feeling like we are looking at another Hitler.
Click to expand...

You raise interesting points.

Depending on what people’s thoughts are on Al Jazeera…I read this today:
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2013/09/201395104630886129.html
 
wegs said:
You raise interesting points.

Depending on what people’s thoughts are on Al Jazeera…I read this today:
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2013/09/201395104630886129.html
Click to expand...
Just the headline says enough. "Iran says US will suffer if Syria is attacked" . President Obama should go and have a chat with Supreme Leader Khamenei on his way back from Putin and present him with the evidence.
If the Iranians are God fearing as he, Supreme Leader Khamenei, should be won't the truth convince him?

Blessed are the peacemakers, and now is the opportune time.
 
The evidence will probably show that Sarin was used.
It won't show who used it, so people on Assad's side will continue to claim the rebels did it.
If any remained, it might give some indications about the method of manufacture.
The evidence was taken nine days after the attack, so may not be useful at all.

@wegs
The Iranian Aatollahs tend to be bombastic.
I wouldn't be surprised if what Khamenei said wasn't toned down considerably.
It was probably more like "We will rain down the fires of hell from the heavens and destroy them utterly"
"America will suffer" sounds positively benign.
 
Bells said:
How many times must you be asked to stop posting this crap?

No, really. How many times?
Click to expand...


Bells, my answer to your question(s) is : I am not entirely sure that I "must" be asked even one time.

Bells, since I answered your question(s), may I ask a couple of you?
....... 1.) Why exactly do (or to use your vernacular "must") you consider the information/view/opinion/Posting "crap" ?
....... 2.) Why exactly do (or to use your vernacular "must") you feel so compelled to ask that I stop Posting the information/views/opinions in a Free and Open Forum ?

Bells, if your Post is truthful and the count means that much to you, why not keep a running tally and Post it for interested parties?

I answered your questions, openly and honestly.
Will you, please, answer mine, openly and honestly ?

No, really. Will you, please, answer mine, openly and honestly ?
 
Captain Kremmen said:
The evidence will probably show that Sarin was used.
It won't show who used it, so people on Assad's side will continue to claim the rebels did it.
It may give some indications about the method of manufacture,
which might point in one direction or the other.
Click to expand...

Well I hope for all our sakes there is real evidence. Proof one side did it, and it overcomes this toing and froing.
 
Good day. In the interest of providing as close to the factual, validated and true information that is currently available, I Post the following Links.
I have read the pages Linked, and although some do express an editorial comment(s)...they are not my, dmoe, repeat, not my comments - I am Posting only for the sake of the "data" contained within them.
I have read the pages Linked, and they seem to me, dmoe, to be "free" of any "harmful" or "offensive" content. However, I did not, I repeat, I, dmoe, did not click on every Link on every Page!
Nor did I, dmoe, I repeat, nor did I click on every Link of every Linked Page...so...

So...at the risk of becoming some sort of "virtual social Pariah" - but more in the interest of supplying pertinent information on the sales/exports of Military Arms/Equipment/Supplies to the counties/nations of the world...here are some Links :

....... - "The 'Big Six' arms exporters" - below -
....... - http://www.amnesty.org/en/news/big-six-arms-exporters-2012-06-11

....... - "The Arms Trade is Big Business" - below -
....... - http://www.globalissues.org/article...big-business#GlobalArmsSalesBySupplierNations

....... - "Arms sales: who are the world's 100 top arms producers?" - below -
....... - http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/mar/02/arms-sales-top-100-producers

....... - "Arms industry" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_industry#World.27s_largest_arms_exporters

Whether or not these countries/corporations have a "vested" interest in creating or maintaining "wars"...you will have to ask them.
I do NOT "assume" nor "presume" anything at all about these countries or corporations.
I do however believe that these countries/corporations make these sales for a "profit" of some kind.
 
Captain Kremmen said:
So your point is, that Arms are big business?
Click to expand...


Captain Kremmen, since you placed a (?) question mark at the end of your Post #689, it would seem to me, dmoe, that other than the Post being merely sarcasm or rhetoric, it may, possibly, and I repeat, possibly be a question.

So, I, dmoe, will attempt, I repeat, attempt to clarify the Point of my Post #688 :

The "Global Military Industrial Complex" and also "Wars" are "Big Business" - and not just for Russia.

"Big Business", more often than not, operates on the "Business Model" of maintaining or hopefully increasing their "Business Revenues/Profits".
What a country/corporation does to maintain or increase these "Revenues/Profits" is at the sole discretion of said countries/corporations.

Captain Kremmen, so, have I in any way clarified what my "... point is"?

And, if so, may I, dmoe, inquire as to why you, Captain Kremmen, felt the need for the query in your Post #689 ?
 
My point was that you didn't make a point.
You can't just link to stuff, and expect people to read your mind.

What are you saying? Just say it.
 
Captain Kremmen said:
@Spidergoat
You look through Star and Stripe tinted spectacles.
What proportion of the vetoes do you suppose are by the United States?

Yes, selfish states are gradually turning the UN into another League of Nations,
but the US is doing more than its fair share towards that end.
Click to expand...
Maybe so, but all the more reason to act unilaterally.
 
Captain Kremmen said:
My point was that you didn't make a point.
You can't just link to stuff, and expect people to read your mind.

What are you saying? Just say it.
Click to expand...

Captain Kremmen, I have stated and restated my point(s), and done all that I can to clarify and explain those point(s)!

Captain Kremmen, if my maximum mental abilities to coherently express, explain and clarify my Posted views/point(s)/statements are so far below your minimum threshold for understanding...well then...?

Captain Kremmen, you must have far greater mental powers than I, dmoe, possess...for instance, I did not even know that it was possible for any human being to read any other human beings mind...let alone, expect that ability in another human being!

Captain Kremmen, perhaps, and I, dmoe, repeat, perhaps you may deign to use your obviously superior mind reading ability to read my thoughts/point(s)/views with said ability - even, as I stated before, I did not even know that it was possible for any human being to read any other human beings mind...let alone, expect that ability in another human being - with your superior abilities, I cannot assume nor presume that you will fail to achieve it.

Captain Kremmen, if you are, for some reason unable to read my mind, it could only therefore be attributed to my inferior mental facilities, would that not be the only possible explanation?

Captain Kremmen, in closing I must humbly state that I am sorry that my inferiority does not allow discourse with someone as superior as you.

Actually, this Post itself is probably below your minimum...threshold of understanding...

If so...meh!
 
youreyes said:
It's not just Russia and China who are against the war with Syria. Germany and Britain have also voiced against war with Syria at G20 meeting. And that is what U.N. is for, a mission of which is to come to a unilateral decision between its parties, and not be biased to ANY PARTICULAR COUNTRY OR ALLIANCES.
Click to expand...

Germany and Britain would not veto it through the UN. They said they won't strike Assad without UN approval. Well Germany did. The UK seems to be all over the place, but I can assure you, if you think they would veto it through the UN, then you are delusional.

The only country that has vetoed all sanctions and even condemnations against Assad over the last 2.5 years has been Russia. That's right, the UNSC aren't even allowed to condemn his actions because of Putin.

Russia, with the help of China, is acting solely to protect its interests in the Middle East. And even if its weapons are used in gassing people.

The ideal solution would be sanctions against Syria - whereupon Assad would be prevented from obtaining arms and seizing his money overseas so he cannot purchase more arms. That would be a peaceful solution. What a shame Russia vetoed that as well.:rolleyes:
 
dumbest man on earth said:
Bells, my answer to your question(s) is : I am not entirely sure that I "must" be asked even one time.

Bells, since I answered your question(s), may I ask a couple of you?
....... 1.) Why exactly do (or to use your vernacular "must") you consider the information/view/opinion/Posting "crap" ?
....... 2.) Why exactly do (or to use your vernacular "must") you feel so compelled to ask that I stop Posting the information/views/opinions in a Free and Open Forum ?

Bells, if your Post is truthful and the count means that much to you, why not keep a running tally and Post it for interested parties?

I answered your questions, openly and honestly.
Will you, please, answer mine, openly and honestly ?

No, really. Will you, please, answer mine, openly and honestly ?
Click to expand...
I asked you to stop posting off-topic and posting your anti-semitic rubbish. Just because you leave out the words Jews and Israel, does not hide the fact that you are still pushing the same anti-semitic ideology and lies to perpetuate the stereotype you seem to believe in.

I am not going to feed your OCD tendencies to count how many times I asked you to stop. What matters is that you were asked to stop. And instead of doing so, you have kept pushing the exact same rubbish.

So I will ask you one last time. Stop posting your conspiracy theory and anti-semitic theories about who controls the media.

Understand now?
 
Bells said:
Germany and Britain would not veto it through the UN. They said they won't strike Assad without UN approval. Well Germany did. The UK seems to be all over the place, but I can assure you, if you think they would veto it through the UN, then you are delusional.

The only country that has vetoed all sanctions and even condemnations against Assad over the last 2.5 years has been Russia. That's right, the UNSC aren't even allowed to condemn his actions because of Putin.

Russia, with the help of China, is acting solely to protect its interests in the Middle East. And even if its weapons are used in gassing people.

The ideal solution would be sanctions against Syria - whereupon Assad would be prevented from obtaining arms and seizing his money overseas so he cannot purchase more arms. That would be a peaceful solution. What a shame Russia vetoed that as well.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I think you are on the right track with all of this.
 
Bells said:
Russia, with the help of China, is acting solely to protect its interests in the Middle East. And even if its weapons are used in gassing people.

The ideal solution would be sanctions against Syria - whereupon Assad would be prevented from obtaining arms and seizing his money overseas so he cannot purchase more arms. That would be a peaceful solution. What a shame Russia vetoed that as well.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Stop pretending to be dumb, you are a smart woman. USA is starting this war on its own and before it gets permission from the government branches, it needs to sway public opinion with every possible option possible. If that means to kill innocent people just to start a war, that is the length US is going at.

What a shame USA is able to control its citizens that they blindly believe every lie they are being told. What a shame that other countries are joining this lie to protect their own companies and their subsiduaries in Syria. Bells, in Syria the so called "rebels" are terrorists from Al Quida, the same people that attacked WTC, are capable of using chemical weapons to stage what appears to be a government attack.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top