**Breaking The US has just made the decision to strike Syria....

[LongTermGuy]

No link yet....."Syrian Military 100% behind Gasing...: Russians informed..."

Just heard on FOX News...Announcement coming very soon......President to speak in about 15 minutes...


`God let me accept the things I cant change, courage to change things I can & the wisdom to know the difference.Have a blessed night and stay safe out there, y’all.`

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Das-qGDUQAA9JVX.jpg

[LongTermGuy]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DatGXJIXcAEFGXD.jpg

[LongTermGuy]

Strikes already under way....

[Drummond]

It's the only way.

Nobody wants these hostilities. But you either stand up and defy evil, or, you fall prey to it.

Doing nothing would encourage the wrongdoers - Assad's regime, and that one in the Kremlin - to believe that chemical weapons can be used against innocents without consequence. Sending that message would be a very bad one for the future of humanity.

This is essentially another 'anti-terrorist' action. Assad, and Putin, are happy to kill innocents, in indeterminate numbers, as they choose. Well .. so are terrorists. We tolerate their murderous ways, or, we show resistance to them.

[LongTermGuy]

It's the only way.

Nobody wants these hostilities. But you either stand up and defy evil, or, you fall prey to it.

Doing nothing would encourage the wrongdoers - Assad's regime, and that one in the Kremlin - to believe that chemical weapons can be used against innocents without consequence. Sending that message would be a very bad one for the future of humanity.

This is essentially another 'anti-terrorist' action. Assad, and Putin, are happy to kill innocents, in indeterminate numbers, as they choose. Well .. so are terrorists. We tolerate their murderous ways, or, we show resistance to them.


​Seems like a very different attack this time....Taking out Military

"Damascus Syria...large explosions light up sky...heavy smoke...US...France and England attacking..."



https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Das-VxaVQAIbJCj.jpg

[Gunny]

Brilliant. We will strike Syria. "Get your popcorn ..." You are bad guys we will smite you after giving you enough warning to hide your important assets in Russian airfields. Hell. you can have your next birthday party before we do anything.

Might as well just say w're pussies. Fuck. I'm disgusted. What w bunch of losers. I should have joined the IDF when I was 20 which was my on;y other option to bring a Marine.

[LongTermGuy]

RuthieRedSox‏ @RuthieRedSox (https://twitter.com/RuthieRedSox) 15m15 minutes ago (https://twitter.com/RuthieRedSox/status/984960506170695680)More



Tomahawks launching from a ship is the sound of freedom to many, but it’s death & destruction on the other end. Prayers for precision. #Syria (https://twitter.com/hashtag/Syria?src=hash)

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DatIWwvVMAAouGE.jpg

[Black Diamond]

Brilliant. We will strike Syria. "Get your popcorn ..." You are bad guys we will smite you after giving you enough warning to hide your important assets in Russian airfields. Hell. you can have your next birthday party before we do anything.

Might as well just say w're pussies. Fuck. I'm disgusted. What w bunch of losers. I should have joined the IDF when I was 20 which was my on;y other option to bring a Marine.
How much fucking popcorn are you going to make me eat ?

[LongTermGuy]

Brilliant. We will strike Syria. "Get your popcorn ..." You are bad guys we will smite you after giving you enough warning to hide your important assets in Russian airfields. Hell. you can have your next birthday party before we do anything.

Might as well just say w're pussies. Fuck. I'm disgusted. What w bunch of losers. I should have joined the IDF when I was 20 which was my on;y other option to bring a Marine.

You will be fine Gunny....The attacks have been going on for awhile...This "message" should be much stronger for the Gas attacks...we will see...


Military Installations...are targeted...and have been for awhile...

[pete311]

Trump is a walking hypocrisy. He should be apologizing to Bush for bashing him so hard in Iraq.

http://www.debatepolicy.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=11339&stc=1

[LongTermGuy]

https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/980659357883994112/vrzPQx0G_bigger.jpgSebastian Gorka DrG‏Verified account @SebGorka (https://twitter.com/SebGorka) 40m40 minutes ago (https://twitter.com/SebGorka/status/984963518301655040)More



The message from @realDonaldTrump (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump) tonight to Iran and Russia is clear. If you support a monster such as Assad, you will pay a price. Time for Tehran and Moscow to decide.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DatLFJZXUAE43EJ.jpg
Godspeed....

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DatRYqlWsAIkGg4.jpg

[revelarts]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alATb7oLRbo

[revelarts]

https://i.pinimg.com/564x/1c/fe/b5/1cfeb5131dceb8b785e86e9d9dde2df7.jpg

[High_Plains_Drifter]

Trump is a walking hypocrisy. He should be apologizing to Bush for bashing him so hard in Iraq.

http://www.debatepolicy.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=11339&stc=1
Pathetic photoshop... fake news.

[revelarts]

World Feb 2, 2018 1:44 PM EDT
WASHINGTON —
The U.S. has no evidence to confirm reports from aid groups and others that the Syrian government has used the deadly chemical sarin on its citizens, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said Friday.
“We have other reports from the battlefield from people who claim it’s been used,” Mattis told reporters at the Pentagon. “We do not have evidence of it.”
He said he was not rebutting the reports.
“We’re looking for evidence of it, since clearly we are dealing with the Assad regime that has used denial and deceit to hide their outlaw actions,” Mattis said....

[Elessar]

Trump is a walking hypocrisy. He should be apologizing to Bush for bashing him so hard in Iraq.


What did you want, pete? An Obama "line(s) in the sand"?

[High_Plains_Drifter]

World Feb 2, 2018 1:44 PM EDT
WASHINGTON —
Well he just said LIVE on TV that now they do.

[revelarts]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-yba3R6IBY

[aboutime]

pathetic photoshop... Fake news.


wrong again....read the constitution for a change.

[revelarts]

US Constitution, Section 8
1: The Congress shall have Power To..
11: To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;


https://media.giphy.com/media/26gshTLscOjAcc29G/giphy.gif

[revelarts]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2fhAEGcO18M

[pete311]

Pathetic photoshop... fake news.

Can you tell me how to photoshop a twitter feed?
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/373581528405905408

[revelarts]

April 2017
http://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=115&v=QX0HTPvlVX8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QX0HTPvlVX8

[LongTermGuy]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DathMevU8AAFKd1.jpg

[LongTermGuy]

**Just a REMINDER THAT NONE of this would be happening right now IF Obama, Rice, & Kerry hadn't LIED to the world by saying Syria had been "cleansed" of Chemical weapons! THIS shit's on them!


https://pbs.twimg.com/card_img/983428711914590208/b3fUUltA?format=jpg&name=600x314
WATCH: Team Obama Said Syria Had Been Cleansed Of Chemical Weapons. Over And Over And Over Again.


https://www.dailywire.com/news/29222/watch-flashback-team-obama-said-syria-had-been-ben-shapiro

[Drummond]

Trump is a walking hypocrisy. He should be apologizing to Bush for bashing him so hard in Iraq.

http://www.debatepolicy.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=11339&stc=1

... and so the Left comes crawling out of the woodwork. Typical.

The truth, Pete, is that you hate it that Trump acted on this. The Left are perfectly consistent when it comes to the matter of confronting rogue regimes in the Middle East ... they dream up every excuse to say 'DON'T DO IT .. LEAVE THEM ALONE'

They went into overdrive to try and protect Saddam Hussein from harm, in the days and weeks before the 2003 invasion. Now .. over a targeted, highly selective, short-lived, attack on Assad's chemical research facilities ... not even the very limited nature of the attack is palatable to them.

I think the tactics used in all this have been superb (and I'm proud that the UK played its part in the mission). Highly limited, highly selective, yet designed not only to do damage to Assad's capability to launch more chemical attacks, but more, it all sends a message: your barbaric use of chemical weapons MUST STOP.

The lesson was also targeted at Russia and Iran, Assad's allies. Trump made a point of effectively asking, in his speech, what kind of nation would support a power that stooped to the deployment of chemical weapons. How should they be regarded ? Wouldn't such nations prefer to be looked upon as being part of the civilized community of nations ?

Trump evidently hoped that in the future, they would.

Russia can pull back from its disgusting arrogance on the matter of chemical weapons use. Iran, for its part, can cease to be a terrorist facilitator ! Chances exist for them to do so.

Time will tell as to whether either or both nations are actually civilized enough to do it ...

... and to hell with pathetic, ever-divisive, Leftie spanner-wielding in all this !!

[LongTermGuy]

Looks like Ann Coulter has left the President for the 76th time......:laugh:

[LongTermGuy]

#Mattis (https://twitter.com/hashtag/Mattis?src=hash) We are expecting a disproportionate amount of disinformation coming out so we will have another briefing tomorrow at 9am. #Damascus (https://twitter.com/hashtag/Damascus?src=hash) #SyriaStrike (https://twitter.com/hashtag/SyriaStrike?src=hash) #Syria (https://twitter.com/hashtag/Syria?src=hash)

[LongTermGuy]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DatoFCNUQAAfKCv.jpg

[revelarts]

**Just a REMINDER THAT NONE of this would be happening right now IF Obama, Rice, & Kerry hadn't LIED to the world by saying Syria had been "cleansed" of Chemical weapons! THIS shit's on them!


https://pbs.twimg.com/card_img/983428711914590208/b3fUUltA?format=jpg&name=600x314
WATCH: Team Obama Said Syria Had Been Cleansed Of Chemical Weapons. Over And Over And Over Again.


https://www.dailywire.com/news/29222/watch-flashback-team-obama-said-syria-had-been-ben-shapiro

http://www.azquotes.com/picture-quotes/quote-the-state-must-declare-the-child-to-be-the-most-precious-treasure-of-the-people-as-long-adolf-hitler-50-96-51.jpg
https://www.ericgarland.co/wp-content/uploads/pix/2017/05/quote-we-know-where-they-are-iraq-s-weapons-of-mass-destruction-they-re-in-the-area-around-donald-rumsfeld-59-78-20.jpg

[Elessar]

US Constitution, Section 8
1: The Congress shall have Power To..
11: To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;


https://media.giphy.com/media/26gshTLscOjAcc29G/giphy.gif


WHO "Declared" War?

It was O.K. when Bill Clinton did it, right? It was O.K. for Obama to threaten (but never
act - like the coward he was), Right?

But let a Republican act, and all of a sudden it is a "Declaration of War"?

That is a stretch. A huge stretch.

[revelarts]

WHO "Declared" War?
It was O.K. when Bill Clinton did it, right? It was O.K. for Obama to threaten (but never
act - like the coward he was), Right?
But let a Republican act, and all of a sudden it is a "Declaration of War"?
That is a stretch. A huge stretch.
Not Ok when any president does it.
Congress has constitutional war powers not Trump... or Obama or Clinton or Bush.

So just to be clear, if Syria only used a few missiles to hit DC and New York, or just struck a couple U.S. chemical weapon stocks, it would not be war either? right?
Of course it would.

[Black Diamond]

WHO "Declared" War?

It was O.K. when Bill Clinton did it, right? It was O.K. for Obama to threaten (but never
act - like the coward he was), Right?

But let a Republican act, and all of a sudden it is a "Declaration of War"?

That is a stretch. A huge stretch.
Yeah didn't you know any time we have acted militarily since 1941, it's been illegal ? Truman through trump should all be hanged. :laugh:

[LongTermGuy]

http://www.azquotes.com/picture-quotes/quote-the-state-must-declare-the-child-to-be-the-most-precious-treasure-of-the-people-as-long-adolf-hitler-50-96-51.jpg
https://www.ericgarland.co/wp-content/uploads/pix/2017/05/quote-we-know-where-they-are-iraq-s-weapons-of-mass-destruction-they-re-in-the-area-around-donald-rumsfeld-59-78-20.jpg

:cool:
Its not Trumps fault he has to tie up Obamas loose ends, never shoulda started the war in Syria, now Trump will end it. Kim Jong Un definitely looking on right now glad that he never attacked South Korea





https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DatttTzW4AAHAwL.jpg

[LongTermGuy]

Russia did NOTHING to stop our attack tonight. Trump just weakened Putin's posture dramatically on the world stage......Trumps Russian collusion eh???:laugh:

[Polite Russian]

Well, shit :D




Russia did NOTHING to stop our attack tonight. Trump just weakened Putin's posture dramatically on the world stage......Trumps Russian collusion eh???:laugh:

As I know, we hit some of your missles. That is what our media are saying.

[Gunny]

Hope everybody feels better :rolleyes:

[LongTermGuy]

Well, shit :D





As I know, we hit some of your missles. That is what our media are saying.




"As You know"....Ok...


I just wish Putin would look at the big picture and get his act together....By understanding `we` dont need to hurt "each other" ....and should.... together.... look at the CANCER of Islam as the main problem affecting "both of us" and the civilized world...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DavlBzsW4AYmeW0.jpg

[High_Plains_Drifter]

Can you tell me how to photoshop a twitter feed?
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/373581528405905408
Whatever... I can't see it... I'm no longer on twitter. I've been banned for saying muslims throw homos off buildings.

Just one more glaring, blatant example of you fascist democrats and your war on the 1st Amendment and the truth.

[Gunny]

One would hope. Fact is, he's probably still laughing. If it was anybody but us, I would be.

[Drummond]

Well, shit :D





As I know, we hit some of your missles. That is what our media are saying.

This is an example of your media feeding you lies. Sorry -- but it's a fact.

We're getting a military 'debriefing' broadcast from America, as I speak (relayed to us by BBC News). The account given says that nothing at all was hit either by Syria or Russia .. in fact, I've yet to hear anything saying that Russian munitions were even involved; it appears that none were !! Apparently Syria launched some missiles .. we think they were unguided (!!) .. and hit precisely nothing. At least, nothing they were intended to hit ! As has been pointed out, those missiles must've come down somewhere. Hopefully not on civilian populations (?).

Aerial photos have been shown to us, which show the obliteration of our intended targets. The allied mission was, clearly, a resounding success.

I'm staggered to learn that Russia intends to take this matter to the Security Council ?!? On what possible basis ?? Had Russia lived up to its responsibilities and - instead of allowing, and approving of, the use of chemical weapons by Assad, and even BY THEMSELVES .. this current mess wouldn't even exist today.

Instead, all we get from Russia is ever-more belligerence.

The UN Secretary General - unfortunately - is correct. The Cold War 'is back with a vengeance'.

We have some truly staggering levels of Russian belligerence to thank for it. It's belligerence they could, even now, back away from. But ... will they ?

I won't be holding my breath on that one.

[pete311]

lol did he actually write "Mission Accomplished"? Ask Bush how well that worked out.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

Not Ok when any president does it.
Congress has constitutional war powers not Trump... or Obama or Clinton or Bush.

So just to be clear, if Syria only used a few missiles to hit DC and New York, or just struck a couple U.S. chemical weapon stocks, it would not be war either? right?
Of course it would.
Guess you've never heard of the "WAR POWERS ACT."

[High_Plains_Drifter]

lol did he actually write "Mission Accomplished"? Ask Bush how well that worked out.
Have you changed your Kotex?

[Drummond]

lol did he actually write "Mission Accomplished"? Ask Bush how well that worked out.

You've something against the English language, now ?

Interesting, Pete. Can you perhaps list a collection of 'banned phrases' that the Left doesn't want others to use ?

[Elessar]

lol did he actually write "Mission Accomplished"? Ask Bush how well that worked out.

I wondered how long it would take for our spoiled liberal member to trot that out.

That has been debunked so many times!

The "Mission Accomplished" banner was for the aircraft carrier returning to home port.

Try again. Get a clue. Get a life. You suck at being a liberal sniper.

[Elessar]

Guess you've never heard of the "WAR POWERS ACT."

Beat me to it: https://www.history.com/topics/war-powers-act

[Black Diamond]

Guess you've never heard of the "WAR POWERS ACT."
That's unconstitutional, too. :)

[Black Diamond]

http://www.azquotes.com/picture-quotes/quote-the-state-must-declare-the-child-to-be-the-most-precious-treasure-of-the-people-as-long-adolf-hitler-50-96-51.jpg
https://www.ericgarland.co/wp-content/uploads/pix/2017/05/quote-we-know-where-they-are-iraq-s-weapons-of-mass-destruction-they-re-in-the-area-around-donald-rumsfeld-59-78-20.jpg
The hitler card. That didn't take long.

[Black Diamond]

Have you changed your Kotex?
Not since November 9, 2016.

[Black Diamond]

lol did he actually write "Mission Accomplished"? Ask Bush how well that worked out.
Has he called ISIS the JV team yet ?

[Elessar]

That's unconstitutional, too. :)

A law passed by the Congress OVER Nixon's veto.

[Black Diamond]

A law passed by the Congress OVER Nixon's veto.
Every time the military has been used since World War II it's been illegal. Just ask Ron Paul.

[Elessar]

Every time the military has been used since World War II it's been illegal. Just ask Ron Paul.

Ron Paul was a basket-case medical doctor trying to play lawyer.

His vision would have thrown us back to early 1800's isolationism, that in the present global
picture, would be impossible to accomplish. All he would have done would be to weaken
us far worse than Obama did.

[Black Diamond]

Ron Paul was a basket-case medical doctor trying to play lawyer.

His vision would have thrown us back to early 1800's isolationism, that in the present global
picture, would be impossible to accomplish. All he would have done would be to weaken
us far worse than Obama did.
But his followers love to pull this shit every time we use the military. And, as happened this morning, an American official is compared to adolf.

[Elessar]

But his followers love to pull this shit every time we use the military. And, as happened this morning, an American official is compared to adolf.

You know yourself that when liberals cannot reply with logic, they resort to their playbook that
subscribes that they make inane comparisons and use name-calling to support their ineptness.

[revelarts]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ppzI1va3hsg

[Gunny]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ppzI1va3hsgIf the media has anything to do with it, yes.

[revelarts]

---realnews---


...although there has not yet been an independent international investigation into the alleged chemical attack, president trump has blamed the syrian government....
...well, joining us to discuss this issue is the leading human rights expert alfred de zayas. Alfred is the u.n. Independent expert on the promotion of a democratic and equitable international order. He is also a lawyer and teaches international law at the geneva school of diplomacy. Thanks for joining us, alfred. ...
alfred de zayas: good afternoon.
ben norton: well, alfred, can we just begin, and we can speak more about what we know about the details in douma. We don't have many. Of course there has not yet been and independent international investigation. Before that, would a strike led by donald trump, would a u.s. Strike be legal?

alfred de zayas: i could answer that in two seconds. Of course it would be illegal. And i remind you that international law is also the law of the land in the united states and on american citizen. and article 2, paragraph 4 of the united nations charter is very clear in stipulating a prohibition on the use of force. There are only two exceptions. Force can be used in self-defence. Article 51. Or if the security council so decides pursuant to article 39, it must first determine that there is a threat or a breach of international peace. And then if you have a clear resolution of the security council then certain use of force would be legal.
otherwise you have the crime of aggression. and since 2010 we have a definition of what the crime of aggression entails, and of course an unprovoked attack on syria by the united states, that is essentially not a party to this civil war and which is acting actually already illegally in the territory. It's interesting to note, most people don't know that, that in international law if there's a civil war, there's an obligation of neutrality for the rest of the international community. The only country that is there, shall we say, by invitation, and therefore legally is russia. We may not want to accept it but that is what international law says and so whatever activities the united states is having in syria at present are incompatible, both with the united nations charter and with customary international law. ... us attack on syria would be illegal under international law (http://therealnews.com/t2/story:21561:us-attack-on-syria-would-be-illegal-under-international-law)


"most war crimes fall into one of three categories: crimes against peace, crimes against humanity, and traditional war crimes. crimes against peace include the planning, commencement, and waging of aggressive war, or war in violation of international agreements. Aggressive war is broadly defined to include any hostile military act that disregards the territorial boundaries of another country, disrespects the political independence of another regime, or otherwise interferes with the sovereignty of an internationally recognized state. wars fought in self-defense are not aggressive wars.

following world war ii (http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/world+war+ii), for example, the allies prosecuted a number of leading nazi officials at the nuremberg trials (http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/nuremberg+trials) for crimes against peace. during the war, the nazis had invaded and occupied a series of sovereign states, including france, czechoslovakia, poland, and austria. Because those invasions were made in an effort to accumulate wealth, power, and territory for the third reich, nazi officials could not claim to be acting in self-defense. thus, those officials who participated in the planning, initiation, or execution of those invasions were guilty of crimes against peace.
Hermann göring, chief of the luftwaffe (the german air force), was one nazi official who was convicted of crimes against peace at the nuremberg trials. The international military tribunal presiding at nuremberg, composed of judges selected from the four allied powers (france, great britain, the soviet union, and the united states), found that göring had helped plan and carry out the invasions of poland and austria and had ordered the destruction of rotterdam, holland, after the city had effectively surrendered...."
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedicti...com/war+crimes (http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/war+crimes)

statement by supreme court justice jackson on war trials agreement; august 12, 1945
there are some things i would like to say, particularly to the american people, about the agreement we have just signed.
For the first time, four of the most powerful nations have agreed not only upon the principles of liability for war crimes of persecution, but also upon the principle of individual responsibility for the crime of attacking the international peace.

repeatedly, nations have united in abstract declarations that the launching of aggressive war is illegal. they have condemned it by treaty. But now we have the concrete application of these abstractions in a way which ought to make clear to the world that those who lead their nations into aggressive war face individual accountability for such acts.
the definitions under which we will try the germans are general definitions. they impose liability upon war-making statesmen of all countries alike. if we can cultivate in the world the idea that aggressive war-making is the way to the prisoner's dock rather than the way to honors, we will have accomplished something toward making the peace more secure.
This, too, is the first time that four nations with such different legal systems have tried to knit their ideas of just criminal procedure into a cooperative trial. That task is far more difficult than those unfamiliar with the differences between continental and anglo-american methods would expect. It has involved frank and critical examination by the representatives of each country of the other's methods of administering justice. Our discussions have been candid and open-minded...."

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/imt_jack02.asp

[Gunny]

Does the Darth Vader theme song play when you enter a room?

[pete311]

Have you changed your Kotex?

Why do you always make sexist jokes? Being a women is not a weakness.

[pete311]

Making America Great Again by spending more money in a war we go no business being in. How's that trillion dollar deficit going conservatives?

[Elessar]

Why do you always make sexist jokes? Being a women is not a weakness.

Being "A" Women? Inferring dual personality or are you another idiot that does not know
singular WOMAN from plural / collective WOMEN?

[revelarts]

Does the Darth Vader theme song play when you enter a room?

Darth Vader theme song plays when Syrians hear U.S. missiles and planes over head... that take closer to WW3

[revelarts]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSGf2ZpDENU

[Elessar]

Making America Great Again by spending more money in a war we go no business being in. How's that trillion dollar deficit going conservatives?

Likely just as well as the one your Crown (Clown?) Prince Obama doubled over 8 years.:laugh:

[Black Diamond]

Likely just as well as the one your Crown (Clown?) Prince Obama doubled over 8 years.:laugh:
He'll use an affirmative action curve and say Obama didn't.

[Gunny]

Making America Great Again by spending more money in a war we go no business being in. How's that trillion dollar deficit going conservatives?I think it should be spent on the wall, prosecuting public officials in CA, and investigating the Clintons and DNC instead of tossing missiles in the sand. That criminal organization you belong to deserves some serious legal funds spent on its unconstitutional and unethical behavior.

Or we can blow up sand dunes. Accomplishes about the same thing :rolleyes:

[pete311]

Being "A" Women? Inferring dual personality or are you another idiot that does not know
singular WOMAN from plural / collective WOMEN?

When you got nothing else you attack the person.

[pete311]

Likely just as well as the one your Crown (Clown?) Prince Obama doubled over 8 years.:laugh:

So you're not a conservative, got it.

[Gunny]

When you got nothing else you attack the person.The organization. Assad is a stooge. Democrats are an organized, anti-Constitutional crime ring. Far more dangerous than an idiot puppet who happens to own a warm water port in the Med.

The missiles would have been better used taking out Dem politicians. That would have at least accomplished something for the greater good.

You, as a person, are not what is wrong. You as part of the collective, are just part of the problem. So don't take it personally :)

[NightTrain]

A job well done by Trump & Crew. And our armed forces & allies.



As far as Rev goes, he's already been educated about the War Powers act a dozen times, so save your breath. He reverts to feigning ignorance and makes the same 'unconstitutional' bullshit statements the very next time the Prez hammers another bunch of scumbags.



And I think you all know that Pete would condemn Trump if he singlehandedly found the cure to cancer.

[revelarts]

http://memeshappen.com/media/created/2018/04/Mr-Assad-I-dont-Have-any-proof-here-yet-So-I-cant-say-for-sure-If-you-ARE-using-chemical-weapons-Hey-Trump-Even-Maury-Povich-gets-independent-verificagOa08.jpg

[Gunny]

http://memeshappen.com/media/created/2018/04/Mr-Assad-I-dont-Have-any-proof-here-yet-So-I-cant-say-for-sure-If-you-ARE-using-chemical-weapons-Hey-Trump-Even-Maury-Povich-gets-independent-verificagOa08.jpgI'm sure it was Idi Amin. Oh wait ... isn't he dead? :rolleyes:

Everybody knows who did it. Shut up. That's not even a question.

What you should ask yourself is why we didn't blow up Putin's bridge to the "Stolen Land". Get some REAL attention and piss his little faggot ass off for real. I'm against shit that's as lame as my little brother's jokes. I'm not against choke-slamming the commie against the wall.

Just so we're clear.

[revelarts]

thursday

u.s. Defense secretary jim mattis has said he believes there was a chemical weapons attack in syria last saturday, but admits the u.s. Government is still"looking for the actual evidence" to support the claim.

"i believe there was a chemical attack and we are looking for the actual evidence,” mattis said to washington lawmakers, adding that he is trying to send inspectors to syria "probably within the week."
the u.s. Military official claims it will become "more difficult" to obtain evidence to back up the claims that are being used to justify escalations towards war with syria.
"as each day goes by – as you know, it is a non-persistent gas – so it becomes more and more difficult to confirm it."...

[revelarts]

Feb. 2, 2018, Mattis Speaking on the 2017 supposed Assad Chemical attack "on his own people"

By ROBERT BURNS, AP National Security Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. has no evidence to confirm reports from aid groups and others that the Syrian government has used the deadly chemical sarin on its citizens, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said Friday.
"We have other reports from the battlefield from people who claim it's been used," Mattis told reporters at the Pentagon. "We do not have evidence of it."

[Elessar]

When you got nothing else you attack the person.

Thus sayeth the one who always attacks the person, not having anything else to say in a topic.

For two-facedness, look in a mirror.

[Elessar]

So you're not a conservative, got it.

Where did you pull that one from? I never suggested I was not
conservative leaning.

Attack the person indeed. Your own one-liners expose your desperation.

[revelarts]

....
.... about the War Powers act a dozen times, so save your breath. ....

education...


https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4723572/tulsi-gabbard-questions-constitutionality-syrian-strike

Congress woman Tulsi Gabbard ask Mattis about the War Powers Act just the other day:


GABBARD: Thank you. Thank you, gentlemen, for your service. You know, the President has indicated recently his intention to launch U.S. military attacks against Syria. Article one of the Constitution gives Congress the sole power to declare war. Congress has not done so against the Syrian government. Section 3 of the War Powers Resolution requires the president to consult with Congress before introducing U.S. Armed Forces into situations of hostilities. Section 2 of the War Powers Resolution clarifies the constitutional powers of the President as commander-in-chief. In article 2, which you referenced, Secretary Mattis, to introduce forces into hostilities only pursuant to 1.) a declaration of war, 2.) specific statutory authorization or 3.) a national emergency created by an attack upon the U.S., its territories, possessions or Armed Forces.

Syria’s not declared war against the U.S. or threatened the U.S. The launch of 59 missiles against Syria by Trump last year was illegal and did not meet any of those criteria in the War Powers Resolution. The consolidated Appropriations Act of 2018 which was signed into law by President Trump states that none of the funds made available by this Act may be used with respect to Syria in contravention of the War Powers Resolution, including for the introduction of U.S. Armed Military Forces into hostilities in Syria.


My question is, will the President uphold the Constitution, the War Powers Resolution, and comply with the law that he signed – that he signed – by obtaining authorization from Congress before launching U.S. military attacks against Syria.

MATTIS: Congresswoman, we have not yet made any decision to launch military attacks into Syria. I think that when you look back at President Obama sending the U.S. troops into Syria at the time he did, he also had to deal with this type of situation. Because we were going after a named terrorist group that was not actually named in the AUMF that put them in. This is a complex area, I’ll be the first to admit.
GABBARD: It is it is simple, however, what the Constitution requires. So while you’re correct in saying the President has not yet made a decision, my question is will he abide by the Constitution and comply with the law?



the obvious educated and HONEST answer is NO. no he won't.


http://www.c-span.org/video/?c4723572/tulsi-gabbard-questions-constitutionality-syrian-strike

[Gunny]

education...


https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4723572/tulsi-gabbard-questions-constitutionality-syrian-strike

Congress woman Tulsi Gabbard ask Mattis about the War Powers Act just the other day:

GABBARD: Thank you. Thank you, gentlemen, for your service. You know, the President has indicated recently his intention to launch U.S. military attacks against Syria. Article one of the Constitution gives Congress the sole power to declare war. Congress has not done so against the Syrian government. Section 3 of the War Powers Resolution requires the president to consult with Congress before introducing U.S. Armed Forces into situations of hostilities. Section 2 of the War Powers Resolution clarifies the constitutional powers of the President as commander-in-chief. In article 2, which you referenced, Secretary Mattis, to introduce forces into hostilities only pursuant to 1.) a declaration of war, 2.) specific statutory authorization or 3.) a national emergency created by an attack upon the U.S., its territories, possessions or Armed Forces.

Syria’s not declared war against the U.S. or threatened the U.S. The launch of 59 missiles against Syria by Trump last year was illegal and did not meet any of those criteria in the War Powers Resolution. The consolidated Appropriations Act of 2018 which was signed into law by President Trump states that none of the funds made available by this Act may be used with respect to Syria in contravention of the War Powers Resolution, including for the introduction of U.S. Armed Military Forces into hostilities in Syria.


My question is, will the President uphold the Constitution, the War Powers Resolution, and comply with the law that he signed – that he signed – by obtaining authorization from Congress before launching U.S. military attacks against Syria.

MATTIS: Congresswoman, we have not yet made any decision to launch military attacks into Syria. I think that when you look back at President Obama sending the U.S. troops into Syria at the time he did, he also had to deal with this type of situation. Because we were going after a named terrorist group that was not actually named in the AUMF that put them in. This is a complex area, I’ll be the first to admit.
GABBARD: It is it is simple, however, what the Constitution requires. So while you’re correct in saying the President has not yet made a decision, my question is will he abide by the Constitution and comply with the law?



the obvious educated and HONEST answer is NO. no he won't.


http://www.c-span.org/video/?c4723572/tulsi-gabbard-questions-constitutionality-syrian-strikeIs it legal to smoke that shit in your state? Just wondering :rolleyes:

The President can declare war without Congress. FDR dreamed up that Congressional declaration of war as part of his PR to let everyone know everyone was for it.

You like the Constitution. Allegedly. Try reading it.

[jimnyc]

Comical when the trolls come out, and members that normally don't post, and new spammers. :)

That's how you KNOW things are going right. Posting OLD and outdated news as fact. One sentence - one liners showing how bright they are. Conspiracy sites and videos. Lack of understanding of the law.

[jimnyc]

World Feb 2, 2018 1:44 PM EDT

Never mind any current news or follow up in the past few months. This one fits my world view, and I'm sticking with it damnit!! :laugh:

[jimnyc]

Making America Great Again by spending more money in a war we go no business being in. How's that trillion dollar deficit going conservatives?

Things are going SO SO much better than I could ever have imagined. And seeing faggots like you whining and bitching and trolling - just an added bonus. :)

[jimnyc]

When you got nothing else you attack the person.

Or attack ALL conservatives
attack the website you're posting on
make shit up
Bush did it
TDS over and over
One liners, also over and over

Some folks "have nothing else" by running out - while you never had jack shit to begin with.

[jimnyc]

A job well done by Trump & Crew. And our armed forces & allies.



As far as Rev goes, he's already been educated about the War Powers act a dozen times, so save your breath. He reverts to feigning ignorance and makes the same 'unconstitutional' bullshit statements the very next time the Prez hammers another bunch of scumbags.



And I think you all know that Pete would condemn Trump if he singlehandedly found the cure to cancer.

Yep. Yup. Spot on. But ignorance continues.

[jimnyc]

education...


Of course in which you are severely lacking. One twit who may think like you doesn't make it law or unconstitutional. You can whine and stomp your feet every time a president uses his constitutional powers, but it matters not.

And it will hopefully continue when necessary, regardless of the whining of the ignorant, uneducated and liberal.

[Drummond]

thursday

Genius ... explain why Russia vetoed an investigation into this whole matter. One of many vetoes they've registered with the UN over the years, to stop any and all possibility for culpability for crimes committed by the Assad regime.

The very fact of the latest veto proves in itself that Russia doesn't want what happened to receive verification. WHY, unless we're RIGHT ?

Being right, justifies our action to stop further chemical weapon production.

Or don't you 'get that' ... because THE LEFT ALWAYS TRIES TO SHIELD TINPOT DICTATORS FROM HARM (e.g Saddam ... they went into overdrive on that one, in 2003 ..) ?

[jimnyc]

Genius ...

There is actual video of Mattis going further, and explaining the strikes, and that they had enough proof. But posting it would be a waster of time, at least for Rev. No amount of anything will change what he thinks, and if he found stuff from prior to yesterday, that stated that the UK, France or the USA didn't have proof - then anything after that is :lalala:

[jimnyc]

World Feb 2, 2018 1:44 PM EDT
WASHINGTON —

Additionally - February 2nd? WTF?

The attack wasn't even made until last week. But we're supposed to go by words from February?

[Black Diamond]

There is actual video of Mattis going further, and explaining the strikes, and that they had enough proof. But posting it would be a waster of time, at least for Rev. No amount of anything will change what he thinks, and if he found stuff from prior to yesterday, that stated that the UK, France or the USA didn't have proof - then anything after that is :lalala:
Yeah I have had similar conversations with 9/11 conspiracy theorists. Remember the reports of a secondary device?

[Gunny]

Additionally - February 2nd? WTF?

The attack wasn't even made until last week. But we're supposed to go by words from February?I hate to point this out, but weren't we on boycott in Feb? Wasn't Feb a month ago or some shit?

So who was rev running his mouth to where he was equally as wrong?

[jimnyc]

And before someone, Pete or Gabby, whines about the source - all the source does is claim that the USA stated they have proof, and Haley's statements to the UN. So can it before you think it.

---

Haley: Assad used chemical weapons 50 times

White House, State Department say they have proof Assad regime was behind chemical attack in Douma.

U.S. Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley on Friday said that Syria had used chemical weapons at least 50 times during that country’s civil war.

“Let’s be clear: Assad’s most recent use of poison gas against the people of Douma was not his first, second, third, or even 49th use of chemical weapons The United States estimates that Assad has used chemical weapons in the Syrian war at least 50 times. Public estimates are as high as 200,” she said at an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council called by Russia, in a reference to last Saturday’s attack in which sarin nerve gas is believed to have been used.

“Our President has not yet made a decision about possible actions in Syria. But should the United States and our allies decide to act in Syria, it will be in defense of a principle on which we all agree. It will be in defense of a bedrock international norm that benefits all nations…The United States and our allies will continue to stand up for truth, accountability, justice, and an end to the use of chemical weapons,” added Haley.

Rest - https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/244396

[jimnyc]

I hate to point this out, but weren't we on boycott in Feb? Wasn't Feb a month ago or some shit?

So who was rev running his mouth to where he was equally as wrong?

If it fits, you must acquits! :)

The news fits...

[Black Diamond]

I hate to point this out, but weren't we on boycott in Feb? Wasn't Feb a month ago or some shit?

So who was rev running his mouth to where he was equally as wrong?
Does Ron Paul own any message boards ?

[jimnyc]

Does Ron Paul own any message boards ?

:laugh2:

[jimnyc]

The Importance of Striking Syria's Scientific Studies and Research Center

With air strikes on Syria's chemical weapons facilities, carried out jointly with Britain and France, America has done the right thing.

Leading from in front, President Trump is finally redrawing the red line that President Obama erased in 2013. Whatever the threats and criticisms that will surely follow, the world will be safer for it. The vital message is that America is no longer the hamstrung giant of the Obama era. Tyrants such as Syria's Bashar al-Assad, and his patrons in Moscow and Tehran, have been served notice that it would be unwise to continue to assume that America will waffle, appease or simply retreat while they take upon themselves the shaping -- to monstrous effect -- of the 21st-century world order. This message is also likely to resonate in Beijing (which has reportedly been planning live-fire naval exercises next week in the Taiwan Strait) and Pyongyang (with its nuclear missile projects).

The immediate aim of the U.S.-led air strikes was to end the chemical weapons attacks that Syria's Assad regime has continued to inflict on its own people -- despite Assad's promises in 2013 to surrender his chemical weapons, and Russia's promise to ensure Assad did so. On Friday, speaking at a meeting of the United Nations Security Council, Ambassador Nikki Haley charged that by U.S. estimates, "Assad has used chemical weapons in the Syrian war at least 50 times" -- some of these attacks within the past year, including the gas attack that killed dozens last weekend in the Syrian city of Douma.

There's room for debate about whether it is America's responsibility, on humanitarian grounds, to stop such atrocities. But whatever your views on protecting children in a far-off land from the hideous effects of chemical weapons, there is a larger, strategic reason for trying to stop Assad. Syria, with its liberal use of chemical weapons, has been setting a horrific precedent -- repeatedly violating the Chemical Weapons Convention to which Damascus acceded in 2013, and eroding the longstanding international taboo against chemical warfare. This is dangerous way beyond Syria. As Haley told the UN Security Council: "All nations and all people will be harmed if we allow Assad to normalize the use of chemical weapons."

In theory, the United Nations was supposed to prevent this, ensuring in tandem with the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons that Assad would give up all his chemical weapons -- with the specific oversight and guarantees of Russia, under a deal cut in 2013 by Obama and Putin. As I explained in an article earlier this week for The Hill, the UN has failed utterly, thanks to Putin's cynical exploitation of the entire setup. Russia used the chemical weapons disarmament deal as a portal for its own military entry into Syria in support of Assad, and has since been using its veto on the UN Security Council, along with a torrent of Kremlin propaganda, to run diplomatic cover for Assad.

The upshot has been that if the U.S. does not stop Assad's use of chemical weapons, then nobody will. Last April, after Assad used sarin gas in an attack that killed almost 100 people, Trump ordered a strike of 59 Tomahawk missiles on a Syrian airbase. Evidently, that was not enough to stop Assad's chemical weapons spree.

Rest - https://pjmedia.com/claudiarosett/importance-striking-syrias-scientific-studies-research-center/

[jimnyc]

Klukowski: President Trump’s Syria Strikes Are Constitutional

While experts can debate whether striking Syria is good policy, the legal reality should not be open to debate: President Donald Trump’s strikes against Syria were fully authorized by the U.S. Constitution.

Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 of the Constitution says that only Congress has the power “to declare War.” However, Article II, Section 2, Clause 1 says, “The President shall be Commander in Chief of the [Armed Forces] of the United States.” The Constitution has no wasted or meaningless words; both of these provisions must be given legal effect.

Not every presidential use of military force constitutes “war.” Whether a specific use of military might crosses that line depends on the nature, scope, and duration of that force. Congress also has ongoing authority through its Article I powers, to raise and equip military units and to authorize funding for specific military operations, to shape a president’s use of military power over time.

Short of an actual war, the Constitution’s Commander in Chief Clause empowers the president to use force to protect the interests of the United States when they are threatened by a foreign power. Those interests include: (1) defending the United States against an attack or the threat of an imminent attack, (2) defending U.S. citizens, (3) defending our allies when we are obligated by treaty to do so, and (4) enforcing treaty obligations and other international law standards that protect American lives and interests.

American interests are implicated here. First, Syria signed the Chemical Weapons Convention, an international treaty which forbids Syrian President Bashar al-Assad from using chemical weapons against his own people. The United States and other nations have determined that he has done precisely that—repeatedly. Weapons of mass destruction (WMD) are in a class by themselves. Chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons pose such a threat to nation-states – capable of killing millions of civilians – that curtailing and deterring their illegal use is in America’s interests.

Article VI of the Constitution specifies that any constitutionally authorized treaty signed by the president and ratified by two-thirds of the U.S. Senate becomes part of the Supreme Law of the Land. The United States has both rights and obligations under that treaty, which Syria has now violated.

“The purpose of our actions tonight is to establish a strong deterrent against the production, spread, and use of chemical weapons,” President Trump told the nation on Friday in a televised address from the White House. “Establishing this deterrent is a vital national security interest of the United States.”

Rest - http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/04/14/klukowski-president-trumps-syria-strikes-constitutional/

[jimnyc]

BATTLE ASSESSMENT: Here Is How The Devastating Strike On Syria Went Down

The early morning coalition strikes on Syria’s chemical weapons infrastructure Saturday destroyed three critical targets, crippling the Syrian regime’s ability to create chemical weapons.

“We sent a very clear message last night,” Pentagon spokesman Dana White explained Saturday, further commenting, “We hope he [Syrian President Bashar al-Assad] heard it.” Around 4 a.m. in Syria, American, British, and French naval and aviation assets opened fire on multiple targets associated with the Syrian regime’s chemical weapons program.

The three targets included the Barzah research and development center in Damascus, Him Shinshar chemical weapons storage facility near Homs, and the Him Shinsar chemical weapons bunker. Marine Lt. Gen. Kenneth F. McKenzie Jr. described the coalition strikes on these targets as “precise, overwhelming, and effective.” He added that coalition forces “delivered a very serious blow” to the “heart” of Syria’s chemical weapons program.

British, French, and American air and naval assets in the Red Sea, the North Arabian Gulf, and the Eastern Mediterranean hammered the above sites with more than one hundred missiles.

Located in the Red Sea, the Ticonderoga-class cruiser USS Monterey and Arleigh Burke-class destroyer USS Laboon fired more than a dozen Tomahawk missiles. The Arleigh Burke-class destroyer USS Higgins fired Tomahawk missiles from the North Arabian Gulf while a French frigate and the American Virginia-class submarine John Warner launched various missiles out of the Eastern Mediterranean.

From the air, B-1B Lancers fired 19 Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missiles (JASSMs) while British Tornadoes and Typhoons launched multiple Storm Shadow missiles alongside French Rafales and Mirages firing off SCALP cruise missiles.

This multinational response reportedly “overwhelmed Syrian defenses,” which were primarily employed after the coalition strike had ended. “No Syrian weapon had any affect on anything we did,” McKenzie explained.

The Barzah research and development center was hit with 76 missiles, including 57 Tomahawks and 19 JASSMs. This site, a critical facility for the research, development, and production of chemical weapons, “does not exist anymore,” McKenzie revealed.

Rest - http://dailycaller.com/2018/04/14/syria-battle-assessment/

[Drummond]

We have our own Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, 'doing a Revelarts'.

Corbyn is the leader of our mainstream Lefties. He is doing his utmost to press the case that the coordinated Syria strike was carried out with 'questionable' legality, from the British point of view. He has pressed the case for Parliament as a whole to decide on our involvement ... which, of course, had it happened, would've made close coordination of our forces with the US an impossibility.

Also, hours before the strike happened, he attacked Theresa May for supposedly 'waiting for instructions from Trump' .. a reference to the days, no doubt, when Tony Blair was called 'Bush's poodle', in an effort to rubbish the Iraq war THEN ...

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/apr/14/jeremy-corbyn-calls-syria-airstrikes-legally-questionable


Jeremy Corbyn has described airstrikes on Syria as legally questionable and accused Theresa May of “trailing after Donald Trump” in an attack that could escalate the conflict.

The Labour leader was responding to the news that the US, UK and France launched airstrikes in Syria early on Saturday morning. Corbyn, who has called for an independent UN-led investigation of last week’s chemical weapons attack, said the prime minister should have sought parliamentary approval before launching the action.

“Bombs won’t save lives or bring about peace,” Corbyn said. “This legally questionable action risks escalating further, as US defence secretary James Mattis has admitted, an already devastating conflict and therefore makes real accountability for war crimes and use of chemical weapons less, not more likely.”

So, Lefties are doing what they always do in situations of this kind ... the US is far from alone in having their ilk doing all they can to chuck a spanner into the works. Revelarts, I think, would feel at home in our Labour Party.

[jimnyc]

So, Lefties are doing what they always do in situations of this kind

Unless one of their own is involved and in charge, then of course things are perfectly OK. :rolleyes:

[revelarts]

General Mattis THIS PAST THURSDAY said to congress about the attacks THIS past Saturday


u.s. Defense secretary jim mattis has said he believes there was a chemical weapons attack in syria last Saturday, but admits the u.s. Government is still "looking for the actual evidence" to support the claim.
"i believe there was a chemical attack and we are looking for the actual evidence,” Mattis said to Washington lawmakers, adding that he is trying to send inspectors to Syria "probably within the week."
the u.s. Military official claims it will become "more difficult" to obtain evidence to back up the claims that are being used to justify escalations towards war with Syria.
"as each day goes by – as you know, it is a non-persistent gas – so it becomes more and more difficult to confirm it."...


Justin Amash (R) congressmen
tweets

These offensive strikes against Syria are unconstitutional, illegal, and reckless. The next speaker of the House must reclaim congressional war powers as prescribed in Article I of the Constitution. @SpeakerRyan (https://twitter.com/SpeakerRyan) has completely abdicated one of his most important responsibilities.
6:30 PM - 13 Apr 2018

Rand Paul (R) Senator


Senator Rand Paul @RandPaul (https://twitter.com/RandPaul)Apr 6, 2017 (https://twitter.com/RandPaul/status/850161484013481984)
While we all condemn the atrocities in Syria, the United States was not attacked.
Senator Rand Paul ✔ @RandPaul (https://twitter.com/RandPaul)
The President needs Congressional authorization for military action as required by the Constitution.
9:41 PM - Apr 6, 2017 (https://twitter.com/RandPaul/status/850161531094523906)


Tulsi Gabbard (D) congresswomen of Hawaii

"This escalation is short-sighted and will lead to more dead civilians, more refugees, the strengthening of al-Qaeda and other terrorists, and a possible nuclear war between the United States and Russia," Gabbard said in a statement (https://twitter.com/HawaiiNewsNow/status/850186497953210369). "This Administration has acted recklessly without care or consideration of the dire consequences of the United States' attack on Syria without waiting for the collection of evidence from the scene of the chemical poisoning."...

[jimnyc]

:rolleyes:

[LongTermGuy]

“If Russia had lived up to its commitment...there would be no chemical weapons in Syria, and we would not be here today.”


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dav_HM5U8AIiYCU.jpg

[jimnyc]

This has been explained beyond explanation so many times, and it's quite straight forward.

How War Powers Act works

The War Powers Act of 1973, passed in the aftermath of the Vietnam War, puts limits on the ability of the President to send American troops into combat areas without Congressional approval.

Under the act, the President can only send combat troops into battle or into areas where ''imminent'' hostilities are likely, for 60 days without either a declaration of war by Congress or a specific Congressional mandate.

The President can extend the time the troops are in the combat area for 30 extra days, without Congressional approval, for a total of 90 days.

The act, however, does not specify what Congress can do if the President refuses to comply with the act. Congress could presumably suspend all funds for such troops and override a Presidential veto.

https://www.nytimes.com/1984/03/29/world/how-war-powers-act-works.html

And here is the actual act itself:

https://www.loc.gov/law/help/war-powers.php

[Black Diamond]

This has been explained beyond explanation so many times, and it's quite straight forward.

How War Powers Act works

The War Powers Act of 1973, passed in the aftermath of the Vietnam War, puts limits on the ability of the President to send American troops into combat areas without Congressional approval.

Under the act, the President can only send combat troops into battle or into areas where ''imminent'' hostilities are likely, for 60 days without either a declaration of war by Congress or a specific Congressional mandate.

The President can extend the time the troops are in the combat area for 30 extra days, without Congressional approval, for a total of 90 days.

The act, however, does not specify what Congress can do if the President refuses to comply with the act. Congress could presumably suspend all funds for such troops and override a Presidential veto.

https://www.nytimes.com/1984/03/29/world/how-war-powers-act-works.html

And here is the actual act itself:

https://www.loc.gov/law/help/war-powers.php
war powers act is probably unconstitutional. All presidents should hang. :laugh:

[revelarts]

Tusli Gabbard to Mattis
"...Section 2 of the War Powers Resolution clarifies the constitutional powers of the President as commander-in-chief.
In article 2, which you referenced, Secretary Mattis, to introduce forces into hostilities only pursuant to
1.) a declaration of war,
2.) specific statutory authorization (by congress) or
3.) a national emergency created by an attack upon the U.S., its territories, possessions or Armed Forces. "


none of those were met.
none.


This has been explained beyond explanation so many times, and it's quite straight forward.
How War Powers Act works
The War Powers Act of 1973, passed in the aftermath of the Vietnam War, puts limits on the ability of the President to send American troops into combat areas without Congressional approval.
Under the act, the President can only send combat troops into battle or into areas where ''imminent'' hostilities are likely, for 60 days without either a declaration of war by Congress or a specific Congressional mandate.
The President can extend the time the troops are in the combat area for 30 extra days, without Congressional approval, for a total of 90 days.
The act, however, does not specify what Congress can do if the President refuses to comply with the act. Congress could presumably suspend all funds for such troops and override a Presidential veto.
https://www.nytimes.com/1984/03/29/world/how-war-powers-act-works.html
And here is the actual act itself:
https://www.loc.gov/law/help/war-powers.php

"The act, however, does not specify what Congress can do if the President refuses to comply with the act. Congress could presumably suspend all funds for such troops and override a Presidential veto."

"refuses to comply with act" in other words BREAK the LAW.

They could simply say that his actions are unconstitutional and illegal according to the War powers act and begin impeachment, or other legal action.
regardless if they do anything or not ,it's still illegal and unconstitutional since he "refuses to comply with act" and the constitution.

[jimnyc]

Tusli Gabbard to Mattis
"...Section 2 of the War Powers Resolution clarifies the constitutional powers of the President as commander-in-chief.
In article 2, which you referenced, Secretary Mattis, to introduce forces into hostilities only pursuant to
1.) a declaration of war,
2.) specific statutory authorization (by congress) or
3.) a national emergency created by an attack upon the U.S., its territories, possessions or Armed Forces. "


none of those were met.
none.



"The act, however, does not specify what Congress can do if the President refuses to comply with the act. Congress could presumably suspend all funds for such troops and override a Presidential veto."

"refuses to comply with act" in other words BREAK the LAW.

They could simply say that his actions are unconstitutional and illegal according to the War powers act and begin impeachment, or other legal action.
regardless if they do anything or not ,it's still illegal and unconstitutional since he "refuses to comply with act" and the constitution.


Ummm, no. He need only report to congress within a certain amount of time, and seek congress approval should he/she want to set boots on the ground beyond that period. Notice it DOES NOT state anywhere that congress needs to vote, only that they need to "CONSULT" with congress. I think that distinction is abundantly clear. And that's exactly why over 130+ reports have been made to congress since the resolution came about, and not once was there a vote. Yeah, I know, ALL illegal. :rolleyes:


---

The President in every possible instance shall consult with Congress before introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, and after every such introduction shall consult regularly with the Congress until United States Armed Forces are no longer engaged in hostilities or have been removed from such situations.

(Pub. L. 93–148, § 3, Nov. 7, 1973, 87 Stat. 555.)

---

(a) Written report; time of submission; circumstances necessitating submission; information reportedIn the absence of a declaration of war, in any case in which United States Armed Forces are introduced—
(1) into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances;
(2) into the territory, airspace or waters of a foreign nation, while equipped for combat, except for deployments which relate solely to supply, replacement, repair, or training of such forces; or
(3) in numbers which substantially enlarge United States Armed Forces equipped for combat already located in a foreign nation;
the President shall submit within 48 hours to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and to the President pro tempore of the Senate a report, in writing, setting forth—
(A) the circumstances necessitating the introduction of United States Armed Forces;
(B) the constitutional and legislative authority under which such introduction took place; and
(C) the estimated scope and duration of the hostilities or involvement.
(b) Other information reported
The President shall provide such other information as the Congress may request in the fulfillment of its constitutional responsibilities with respect to committing the Nation to war and to the use of United States Armed Forces abroad.

(c) Periodic reports; semiannual requirement
Whenever United States Armed Forces are introduced into hostilities or into any situation described in subsection (a) of this section, the President shall, so long as such armed forces continue to be engaged in such hostilities or situation, report to the Congress periodically on the status of such hostilities or situation as well as on the scope and duration of such hostilities or situation, but in no event shall he report to the Congress less often than once every six months.

(Pub. L. 93–148, § 4, Nov. 7, 1973, 87 Stat. 555.)

---

(a) Transmittal of report and referral to Congressional committees; joint request for convening Congress
Each report submitted pursuant to section 1543(a)(1) of this title shall be transmitted to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and to the President pro tempore of the Senate on the same calendar day. Each report so transmitted shall be referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives and to the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate for appropriate action. If, when the report is transmitted, the Congress has adjourned sine die or has adjourned for any period in excess of three calendar days, the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate, if they deem it advisable (or if petitioned by at least 30 percent of the membership of their respective Houses) shall jointly request the President to convene Congress in order that it may consider the report and take appropriate action pursuant to this section.

(b) Termination of use of United States Armed Forces; exceptions; extension period
Within sixty calendar days after a report is submitted or is required to be submitted pursuant to section 1543(a)(1) of this title, whichever is earlier, the President shall terminate any use of United States Armed Forces with respect to which such report was submitted (or required to be submitted), unless the Congress (1) has declared war or has enacted a specific authorization for such use of United States Armed Forces, (2) has extended by law such sixty-day period, or (3) is physically unable to meet as a result of an armed attack upon the United States. Such sixty-day period shall be extended for not more than an additional thirty days if the President determines and certifies to the Congress in writing that unavoidable military necessity respecting the safety of United States Armed Forces requires the continued use of such armed forces in the course of bringing about a prompt removal of such forces.

(c) Concurrent resolution for removal by President of United States Armed Forces
Notwithstanding subsection (b), at any time that United States Armed Forces are engaged in hostilities outside the territory of the United States, its possessions and territories without a declaration of war or specific statutory authorization, such forces shall be removed by the President if the Congress so directs by concurrent resolution.

(Pub. L. 93–148, § 5, Nov. 7, 1973, 87 Stat. 556.)

--------

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/chapter-33

[jimnyc]

At WORST case, the resolution flies in the face of the COTUS, in which case it would take congress to repeal and/or change it. But the presidents who use or used action, based on a congressional resolution = completely legal.

Write your rep.

[Drummond]

Tusli Gabbard to Mattis
"...Section 2 of the War Powers Resolution clarifies the constitutional powers of the President as commander-in-chief.
In article 2, which you referenced, Secretary Mattis, to introduce forces into hostilities only pursuant to
1.) a declaration of war,
2.) specific statutory authorization (by congress) or
3.) a national emergency created by an attack upon the U.S., its territories, possessions or Armed Forces. "


none of those were met.
none.



"The act, however, does not specify what Congress can do if the President refuses to comply with the act. Congress could presumably suspend all funds for such troops and override a Presidential veto."

"refuses to comply with act" in other words BREAK the LAW.

They could simply say that his actions are unconstitutional and illegal according to the War powers act and begin impeachment, or other legal action.
regardless if they do anything or not ,it's still illegal and unconstitutional since he "refuses to comply with act" and the constitution.

Cutting through all your elaborate excuses to avoid confrontation, Revelarts ... how would YOU, given a totally free hand to act as you wished, deal with this whole mess ?

You've got Assad, who's very keen to use chemical weapons on his OWN people, even kids.

You've got Russia, keen to support him in anything he does, no matter how heinous.

You've additionally got a Russia that has one hell of a moral blind spot when it comes to chemical weapons deployments generally .. yet, insanely, expects total respect from the international community, regardless ...

Would you - given the total freedom to do so ...

1. Act militarily ?

2. Dream up yet more excuses not to .. probably indefinitely ?

3. Offer 'talks' to work out differences .. which would no doubt be laughed at ?

4. Ignore it all, trust to blind luck, assume SOMEHOW that things would magically work out (e.g the Kremlin gets an attack of conscience) ?

5. Emigrate, join the British Labour Party, who'd very definitely welcome you with open arms .. ?

[Drummond]

Well, shit :D





As I know, we hit some of your missles. That is what our media are saying.
@Polite Russian (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=3556) ... @Papokarlo (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=3890)

News for you both.

Since Polite Russian has shown us that you're being lied to in your own media about the outcome of last night's combined Syria attack (in fact, the mission went perfectly !) .. it obviously follows that the Russian media might be feeding you a version of 'reality' that's totally warped.

Should we, therefore, post updates which 'deprogram' you, and give you a glimpse of the reality in play ?

Here's my offerings for now:

https://nypost.com/2018/04/14/un-security-council-votes-down-russia-proposal-to-condemn-syria-strikes/amp/


The UN Security Council on Saturday soundly rejected Russia’s call to condemn the United States and its allies for striking Syria’s chemical weapons stockpile.

Russia, China and Bolivia voted in favor of Moscow’s emergency resolution, well short of the nine “yes” votes Syria’s main ally needed.

The Security Council is comprised of five permanent members – the US, France, Great Britain, China and Russia – and 10 rotating members.

Those current members are Bolivia, Côte d’Ivoire, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Netherlands, Peru, Poland, and Sweden.

Is there any Russian here who'd like to explain how it is that the Security Council was so unwilling to support the Russian 'position' ? I'm guessing, you see, that in terms of what your Russian media may be feeding you, such a mood may be inexplicable to you .. ?

[jimnyc]

I saw a few videos with my own eyes and every missile I saw landed, and I saw not a one get shot down in the sky.

[Polite Russian]

@Polite Russian (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=3556) ... @Papokarlo (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=3890)

News for you both.

Since Polite Russian has shown us that you're being lied to in your own media about the outcome of last night's combined Syria attack (in fact, the mission went perfectly !) .. it obviously follows that the Russian media might be feeding you a version of 'reality' that's totally warped.

Should we, therefore, post updates which 'deprogram' you, and give you a glimpse of the reality in play ?

Here's my offerings for now:

https://nypost.com/2018/04/14/un-security-council-votes-down-russia-proposal-to-condemn-syria-strikes/amp/



Is there any Russian here who'd like to explain how it is that the Security Council was so unwilling to support the Russian 'position' ? I'm guessing, you see, that in terms of what your Russian media may be feeding you, such a mood may be inexplicable to you .. ?







Look, I don't believe our official media for a long time :)
I know a lot about Donbass conflict just because I have some people, who fought with Ukrainians there and all of that Donbass things are not so far away from here.


A don't believe anything about Syrian conflict (except some situations, that are not important). A know, that there are a lot of lies. This is the reason, why I said "as I know" and "our media told".
Honestly I don't think, that anybody must be involved. Islamists must solve their problems by themselfes. Without ours, or yours intervention.

Except all that ISIS shitheads, we must eliminate them together, and do it so brutal, that their terroris asses (or heads, no difference) shoud not even think about some explosions in civilized countries. They are international threat.
But civil war in Syria is their war. We have nothing to do there.

[aboutime]

The United States DID NOT HAVE ANY WEAPONS SHOT DOWN over Syria.

Anyone who says they shot down 1 or 100...was told to say that by PUTIN, or the IRANIANS.

But....the SYRIANS DID shoot hundreds of Surface To Air missiles at NOTHING..after the strikes took place....TO IMPRESS the idiots who happily demonstrated....as the smoke cleared.
Photos from SANA indicate this building was destroyed in US/French/UK airstrikes, geolocation by @DragonLadyU2

https://syria.liveuamap.com/pics/2018/04/14/21645149_0.jpg
https://syria.liveuamap.com/pics/2018/04/14/21645149_1.jpg

[Polite Russian]

The United States DID NOT HAVE ANY WEAPONS SHOT DOWN over Syria.

Anyone who says they shot down 1 or 100...was told to say that by PUTIN, or the IRANIANS.

But....the SYRIANS DID shoot hundreds of Surface To Air missiles at NOTHING..after the strikes took place....TO IMPRESS the idiots who happily demonstrated....as the smoke cleared.
Photos from SANA indicate this building was destroyed in US/French/UK airstrikes, geolocation by @DragonLadyU2

https://syria.liveuamap.com/pics/2018/04/14/21645149_0.jpg
https://syria.liveuamap.com/pics/2018/04/14/21645149_1.jpg








Okay, okay, relax.

As I know, I'm not a bot...
..
..
..
..
or am I?

**X-files theme**

[Kathianne]

There was a question regarding a Mattis quote, thought I'd provide the link that was requested:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/u-s-looking-for-the-actual-evidence-of-syria-chemical-attack-mattis-says/

[Kathianne]

Not that it's a 'reliable source,' but figured two was better than one:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-usa/mattis-says-i-believe-there-was-a-chemical-attack-in-syria-idUSKBN1HJ2ES

I really tried to find something that had the forum stamp of approval, but gee there aren't any that cover things like this. Must be sort of an inverse type of thing?

[Drummond]

Look, I don't believe our official media for a long time :)
I know a lot about Donbass conflict just because I have some people, who fought with Ukrainians there and all of that Donbass things are not so far away from here.


A don't believe anything about Syrian conflict (except some situations, that are not important). A know, that there are a lot of lies. This is the reason, why I said "as I know" and "our media told".
Honestly I don't think, that anybody must be involved. Islamists must solve their problems by themselfes. Without ours, or yours intervention.

Except all that ISIS shitheads, we must eliminate them together, and do it so brutal, that their terroris asses (or heads, no difference) shoud not even think about some explosions in civilized countries. They are international threat.
But civil war in Syria is their war. We have nothing to do there.

Bravo !! I applaud your thinking .. yours may be not too dissimilar to mine, then. I knew you were a welcome addition here !

What threw me before was your use of the words 'as I know'. It suggested to me that what 'you knew' was what you were being told - in other words, you considered the reports your media put out were 'knowledge', not propaganda. Which would've meant that you believed it all.

Anyway, thanks for the correction ! ALSO ... we agree on what needs to be done geopolitically. I agree, I don't see that Russia has a legitimate role in Syria. Were you there simply to help Assad rid his country of terrorists, that'd be one thing .. but, it became clear early on that the Russian definition of a 'terrorist' in Syria was anybody at all who opposed Assad.

It seems, from the chemical weapon attack recently, that this includes children ....

Helping 'delouse' a country of its terrorist infestation is highly laudable. But, Putin clearly has other reasons for cozying up to Assad. Putin wants Russian influence there, to treat Assad as a junior partner, of sorts. It isn't a good thing. Shades of the Afghanistan invasion, circa 1980, maybe. Or a form of power-annexation, with Syria permanently in the Russian 'orbit', much (though not as completely) as Crimea is ?

NOW, we have the Kremlin happy to defend Assad's use of a chemical toxin against ordinary people, children included. There's absolutely no doubt whatever that Russia's support has reached monstrous lengths. Add to that their assassination attempt against the Skripals in Salisbury, UK, and apparently Russia is being steered towards pariah status internationally.

The Secretary General of the UN said that the Cold War had returned, with a vengeance. It's hardly surprising, considering the Kremlin's actions abroad.

Thank you for keeping an open mind. It's very appreciated. By the way, I couldn't agree with you more on the ISIS question. Hunt the trash down, exterminate them as the vermin they are. Excellent thinking ! In fact ... it's a great pity. Your Government's actions are distracting the world from the greater need we have to rid this world of Islamic terrorism.

[Polite Russian]

Bravo !! I applaud your thinking .. yours may be not too dissimilar to mine, then. I knew you were a welcome addition here !

What threw me before was your use of the words 'as I know'. It suggested to me that what 'you knew' was what you were being told - in other words, you considered the reports your media put out were 'knowledge', not propaganda. Which would've meant that you believed it all.

Anyway, thanks for the correction ! ALSO ... we agree on what needs to be done geopolitically. I agree, I don't see that Russia has a legitimate role in Syria. Were you there simply to help Assad rid his country of terrorists, that'd be one thing .. but, it became clear early on that the Russian definition of a 'terrorist' in Syria was anybody at all who opposed Assad.

It seems, from the chemical weapon attack recently, that this includes children ....

Helping 'delouse' a country of its terrorist infestation is highly laudable. But, Putin clearly has other reasons for cozying up to Assad. Putin wants Russian influence there, to treat Assad as a junior partner, of sorts. It isn't a good thing. Shades of the Afghanistan invasion, circa 1980, maybe. Or a form of power-annexation, with Syria permanently in the Russian 'orbit', much (though not as completely) as Crimea is ?

NOW, we have the Kremlin happy to defend Assad's use of a chemical toxin against ordinary people, children included. There's absolutely no doubt whatever that Russia's support has reached monstrous lengths. Add to that their assassination attempt against the Skripals in Salisbury, UK, and apparently Russia is being steered towards pariah status internationally.

The Secretary General of the UN said that the Cold War had returned, with a vengeance. It's hardly surprising, considering the Kremlin's actions abroad.

Thank you for keeping an open mind. It's very appreciated. By the way, I couldn't agree with you more on the ISIS question. Hunt the trash down, exterminate them as the vermin they are. Excellent thinking ! In fact ... it's a great pity. Your Government's actions are distracting the world from the greater need we have to rid this world of Islamic terrorism.





And thank you for understanding. That damn language problems :D
Honestly, it is a Great thing, that in such hard times we can calmly discuss all of that. I appreciate that.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

There was a question regarding a Mattis quote, thought I'd provide the link that was requested:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/u-s-looking-for-the-actual-evidence-of-syria-chemical-attack-mattis-says/


Not that it's a 'reliable source,' but figured two was better than one:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-usa/mattis-says-i-believe-there-was-a-chemical-attack-in-syria-idUSKBN1HJ2ES

I really tried to find something that had the forum stamp of approval, but gee there aren't any that cover things like this. Must be sort of an inverse type of thing?
Why do they say this and then turn around and say they know Assad has used chemical weapons at least 50 times, and some estimates say upwards towards 200?

And Friday night before the attack, Mad Dog Mattis was in a press conference and said they had all the evidence they needed.

[Drummond]

The United States DID NOT HAVE ANY WEAPONS SHOT DOWN over Syria.

Anyone who says they shot down 1 or 100...was told to say that by PUTIN, or the IRANIANS.

But....the SYRIANS DID shoot hundreds of Surface To Air missiles at NOTHING..after the strikes took place....TO IMPRESS the idiots who happily demonstrated....as the smoke cleared.
Photos from SANA indicate this building was destroyed in US/French/UK airstrikes, geolocation by @DragonLadyU2

https://syria.liveuamap.com/pics/2018/04/14/21645149_0.jpg
https://syria.liveuamap.com/pics/2018/04/14/21645149_1.jpg



Suggest you cut Polite Russian some slack, Aboutime. We have a free, independently thinking Russian here !!!

And, Polite Russian ... Aboutime is, as always, completely correct. As I understand it, Russian armaments were 'conspicuous' by their absence ... no sign of them ranged against the US and allied forces flying with them, whatsoever.

When President Trump says it all went perfectly, he means it. It did. In fact, the planes and missiles had no opposition at all. Only AFTER all the bombings had taken place, all objectives achieved, did the Syrians launch any missiles !!! They hit nothing, of course.

Hopefully where they landed didn't do some self-inflicted damage, to Syrians ... ? Though ... if against Assad's own forces, that'd be no bad thing .....

[Kathianne]

I dunno. Guess you'd have to ask Mattis or Haley or the reporters?

[Polite Russian]

Suggest you cut Polite Russian some slack, Aboutime. We have a free, independently thinking Russian here !!!

And, Polite Russian ... Aboutime is, as always, completely correct. As I understand it, Russian armaments were 'conspicuous' by their absence ... no sign of them ranged against the US and allied forces flying with them, whatsoever.

When President Trump says it all went perfectly, he means it. It did. In fact, the planes and missiles had no opposition at all. Only AFTER all the bombings had taken place, all objectives achieved, did the Syrians launch any missiles !!! They hit nothing, of course.

Hopefully where they landed didn't do some self-inflicted damage, to Syrians ... ? Though ... if against Assad's own forces, that'd be no bad thing .....





I will not argue with that :)
I don't care about reputation here, I'm interested in Truth.
And I don't care about reputation of our media, I hate them myself xD

But I also don't have any sympathies for your media. I mean they show Russia like some sort of hell :D It is funny, actually. A lot of people I met here, somebody from USA was VERY surprised.
We definitely need to change our government and politics... and fix our economics... and a lot of other stuff... But life here is not that bad :)

[Drummond]

And thank you for understanding. That damn language problems :D
Honestly, it is a Great thing, that in such hard times we can calmly discuss all of that. I appreciate that.:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

[Drummond]

I will not argue with that :)
I don't care about reputation here, I'm interested in Truth.
And I don't care about reputation of our media, I hate them myself xD

But I also don't have any sympathies for your media. I mean they show Russia like some sort of hell :D It is funny, actually. A lot of people I met here, somebody from USA was VERY surprised.
We definitely need to change our government and politics... and fix our economics... and a lot of other stuff... But life here is not that bad :)

OK, well, that's interesting. Thanks for that perspective. I'm totally with you in having an interest in truth, as opposed to following a preferred line because propaganda insists upon it.

Our respective timezones are more similar than those of Russia and the US [UK v Russia] .. so you'll appreciate that I'm keen to get some sleep sometime soon ! As, surely, you must want to, too.

For now -- let me answer you on the 'Russia is some sort of hell' point.

My 'take' on this ... and I'm asking you to expand on your own, in reply ... is that I believe Russians are paid very poorly in their jobs, compared to their Western counterparts. Do you consider it possible that Russians genuinely are pleased with their circumstances, because they lack a frame of reference that shows them how much better they'd do in a Western society ?

See this:

http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Russia/United-States/Cost-of-living


Average monthly salary, after tax: Russia: $686.16. The US: $3,258.85.

Our understanding also is that Russia is a rigid Police State, with close surveillance of citizens the 'norm'. Think and do what your authorities consider acceptable, and you're OK. Fail to, and the Almighty Russian State machine will come down on you like a ton of bricks.

I for one believe the Skripals were attacked with a Russian-made nerve agent because Putin wanted to send a message to everyone who might oppose him ... this days before the Presidential election, after all ! The message was ... oppose me, and you will never be beyond our reach, and never safe. You're wise to dance to my tune instead !!

If I'm right, this is a profile of a monster. One stuck in the power-crazed Soviet era, who may wish to start to recreate its former 'glory', in time.

[revelarts]

Why do they say this and then turn around and say they know Assad has used chemical weapons at least 50 times, and some estimates say upwards towards 200?

And Friday night before the attack, Mad Dog Mattis was in a press conference and said they had all the evidence they needed.

good question...

I asked the same question when colon powell said one day that Saddam was "contained" and "not able to project force against his neighbors" much less the U.S. or Europe. then weeks later Saddam has WMDs and can't be allow to continue.

I figured out which was true after a while myself.
And W Bush admitted years later that they/we, --the U.S. Gov't at the highest level--, had "bad intel".

[LongTermGuy]

**For all the Liberals crying about our Airstrikes last night.(No Casualties). Here’s a Obama Fact for you.

Obama approved 26,171 bombs in 2016 overseas. 2,500 Us Soldiers died in while Obama was President.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/some-2-500-americans-have-died-in-afghanistan-and-iraq-under-obama-20160530 … (https://t.co/ZqJb9cGJQn)

https://pbs.twimg.com/card_img/984701818696499200/hYXvWaUh?format=jpg&name=600x314
`America dropped 26,171 bombs in 2016. What a bloody end to Obama's reign`


https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/09/america-dropped-26171-bombs-2016-obama-legacy

[Polite Russian]

OK, well, that's interesting. Thanks for that perspective. I'm totally with you in having an interest in truth, as opposed to following a preferred line because propaganda insists upon it.

Our respective timezones are more similar than those of Russia and the US [UK v Russia] .. so you'll appreciate that I'm keen to get some sleep sometime soon ! As, surely, you must want to, too.

For now -- let me answer you on the 'Russia is some sort of hell' point.

My 'take' on this ... and I'm asking you to expand on your own, in reply ... is that I believe Russians are paid very poorly in their jobs, compared to their Western counterparts. Do you consider it possible that Russians genuinely are pleased with their circumstances, because they lack a frame of reference that shows them how much better they'd do in a Western society ?

See this:

http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Russia/United-States/Cost-of-living



Our understanding also is that Russia is a rigid Police State, with close surveillance of citizens the 'norm'. Think and do what your authorities consider acceptable, and you're OK. Fail to, and the Almighty Russian State machine will come down on you like a ton of bricks.

I for one believe the Skripals were attacked with a Russian-made nerve agent because Putin wanted to send a message to everyone who might oppose him ... this days before the Presidential election, after all ! The message was ... oppose me, and you will never be beyond our reach, and never safe. You're wise to dance to my tune instead !!

If I'm right, this is a profile of a monster. One stuck in the power-crazed Soviet era, who may wish to start to recreate its former 'glory', in time.







Okay. About our payments.
Yes, you paid less here, then in USA. BUT! Life here is much cheaper... well, for now, at least, all that sanctions may cause some troubles :D We'll see.
For example, bread here costs about 25 roubles. It's something about 0.41$. And I pay for heat and water nearly 4500 roubles per month (and about 2200-2500 in summer). It's like 73$ (and 40$) And what about your prices? I heard, that it is more expencive to live in USA.

And yes, about politicians, I can agree, I think. Sadly, it's getting worce. Just few years later situation with freedom was really better.

Situation with Skripals is complicated. I mean I don't see any reason for our govrenment to kill them now. But there are a lot of sence in blaming Russia here, for new sanctions. Please, don't think, that I really think, that we did not do it. But I believe, that both variants are possible.

And about Police State..
Well. I do not support such things. I really want more freedom, more rights and so on. But people must learn how to use freedom. People must learn, why they need to pay their taxes. Why and how everything works. People must understand, where ends their freedom and starts freedom of other people. Europe, for excample, did not have such totalitarian shit as USSR. And it crashed not so many years ago. There was totalitarian government, and then, suddenly, there are a lot of freedom. And people just don't know, how to use it. That is the problem. We gain too much rights when ussr died, instead of gaining them step by step. Damn, I hope you understand what I mean :D
Problem is not only with the Authorities. Problem is people, their level of understanding of how the democracy shoud work, with their education. We just need some time. And we need to get rid of post-soviet folks in Government.
Right now, sadly, I think that we need that government control, that whole country not fall into chaos, and it is possible. People here are not like in your countries. One of problems - is language. We just can't communicate properly, we can't teach each other something. And we still have a lot of people with soviet and post soviet mentality. I just belive, that generation of 2000+ will be better and smarter.

But you can live here on the "okay" level.


Again, I hope that I said everithng properly. It not so easy in text :D
If you are interested, you can call me in Skype, or something like that. It will be better, I think.


Aaand I'll go to bed. It's 04:05 AM here :D
I need to have some sleep

[aboutime]

I will make no excuses for my remarks here, but I will apologize to you, and others whom I may have PRE-judged unfairly...based on my many years of Hostilitiy toward your nation, and due to my endless distrust of not only Putin, but many of our Own Politicians here in the U.S.A.

I also want to thank Sir Drummond for making what seemed like my unfair treatment of you by missinterpreting much of what you were trying to say here.
We have a saying here in the U.S. I learned many years ago:[B "You catch more flies with Honey, than you do with Vinegar".[/B] Please accept my apologies for jumping the gun (so to speak) as I am an Old, Veteran who only see's THREE COLORS....RED, WHITE, AND BLUE.:salute:
Thank You.

[Polite Russian]

I will make no excuses for my remarks here, but I will apologize to you, and others whom I may have PRE-judged unfairly...based on my many years of Hostilitiy toward your nation, and due to my endless distrust of not only Putin, but many of our Own Politicians here in the U.S.A.

I also want to thank Sir Drummond for making what seemed like my unfair treatment of you by missinterpreting much of what you were trying to say here.
We have a saying here in the U.S. I learned many years ago:[B "You catch more flies with Honey, than you do with Vinegar".[/B] Please accept my apologies for jumping the gun (so to speak) as I am an Old, Veteran who only see's THREE COLORS....RED, WHITE, AND BLUE.:salute:
Thank You.



Dont worry, everything is fine . Thank you for understanding. I understand why a lot of people think so bad about Russia. Media work well in both sides, raising hatred between us. Someday that shit will stop, I hope.

And well... We have the same colors :D

White
Blue
Red

[Gunny]

good question...

I asked the same question when colon powell said one day that Saddam was "contained" and "not able to project force against his neighbors" much less the U.S. or Europe. then weeks later Saddam has WMDs and can't be allow to continue.

I figured out which was true after a while myself.
And W Bush admitted years later that they/we, --the U.S. Gov't at the highest level--, had "bad intel".

Good thing we have you, rev. Hell, we wouldn't know jack shit without you explaining the composition of water to us. Do you have a "I'm F-ing Smarter than Everyone Else" donation site for us to contribute to your worldly endeavors? Hell, ny 5 years old granddaughter wants to debate you. Told me to bet the fortune on HER. Not because she's that smart, but because you're just that damn dumb.

[Drummond]

Okay. About our payments.
Yes, you paid less here, then in USA. BUT! Life here is much cheaper... well, for now, at least, all that sanctions may cause some troubles :D We'll see.
For example, bread here costs about 25 roubles. It's something about 0.41$. And I pay for heat and water nearly 4500 roubles per month (and about 2200-2500 in summer). It's like 73$ (and 40$) And what about your prices? I heard, that it is more expencive to live in USA.

And yes, about politicians, I can agree, I think. Sadly, it's getting worce. Just few years later situation with freedom was really better.

Situation with Skripals is complicated. I mean I don't see any reason for our govrenment to kill them now. But there are a lot of sence in blaming Russia here, for new sanctions. Please, don't think, that I really think, that we did not do it. But I believe, that both variants are possible.

And about Police State..
Well. I do not support such things. I really want more freedom, more rights and so on. But people must learn how to use freedom. People must learn, why they need to pay their taxes. Why and how everything works. People must understand, where ends their freedom and starts freedom of other people. Europe, for excample, did not have such totalitarian shit as USSR. And it crashed not so many years ago. There was totalitarian government, and then, suddenly, there are a lot of freedom. And people just don't know, how to use it. That is the problem. We gain too much rights when ussr died, instead of gaining them step by step. Damn, I hope you understand what I mean :D
Problem is not only with the Authorities. Problem is people, their level of understanding of how the democracy shoud work, with their education. We just need some time. And we need to get rid of post-soviet folks in Government.
Right now, sadly, I think that we need that government control, that whole country not fall into chaos, and it is possible. People here are not like in your countries. One of problems - is language. We just can't communicate properly, we can't teach each other something. And we still have a lot of people with soviet and post soviet mentality. I just belive, that generation of 2000+ will be better and smarter.

But you can live here on the "okay" level.


Again, I hope that I said everithng properly. It not so easy in text :D
If you are interested, you can call me in Skype, or something like that. It will be better, I think.


Aaand I'll go to bed. It's 04:05 AM here :D
I need to have some sleep

You make good points.

If you look at the link I posted, it contains some details about costs of items and services in Russia. Sure, some items are a lot cheaper. Not all .. but, some.

If a Russian wanted to spend out on an air fare to travel abroad .. it'd be prohibitively expensive for most Russians. I suspect the Kremlin is very happy that's the case ...

As for the cheaper items, how many are produced within Russia ? If imported, but still cheap ... that says the real cost has been subsidised. Which in turn means that they cost your country a lot, in real terms.

I think - apart from sanctions, which frankly your country deserves to have ! - your real problem is what you're spending on your military. If Russia could adopt a less belligerent path ... you'd all be much the better for it ...

.. as would the rest of the world, too ...

[Drummond]

Cutting through all your elaborate excuses to avoid confrontation, Revelarts ... how would YOU, given a totally free hand to act as you wished, deal with this whole mess ?

You've got Assad, who's very keen to use chemical weapons on his OWN people, even kids.

You've got Russia, keen to support him in anything he does, no matter how heinous.

You've additionally got a Russia that has one hell of a moral blind spot when it comes to chemical weapons deployments generally .. yet, insanely, expects total respect from the international community, regardless ...

Would you - given the total freedom to do so ...

1. Act militarily ?

2. Dream up yet more excuses not to .. probably indefinitely ?

3. Offer 'talks' to work out differences .. which would no doubt be laughed at ?

4. Ignore it all, trust to blind luck, assume SOMEHOW that things would magically work out (e.g the Kremlin gets an attack of conscience) ?

5. Emigrate, join the British Labour Party, who'd very definitely welcome you with open arms .. ?

I haven't yet seen your answer to the above, Revelarts.

You carp. You criticise. But I've seen nothing, yet, that tells us what YOU would recommend as proper, acceptable actions to a situation which very definitely needed decisions made about it. If you're going to judge adversely, shouldn't you have a 'better' solution to offer ?

[Polite Russian]

You make good points.

If you look at the link I posted, it contains some details about costs of items and services in Russia. Sure, some items are a lot cheaper. Not all .. but, some.

If a Russian wanted to spend out on an air fare to travel abroad .. it'd be prohibitively expensive for most Russians. I suspect the Kremlin is very happy that's the case ...

As for the cheaper items, how many are produced within Russia ? If imported, but still cheap ... that says the real cost has been subsidised. Which in turn means that they cost your country a lot, in real terms.

I think - apart from sanctions, which frankly your country deserves to have ! - your real problem is what you're spending on your military. If Russia could adopt a less belligerent path ... you'd all be much the better for it ...

.. as would the rest of the world, too ...




Yeah, I checked that link :)

Problem is not our military spendings, but that a LOT of money just not going farther, than pockets of some "elites".
We need to spend money for military. Not for some new weapons, or trying to scare West (oh lol, it's funny), but to support our soldiers, to give them normal level of life. Believe, convicts are living in a disgusting conditions. And usual contractor gain very little amount of money. If we stop spending money for the military, we will loose a lot of people there.
Plus our economics is very shitty. And we need to somehow get rid of "soviet-minded" shit in people's heads, because it was not a long time ago since USSR existed. A lot of people here just do not know how to use capitalism properly, there is a point in people's minds, that gaining money, that if you want to gain money - is bad, that it makes you selfish and greedy. It will pass, but we need time to get used to it. I belive, that my kids will live in a better place (if our mighty leaders won't turn our planet to a radioactive ash, lol).

And yeah, traveling with a plane is not the cheapest thing here, I agree. I returned from army (I served in Ussurijsk, it's on border with China and Norh Korea) home by a plane and it costed me 15000 roubles (244$).
And I live in Saint-Petersburg. So I flew across the whole Russia. But international traveling usually expensive as hell, yeah. Not many people here was in Europe, for example. And that's sad. I was there, when I was a kid (used to travel with family).


Now I'm trying not to track our news. They usually make me sad and angry. :D

[Russ]

I realize that I am late to this discussion, but to me it looked like the chemical attack was a deliberate response to Trump's announcement that America would probably be pulling out of the Syria conflict. Assad, possibly with prompting from Putin or from Iran, decided to do the chemical attack as a throwdown toward Trump. I think that Assad thought there would be no response, which on the world stage would be the equivalent of giving Assad/Putin/Iran permission to use chemical weapons all they wanted after America moved out.

Trump had three options, in my opinion:

1) No response - This is sometimes called the 'Obama response' or the 'Spineless response'. Doing nothing prevents any immediate retaliation, but invites more attacks in the future because everyone know you are now spineless. This is like the kid on the playground that gets hit by another kid and never does anything. You can bet another hit is coming.

2) Hyper response - This is the response where you escalate several levels in the hope that your opponent will be sufficiently wounded and shocked that they are afraid to retaliate. The risk is that the opponent isn't wounded or shocked enough, and they just escalate more. This is like the kid on the playground that gets hit by another kid, and responds by breaking the other kids legs. Bad choice here - very dangerous in this case because of the Russian presence.

3) Calculated response - This is where you respond enough to send a message, but not enough to create escalation. I think this was by far the best choice for America here, and I think Trump may have done it. It is key that the strikes were only against Syria, not against Russian forces. It's not a challenge against Putin. I also like the way the strikes specifically targeted chemical weapons. After all, Syria isn't even supposed to have them, and Russia guaranteed that Syria wouldn't have them. It makes it difficult for Putin to manufacture outrage. And maybe the biggest key is bringing in UK and France on the strikes. Now it looks like it is not specifically America that Assad or Putin would be responding to - it is a coalition. And its not a personal challenge from Trump to Putin.
Going back to the kid on the playground analogy, its the equivalent of punching the other kid back just enough that he decides to go elsewhere to find easier targets.

Overall, the worst option would have been the Hyper response, but the No response/Obama response would have been really bad. I think Trump (and Mattis) did a good job of doing the Calculated response.

[aboutime]

Thank you


I will make no excuses for my remarks here, but I will apologize to you, and others whom I may have PRE-judged unfairly...based on my many years of Hostilitiy toward your nation, and due to my endless distrust of not only Putin, but many of our Own Politicians here in the U.S.A.

Correction added...

I also want to thank Sir Drummond for making what seemed like my unfair treatment of you by missinterpreting much of what you were trying to say here.
We have a saying here in the U.S. I learned many years ago: "You catch more flies with Honey, than you do with Vinegar". Please accept my apologies for jumping the gun (so to speak) as I am an Old, Veteran who only see's THREE COLORS....RED, WHITE, AND BLUE.:salute:
Thank You.

[Drummond]

Yeah, I checked that link :)

Problem is not our military spendings, but that a LOT of money just not going farther, than pockets of some "elites".
We need to spend money for military. Not for some new weapons, or trying to scare West (oh lol, it's funny), but to support our soldiers, to give them normal level of life. Believe, convicts are living in a disgusting conditions. And usual contractor gain very little amount of money. If we stop spending money for the military, we will loose a lot of people there.
Plus our economics is very shitty. And we need to somehow get rid of "soviet-minded" shit in people's heads, because it was not a long time ago since USSR existed. A lot of people here just do not know how to use capitalism properly, there is a point in people's minds, that gaining money, that if you want to gain money - is bad, that it makes you selfish and greedy. It will pass, but we need time to get used to it. I belive, that my kids will live in a better place (if our mighty leaders won't turn our planet to a radioactive ash, lol).

And yeah, traveling with a plane is not the cheapest thing here, I agree. I returned from army (I served in Ussurijsk, it's on border with China and Norh Korea) home by a plane and it costed me 15000 roubles (244$).
And I live in Saint-Petersburg. So I flew across the whole Russia. But international traveling usually expensive as hell, yeah. Not many people here was in Europe, for example. And that's sad. I was there, when I was a kid (used to travel with family).


Now I'm trying not to track our news. They usually make me sad and angry. :D

Yes, we hear about Russian 'oligarchs' over here ...

I think you need to spend wisely on your military .. hey, not spending out on Novichok-production might be a good idea ! Also, your lot should give up on spending on nukes, and upgrades to aircraft, missile systems and the like. After all, just as you would ... so would we. Start a new arms race, and the West would certainly match your every move. The best you could hope for is technological parity, and for what ? For systems - IF your side dropped its belligerence ! - you would have no need of in the first place.

Trust me .. the US is far better placed to afford such expenditures, than your economy is.

Daily expenses ... some items are cheaper, some relatively more expensive. I think your economy is geared towards making the most basic items of living affordable, at the expense of many other things. Car ownership, for example ... Russian and American prices are almost equal, YET, Russians only earn a fraction of the wage. I have to wonder if that's a form of control applied to your people, meaning that far fewer citizens can afford privately-funded travel, and so, as in the Soviet days, people don't usually travel far at all.

I can hardly blame you for not following your 'news' ... not if you're going to be outrageously lied to !!! The Syrian strike by the US, UK and France was a total success. Stories you've had about the launching of any form of effective counterstrike are totally 100 percent false.

On your point about 'greed' .. it's a part of human nature to want to prosper. I believe this is a good reason why, after all the generations of its existence, the Soviet Union rotted from within. Ultimately, grafting the Communist way of thinking on to peoples' minds - even after all the repression brought to bear, to FORCE its acceptance - just became an impossibility. Human nature just isn't like that.

If your people experienced more of the merits of Capitalism, they'd embrace it ever-more enthusiastically. But, so much seems out of reach. THAT is a crime against your People ... led in no small part by one Vladimir Putin.

[revelarts]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljROsEqFfRI

[revelarts]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZuYoosLYoY&feature=youtu.be

[revelarts]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOsR0x0jlxk

[LongTermGuy]

https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/966226255078080513/WJUQULEt_bigger.jpgAshton Whitty‏ @ashtonbirdie (https://twitter.com/ashtonbirdie) 36m36 minutes ago (https://twitter.com/ashtonbirdie/status/985705294280900608)More



Has anyone else noticed how distracted we’ve been? Just imagine every American quarreling over whether or not we‘ll be going to war.https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Da2TJh0U0AAcZkM.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Da2acKvV4AAWYMz.jpg
:laugh:

[revelarts]

http://mynetbox.info/xtras/savageantisyria.jpeg

http://mynetbox.info/xtras/savageantisyria2.jpeg


this "liberal" wrote the best selling pro Trump book
https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/61al3u0s4LL._SX332_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg
and encourages all his radio listeners to VOTE TRUMP to "make America Great Again"

[LongTermGuy]

Glorious https://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/72x72/1f1fa-1f1f8.pngThe `correct word` to describe what it is like to have a MAN with courage in the White House who attacks evil when needed...>> instead of a MOUSE who tried to pay off evil with millions.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Da1hpOaU8AAIapN.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/974402790989713408/JsfdRtY5_bigger.jpg   Hanna  ‏ @polishprincessh (https://twitter.com/polishprincessh) Apr 1 (https://twitter.com/polishprincessh/status/980636421076803585)More



My belief is in GOD, but I know GOD answered our prayers and put President Trump as our leader.Prayers for My President Who has the weight of the World on his shoulders! May God puts an Armor around him and his family for protections.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DZvrnxfV4AAH_nf.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/982215901855432705/96DxeHk1_bigger.jpg 鹿 AmyLovesTrump 鹿‏ @alozras411 (https://twitter.com/alozras411) 6h6 hours ago (https://twitter.com/alozras411/status/985630747657719809)More



.@nikkihaley (https://twitter.com/nikkihaley): "The international community is telling Russia that either you make a decision on how you act and when you act, or the rest of us will make a decision in isolating you."https://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/72x72/1f449.pngYou’re doing a FANTASTIC job @nikkihaley (https://twitter.com/nikkihaley)#AmyLovesTrump (https://twitter.com/hashtag/AmyLovesTrump?src=hash)

https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/918480715158716419/4X8oCbge_normal.jpg Fox News (https://twitter.com/FoxNews)
https://twitter.com/alozras411/status/985630747657719809

[revelarts]

http://media.breitbart.com/media/2018/04/sarah-palin-alabama-8-21-17-ap-640x480.jpg
Exclusive–
Sarah Palin on Syria:
Why Should We ‘Sacrifice Even One of Our Sons or Daughters?’
“Why in the world we would be willing to sacrifice even one of our sons or daughters who will be sent over [to Syria]?” asked Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin during a Tuesday interview with SiriusXM host Rebecca Mansour for Breitbart News Tonight.

“It really makes me nervous that there seems to be some enthusiasm for the U.S. to interject ourselves again in a foreign country’s battles when no one has articulated yet what our interest is there,” Palin said. “We should have learned our lesson with Iraq and Afghanistan. I look at it as the blood, the sweat, the toil that has been spent on our end when you can’t really see what the gain is in a lot of respects. We just can’t allow ourselves get back in that mode with Syria.”

Exclusive? Sarah Palin on Syria: Why Should We ?Sacrifice Even One of Our Sons or Daughters?' (http://www.breitbart.com/radio/2018/04/11/exclusive-sarah-palin-on-syria-why-should-we-sacrifice-even-one-of-our-sons-or-daughters/)

[revelarts]

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) argued on Friday night that President Donald Trump has no authority to strike Syria.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/04/13/http-www-breitbart-com-big-government-2018-04-13-pilots-manning-aircraft-involved-in-carrying-out-trumps-syria-strike/

http://mynetbox.info/xtras/syria-repthomasmassie.jpeg

[LongTermGuy]

`Please join me in a special prayer for God's WISDOM upon them, especially after the events of last week!`:salute:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Da1JiVnX4AAUgAW.jpg

[revelarts]

http://mynetbox.info/xtras/syria-trumptweets.jpeg

let's Pray this guy comes back.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) argued on Friday night that President Donald Trump has no authority to strike Syria.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/04/13/http-www-breitbart-com-big-government-2018-04-13-pilots-manning-aircraft-involved-in-carrying-out-trumps-syria-strike/

I can smell the PISS on my computer from you PISSING all over yourself TRASHING our president and his decisions.

You disgusting dog turd.

[aboutime]

If you are upset about what happened in Syria. Get on the phone, call the White House, and tell the President to "INSTRUCT ALL SHIPS, PLANES, AND PERSONELL.....TO RECALL EVERY MISSILE, BOMB, AND WEAPON.... NOW!

[Papokarlo]

old air defenses shot down 73 out of 103.

America claims to have hit a chemical weapons plant. so there are no more chemical weapons factories. or, in a month, chemical weapons factories will reappear? ahahaha

[Gunny]

old air defenses shot down 73 out of 103.

America claims to have hit a chemical weapons plant. so there are no more chemical weapons factories. or, in a month, chemical weapons factories will reappear? ahahaha

:lmao:

Who needs CNN? We got YOU. :laugh2:

I owe Balu an apology. He's NOT the lyingest piece of shit commie on Earth. You got him beat by a long shot.

"Pay no attention to the non-missiles not falling out of the sky, son. We shot them down :cuckoo:"

I got money says that if Russia was even capable of shooting down one, the headlines would say something entirely different. Our own media would be shitting all over us worse than you.:slap:

[Gunny]

I think it was a waste of time, money, etc. It accomplished nothing I am aware of. Don't get me wrong and toss me in the fire with rev. I'm not going to rant about it for 4 pages. Trump had little choice but back up his mouth. I hope he learned a lesson. Words mean things and you can have to support them with action. That applies as well to all the chumps that goaded him into it.

As for papokarlo you dumbass commie ... here's some scoop for you. The Syrians ran and hid their air force on Russian bases. The US did not attack Russia. Russia didn't shoot down jack shit because they didn't even try. I wish they had tried, myself. This missile system Putin claims to have isn't doing much collecting dust. In THAT regard? Putin got called and did nothing. Here in the US of A, we call that getting punked.

On further review ... it DID accomplish one, priceless task ... all the right people are crying like little bitches :laugh:

Anyone besides me notice most of the pissing and moaning is coming from the right? Of course gabby and pete are going to cry. They'd find something wrong if Trump cured cancer. And of course Rand Paul is going to have a hissy fit. Where's McLame? He hasn't weighed in?

[Black Diamond]

I think it was a waste of time, money, etc. It accomplished nothing I am aware of. Don't get me wrong and toss me in the fire with rev. I'm not going to rant about it for 4 pages. Trump had little choice but back up his mouth. I hope he learned a lesson. Words mean things and you can have to support them with action. That applies as well to all the chumps that goaded him into it.

As for papokarlo you dumbass commie ... here's some scoop for you. The Syrians ran and hid their air force on Russian bases. The US did not attack Russia. Russia didn't shoot down jack shit because they didn't even try. I wish they had tried, myself. This missile system Putin claims to have isn't doing much collecting dust. In THAT regard? Putin got called and did nothing. Here in the US of A, we call that getting punked.

On further review ... it DID accomplish one, priceless task ... all the right people are crying like little bitches :laugh:

Anyone besides me notice most of the pissing and moaning is coming from the right? Of course gabby and pete are going to cry. They'd find something wrong if Trump cured cancer. And of course Rand Paul is going to have a hissy fit. Where's McLame? He hasn't weighed in?
McLame would have leveled Damascus. But he already got his punches in blaming trump the gassing a week or two ago.

[Gunny]

McLame would have leveled Damascus. But he already got his punches in blaming trump the gassing a week or two ago.He blamed Trump for the gassing? Didn't hear that one.

There's just one problem with that theory. Trump can't do anything because of obstructionist Dems and RINOs. I'm surprised most of the Dems were for the air strikes. Makes one wonder what accusation they have up their sleeves.

I see Palin weighed in. I guess "Why?" is as good a question as any. So, our sons and daughters just materialized themselves into the ME over the weekend and are now in harm's way? Just now figuring that one out, huh?

I know .... I bet she still thinks we don't have troops in Africa :laugh:

[Papokarlo]

:lmao:

Who needs CNN? We got YOU. :laugh2:

I owe @Balu (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=3557) an apology. He's NOT the lyingest piece of shit commie on Earth. You got him beat by a long shot.

"Pay no attention to the non-missiles not falling out of the sky, son. We shot them down :cuckoo:"

I got money says that if Russia was even capable of shooting down one, the headlines would say something entirely different. Our own media would be shitting all over us worse than you.:slap:
this is what our Deputy Minister of defense tells us.
if memory serves me right it's S300 we put them in Syria a long time ago. and cnn says nothing happened.

[Drummond]

this is what our Deputy Minister of defense tells us.
if memory serves me right it's S300 we put them in Syria a long time ago. and cnn says nothing happened.

CRAP.

Papokarlo, your Russian media (Kremlin-led, of course, in doing so) have lied to you. There were no shooting-downs of any missiles launched by our side. NONE.

No action taken from Russia, at all (they were wise not to).

Syria did take action, launching UNGUIDED missiles, but only AFTER our forces had completed their mission. None of those Syrian missiles hit any targets.

If you persist with this propaganda of yours, you're knowingly lying to us.

[LongTermGuy]

https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/461964160838803457/8z9FImcv_bigger.png
~ "BREAKING: Head of chemical arms watchdog says Russia, Syria cite "pending security issues" before inspectors can visit Douma." ~
************************************
*** Translated into pending destroying-the-evidence operations.

[Gunny]

this is what our Deputy Minister of defense tells us.
if memory serves me right it's S300 we put them in Syria a long time ago. and cnn says nothing happened.Think about what you just posted. Putin is bragging about his "new" super missile and threatening to shoot all of ours down.

Your first clue could have been Syria hiding all its important stuff on Russian bases so it wouldn't get hit. Now how does the crystal ball know it wouldn't get hit? We weren't shooting at Russia and never was going to. Now your government is saying they were old missiles from whenever. So what exactly IS the truth?

The truth is, we fired some missiles and they hit something Russia doesn't give a crap about. If Russia had shot down any, we would know. CNN would be the first one to laugh and call Trump a failure.

So ... for some genius you aren't very bright. Trump got to shoot off some missiles and fulfill his obligatory response, no Russians got hurt so everybody's happy and moving on to the next meltdown. Even though both Putin and Trump were dumb enough to allow themselves to get caught up in a pissing contest that could have gotten out of hand, neither was dumb enough to cross the line. That's how these things work. Every time. There's nothing new here. Your government lies to you and ours lies to us everybody's fat, dumb n happy.

Maybe if you'd ever listen instead of talking shit all the time you might learn something from us "old folks" who aren't at our first rodeo.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

old air defenses shot down 73 out of 103.
---------------------------- http://www.sherv.net/cm/emo/laughing/roflmao.gif (http://www.sherv.net/)

[Gunny]

---------------------------- http://www.sherv.net/cm/emo/laughing/roflmao.gif (http://www.sherv.net/)Hey zoomie, thought I'd point out .. Lot's of activity at Kelly. I live in the flight path. Lot's of 130s and C5As floating around. Puff the Magic Dragon, lived by the sea ...:dev:

[Papokarlo]

Think about what you just posted. Putin is bragging about his "new" super missile and threatening to shoot all of ours down.

Your first clue could have been Syria hiding all its important stuff on Russian bases so it wouldn't get hit. Now how does the crystal ball know it wouldn't get hit? We weren't shooting at Russia and never was going to. Now your government is saying they were old missiles from whenever. So what exactly IS the truth?

The truth is, we fired some missiles and they hit something Russia doesn't give a crap about. If Russia had shot down any, we would know. CNN would be the first one to laugh and call Trump a failure.

So ... for some genius you aren't very bright. Trump got to shoot off some missiles and fulfill his obligatory response, no Russians got hurt so everybody's happy and moving on to the next meltdown. Even though both Putin and Trump were dumb enough to allow themselves to get caught up in a pissing contest that could have gotten out of hand, neither was dumb enough to cross the line. That's how these things work. Every time. There's nothing new here. Your government lies to you and ours lies to us everybody's fat, dumb n happy.

Maybe if you'd ever listen instead of talking shit all the time you might learn something from us "old folks" who aren't at our first rodeo.
say it again. air defense 1980 in Syria shot down 73 missiles, they were armed with Syria and not on our bases in Syria

[jimnyc]

say it again. air defense 1980 in Syria shot down 73 missiles, they were armed with Syria and not on our bases in Syria

You are so full of shit!

I saw a ton of videos with my own eyes, and I didn't see A SINGLE ONE get shot down, let alone 73 of them. You are a delusional commie!

[aboutime]

Only thing they earn from us is:
http://assets1.bigthink.com/system/idea_thumbnails/43754/size_1024/trolls1cropped.jpg?1334673924

[Gunny]

Hey pissant russian troll
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjWPoQWdmjg

Because Stone Cold said so

[revelarts]

I realize that I am late to this discussion, but to me it looked like the chemical attack was a deliberate response to Trump's announcement that America would probably be pulling out of the Syria conflict. Assad, possibly with prompting from Putin or from Iran, decided to do the chemical attack as a throwdown toward Trump. I think that Assad thought there would be no response, which on the world stage would be the equivalent of giving Assad/Putin/Iran permission to use chemical weapons all they wanted after America moved out.

Trump had three options, in my opinion:

1) No response - This is sometimes called the 'Obama response' or the 'Spineless response'. Doing nothing prevents any immediate retaliation, but invites more attacks in the future because everyone know you are now spineless. This is like the kid on the playground that gets hit by another kid and never does anything. You can bet another hit is coming.

2) Hyper response - This is the response where you escalate several levels in the hope that your opponent will be sufficiently wounded and shocked that they are afraid to retaliate. The risk is that the opponent isn't wounded or shocked enough, and they just escalate more. This is like the kid on the playground that gets hit by another kid, and responds by breaking the other kids legs. Bad choice here - very dangerous in this case because of the Russian presence.

3) Calculated response - This is where you respond enough to send a message, but not enough to create escalation. I think this was by far the best choice for America here, and I think Trump may have done it. It is key that the strikes were only against Syria, not against Russian forces. It's not a challenge against Putin. I also like the way the strikes specifically targeted chemical weapons. After all, Syria isn't even supposed to have them, and Russia guaranteed that Syria wouldn't have them. It makes it difficult for Putin to manufacture outrage. And maybe the biggest key is bringing in UK and France on the strikes. Now it looks like it is not specifically America that Assad or Putin would be responding to - it is a coalition. And its not a personal challenge from Trump to Putin.
Going back to the kid on the playground analogy, its the equivalent of punching the other kid back just enough that he decides to go elsewhere to find easier targets.

Overall, the worst option would have been the Hyper response, but the No response/Obama response would have been really bad. I think Trump (and Mattis) did a good job of doing the Calculated response.

If we're speculating it's also possible, since Neither Syria or Russia needed Chem weapons to defeat "the rebels"/ISIS/AQ,
that they'd be happy to hear that the U.S was going to pull out. And the only people unhappy would be those that want "regime change" via U.S. forces.
Trump and U.S troops leaving is the last thing the rebels/ISIS/AQ wanted. the last thing that Saudi Arabia, other Arab states, Israel or the oil companies wanted. Heck it's the last thing John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Rex Tillerson, John Bolton, and the usual suspect neo-cons wanted. The regime change backers and/or the "the rebels" could easily set up a chem "attack" and blame Assad just to force Trump to stay in the game. BTW the "Attacks" were in the "rebel" controlled areas, and the reportage is from "the rebels". Not independent sources, nothing confirmed.

Trump did in fact have other options. 1st of all PROVE publicly the details of the crime. that's a start. that'd put Syria and Russia in the worse light. Next follow the constitution and international law. Follow the words of his campaign promises.

the U.S. leaving Syria is exactly what Assad and Russia has wanted from the start. the best thing for them would be to do nothing.
it makes ZERO sense for them to use chemical weapons on anyone.


If we're speculating, that makes more sense objectively speaking IMO.

[Drummond]

https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/461964160838803457/8z9FImcv_bigger.png
~ "BREAKING: Head of chemical arms watchdog says Russia, Syria cite "pending security issues" before inspectors can visit Douma." ~
************************************
*** Translated into pending destroying-the-evidence operations.








Cleaning up operations beforehand ... but, of course .....

[Drummond]

If we're speculating it's also possible, since Neither Syria or Russia needed Chem weapons to defeat "the rebels"/ISIS/AQ,
that they'd be happy to hear that the U.S was going to pull out. And the only people unhappy would be those that want "regime change" via U.S. forces.
Trump and U.S troops leaving is the last thing the rebels/ISIS/AQ wanted. the last thing that Saudi Arabia, other Arab states, Israel or the oil companies wanted. Heck it's the last thing John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Rex Tillerson, John Bolton, and the usual suspect neo-cons wanted. The regime change backers and/or the "the rebels" could easily set up a chem "attack" and blame Assad just to force Trump to stay in the game. BTW the "Attacks" were in the "rebel" controlled areas, and the reportage is from "the rebels". Not independent sources, nothing confirmed.

Trump did in fact have other options. 1st of all PROVE publicly the details of the crime. that's a start. that'd put Syria and Russia in the worse light. Next follow the constitution and international law. Follow the words of his campaign promises.

the U.S. leaving Syria is exactly what Assad and Russia has wanted from the start. the best thing for them would be to do nothing.
it makes ZERO sense for them to use chemical weapons on anyone.


If we're speculating, that makes more sense objectively speaking IMO.

There was an opportunity to teach both Russia and Syria that the use of chemical weapons against civilian populations WILL NOT be tolerated.

That opportunity was taken. It was taken, and as a result, facilities needed by Syria for future such attacks were destroyed. And, this is a BAD thing ?

Revelarts, why do you REALLY hate what was done ? Why do you Lefties always work to support the wrongdoers ?

Please, explain it to me.

[jimnyc]

There was an opportunity to teach both Russia and Syria that the use of chemical weapons against civilian populations WILL NOT be tolerated.

That opportunity was taken. It was taken, and as a result, facilities needed by Syria for future such attacks were destroyed. And, this is a BAD thing ?

Revelarts, why do you REALLY hate what was done ? Why do you Lefties always work to support the wrongdoers ?

Please, explain it to me.

This was not a bad thing. The international community, for the most part, has agreed that chemical weapons will not and should not be tolerated, and was in need of a response.

IMO, the only issue was once again trying to be nice about it. They should have dropped everything they had and eliminated the entire problem. :)

[Drummond]

say it again. air defense 1980 in Syria shot down 73 missiles, they were armed with Syria and not on our bases in Syria

What do you mean, 'say it again' ... ?

Do you believe that if you tell an untruth 'enough' times, it becomes true ?

NO missiles were shot down. NOT ONE. Claims to the contrary are FALSE.

I pity you. You'd rather believe a lie, because it's Mother Russia that invented it. And you'd rather propagadise on the so-called 'strength' of it, because supporting Mother Russia is preferable to you to supporting the cause of TRUTH and DECENCY.

[Drummond]

This was not a bad thing. The international community, for the most part, has agreed that chemical weapons will not and should not be tolerated, and was in need of a response.

IMO, the only issue was once again trying to be nice about it. They should have dropped everything they had and eliminated the entire problem. :):clap::clap::clap::clap:

Couldn't agree more, Jim.

[aboutime]

The President, with France, and Great Britain acted IN BEHALF of the U.N. Not Congress.

https://www.opcw.org/chemical-weapons-convention/
Chemical Weapons Convention

Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction.
The Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) comprises a Preamble, 24 Articles, and 3 Annexes—the Annex on Chemicals, the Verification Annex, and the Confidentiality Annex.

The Convention aims to eliminate an entire category of weapons of mass destruction by prohibiting the development, production, acquisition, stockpiling, retention, transfer or use of chemical weapons by States Parties. States Parties, in turn, must take the steps necessary to enforce that prohibition in respect of persons (natural or legal) within their jurisdiction.

[Elessar]

https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/461964160838803457/8z9FImcv_bigger.png
~ "BREAKING: Head of chemical arms watchdog says Russia, Syria cite "pending security issues" before inspectors can visit Douma." ~
************************************
*** Translated into pending destroying-the-evidence operations.


Now where have we seen this happen before? What were those convoys of trucks leaving Iraq full of?
Schwan's Ice Cream, Meals, and Cakes?:laugh:

[revelarts]

There was an opportunity to teach both Russia and Syria that the use of chemical weapons against civilian populations WILL NOT be tolerated.
would the opportunity be gone if Trump had follow the constitutional and international law?
the honest answer is no.
As it is now Trump has clearly and publicly broken U.S. laws as well as international.
While 'friend and foe' still have no solid proof that Assad is guilty of the "chemical" Attack. Or even have solid details about the attack at all.

I know folks like yourself don't question U.S. military actions EVER. And think the U.S. military can do no wrong and every attack made by them is always justified somehow. But many people around the world are more objective.
I know folks like yourself can't imagine that Trump could have made a mistake or might be wrong, and won't allow the question to be seriously considered. I mean it's AMERICA right, and Trump's a mainly man. But some folks in the U.S. and elsewhere are more objective.



That opportunity was taken. It was taken, and as a result, facilities needed by Syria for future such attacks were destroyed. And, this is a BAD thing ?
they say they were chemical facilities. I guess i should just take the gov'ts word for it. the gov't never lies.
And as far as it being a "BAD THING". um, personally I'm not the 1st one to appeal to the law before saying a good deed should get done. But when it comes to shooting missiles in other peoples countries. I tend to think that international law should be followed BEFORE that happens. and call me crazy but i tend to think that Presidents of the U.S. should follow the LAW of our country 1st and foremost. Trump told Obama to follow it before he struck Syria, and in that case Obama DID follow it. (not elsewhere but that's another story) Trump has gone back on his word, and turned his back on the constitution in this case.
Is it a BAD THING to point that out?
or is blind loyalty for Trump and support for any military action the only thing that should be expressed no matter what?



Revelarts, why do you REALLY hate what was done ?

Drummond why do you assume I have hidden motives?




Why do you Lefties always work to support the wrongdoers ?
Please, explain it to me.
Why can't you fathom that I'm not a "lefty"? Why can't you think beyond a simply left/right box and look at each issue based on it's own considerations of morals, law and objective reality.
Please, explain it to me.

[aboutime]

Please ignore rev. He hates anybody that he disagree's with, in any way. He will always insist, he, and only he is correct, while WE are all wrong about everything. You see. Rev is a self-appointed expert on BS, and he spreads it so evenly; he should get the award for Hypocrisy at DP.

If I am wrong. Just watch the way he responds to my post here, and you will soon see. Not only Does He Hate Donald Trump....even YOU, can become one of his troublesome DP members that he will eventually ignore...rather than HONESTLY answer questions.

[LongTermGuy]

Please ignore rev. He hates anybody that he disagree's with, in any way. He will always insist, he, and only he is correct, while WE are all wrong about everything. You see. Rev is a self-appointed expert on BS, and he spreads it so evenly; he should get the award for Hypocrisy at DP.

If I am wrong. Just watch the way he responds to my post here, and you will soon see. Not only Does He Hate Donald Trump....even YOU, can become one of his troublesome DP members that he will eventually ignore...rather than HONESTLY answer questions.



:laugh:....Me...Over time I got use to rev...




"rev"
https://media.giphy.com/media/M1VL81pAxfj3y/giphy.gif

[aboutime]

:laugh:....Me...Over time I got use to rev...




"rev"
https://media.giphy.com/media/M1VL81pAxfj3y/giphy.gif

:laugh::laugh::laugh: It's the entertainment factor of his hypocrisy....like another OBAMA.:laugh::laugh::laugh:

[revelarts]

https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/461964160838803457/8z9FImcv_bigger.png
~ "BREAKING: Head of chemical arms watchdog says Russia, Syria cite "pending security issues" before inspectors can visit Douma." ~
************************************
*** Translated into pending destroying-the-evidence operations.

that is suspicious. But isn't the area a REBEL area. that's why Assad supposely hit it with chem weapons right?
So are we to believe now that the Syrian/Russian forces have overrun the areas and run out all the rebels/ISIS and it's perfectly safe for inspectors to go in?
well OK. It's possible.
hard to tell in a war zone what's going on EITHER WAY isn't it?





Now where have we seen this happen before?
Iraq wasn't a war zone when inspectors were trying to go in there was it?
just putting a realistic perspective out there.



What were those convoys of trucks leaving Iraq full of?
Schwan's Ice Cream, Meals, and Cakes?:laugh:

OK remind me why W didn't stop that convoy again? And how we know what was in them exactly? I mean did we get receipts or manifest or something?
But I mean hey, maybe it was all chem weapons, my point is I don't know.
But W and Rumsfeld said they had "bad intel" about all those WMDs in general.
And finally that the WMds weren't there in the quantity or places they thought. But some W supporters keep saying they know better than W Bush and Rummy here. And that Syria got all those WMDs. So that intel is the "good intel" right?
I'm not sure why we should buy that.

[aboutime]

that is suspicious. But isn't the area a REBEL area. that's why Assad supposely hit it with chem weapons right?
So are we to believe now that the Syrian/Russian forces have overrun the areas and run out all the rebels/ISIS and it's perfectly safe for inspectors to go in?
well OK. It's possible.
hard to tell in a war zone what's going on EITHER WAY isn't it.





Iraq wasn't a war zone when inspectors were trying to go in there was it?
just putting a realistic perspective out there.



OK remind me why W didn't stop that convoy again? And how we know what was in them exactly? I mean did we get receipts or manifest or something?
But I mean hey, maybe it was all chem weapons.
But W and Rumsfeld said they had "bad intel" about all those WMDs in general.
And finally that the WMds weren't there in the quantity or places they thought. But some W supporters keep saying they know better than W Bush and Rummy here. And that Syria got all those WMDs. So that intel is the "good intel" right?
I'm not sure why we should buy that.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYTKD6NhrXc

[Kathianne]

Rev doesn't agree we ith everyone here all the time, lol, but he was writing the same about activities of GWB and Obama during similar situations. He hasn't changed what he thinks pn issues or the Constitution.

[LongTermGuy]

that is suspicious. But isn't the area a REBEL area. that's why Assad supposely hit it with chem weapons right?
So are we to believe now that the Syrian/Russian forces have overrun the areas and run out all the rebels/ISIS and it's perfectly safe for inspectors to go in?
well OK. It's possible.
hard to tell in a war zone what's going on EITHER WAY isn't it?





Iraq wasn't a war zone when inspectors were trying to go in there was it?
just putting a realistic perspective out there.



OK remind me why W didn't stop that convoy again? And how we know what was in them exactly? I mean did we get receipts or manifest or something?
But I mean hey, maybe it was all chem weapons, my point is I don't know.
But W and Rumsfeld said they had "bad intel" about all those WMDs in general.
And finally that the WMds weren't there in the quantity or places they thought. But some W supporters keep saying they know better than W Bush and Rummy here. And that Syria got all those WMDs. So that intel is the "good intel" right?
I'm not sure why we should buy that.



**********************


"So rev...your smarter than me and all my intelligence resources??

"...Ok rev...tell you what...send me your resume and I will check it out OK?"

http://www.catsimatidis.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/John-Bolton.jpg

[revelarts]

https://i.pinimg.com/564x/69/a9/46/69a946440dd9efabb18de296819d4cc7.jpg

[revelarts]

More from the Liberal 'enemy loving' Sarah Palin,


"I hate to say it, but a lot of the talk that’s enthusiastic about war, unfortunately, comes from people with strong ties to defense contractors and have strong ties to those who ultimately can make money on the operations. So often you got to follow the money and that leads you to what the root is of some of these arguments.”

“Until we are given the reasons why it’s in America’s best interests, why in the world we would be willing to sacrifice even one of our sons or daughters who will be sent over there? It’s like that old saying, the old men call war, and they send the young men to go fight them. No. I see what war does to an individual, to a family. I guess there’s a lot of humanity that I’m considering at this point.”

“Yeah, America is the strongest fighting power on the globe — and we should be — but being prepared with that, being the strongest, should create an environment of peace. That’s what Reagan used to preach.”




http://www.breitbart.com/radio/2018/04/11/exclusive-sarah-palin-on-syria-why-should-we-sacrifice-even-one-of-our-sons-or-daughters/

why does she ...and Reagan... hate America?
Why does she think that America would send people and arms to war FOR money? :shock
Doesn't she know that the ONLY reason people on the right ever advocate war or "limited military actions" is to "spread democracy and freedom", "protect 'der homeland'" and to stop people from using chemical weapons?

[LongTermGuy]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=19&v=Gb8JZ5wQGKI

[revelarts]

Newsweek magazine (http://www.newsweek.com/us-ally-iraq-joins-russia-and-iran-says-trumps-syria-strikes-may-help-isis-887829?piano_t=1):

Iraq criticized President Donald Trump's decision Friday to target Syrian government facilities suspected to be involved in the production of chemical weapons, saying such missile strikes undermined the wider effort to combat terrorism in both neighboring Arab states.

Iraqi Foreign Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari spoke on the phone Sunday with acting U.S. Secretary of State John Sullivan, discussing the trilateral U.S., French and U.K. missile attack on Syria, which Iraq considers an ally in the fight against the Islamic State militant group (ISIS). Jaafari emphasized "the necessity to prioritize finding a political solution and that the Syrian people alone should determine their own fate," according to a statement by the Iraqi Foreign Ministry (http://www.mofa.gov.iq/ab/news.php?articleid=2549).

Jaafari condemned the production and use of chemical weapons, but warned that "any escalation in Syria will negatively affect the security and stability of the region as a whole, and will give terrorism an opportunity to regain its activity after the defeat it met in Iraq and its retreat in Syria. The risk of terrorism today threatens all countries of the world."...

[LongTermGuy]

http://31.media.tumblr.com/28fdd427b141ba0d48f7af63a9b30e6b/tumblr_nc24wnASMl1rp0vkjo1_500.gif

[Papokarlo]

))
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vkdsQit-If8

[Black Diamond]

Paprika strikes again.

[Gunny]

Y'all dont know a thing. Just numbers to political fags needing a body count.

I'm going back to bed. For real?

[Papokarlo]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alATb7oLRbo
you mean that?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vkdsQit-If8

[Papokarlo]

Y'all dont know a thing. Just numbers to political fags needing a body count.

I'm going back to bed. For real?
sleeping tired toys, books sleep

[Gunny]

I'm not commie. Bring your loser shit.

[Gunny]

having a set is obviously out of your league. I am your enemy. Face me. Constantly see your ass stinks. Pun intended.

[LongTermGuy]

http://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.timetoast.com/public/uploads/photos/1617026/sc_ussr_usa1.jpg?1473683822
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFtmdorQG-U

[revelarts]

BREAKING: British journalist who visited Douma, Syria today says there was NO chemical attack
We have just spoken to Robert Fisk (Foreign correspondent with the UK Independent) in Douma, at 13.00 today, who says he is the 1st journalist to visit the clinic where the “alleged” chemical attack took place. He went alone ie. not accompanied by military to see for himself. Everything is operating as per normal in a hospital. He confirms the following:

1. The footage is authentic – he could recognise the location
2. He spoke to doctors there who said that children were admitted coughing and spluttering
3. They were admitted AS A RESULT OF NEARBY SHELLING and DUST FUMES!
4. Someone created panic by shouting “gas, gas, gas” and they began following procedure as they would in a gas attack by hosing them down.
5. THERE WAS NO CHLORINE GAS ATTACK
BREAKING: British journalist who visited Douma, Syria today says there was NO chemical attack – Investment Watch Blog (http://www.investmentwatchblog.com/breaking-british-journalist-who-visited-douma-syria-today-says-there-was-no-chemical-attack/)

https://www.independent.co.uk/author/robert-fisk

Reviewing Ground Reports
Examining Ground Reports From Syria (http://truthinmedia.com/examining-ground-reports-syria/)
...On Monday, April 16, several journalists gained access to Douma and interviewed residents in the area. One of these journalists was Robert Fisk, two-time winner of the British Press Awards’ Journalist of the Year prize and a seven-time winner of the British Press Awards’ Foreign Correspondent of the Year. Fisk is a longtime foreign correspondent who the New York Times referred to as “probably the most famous foreign correspondent in Britain” and The Guardian called “one of the most famous journalists in the world.”

Writing for The Independent, Fisk described the situation in Douma:

This is the story of a town called Douma, a ravaged, stinking place of smashed apartment blocks–and of an underground clinic whose images of suffering allowed three of the Western world’s most powerful nations to bomb Syria last week. There’s even a friendly doctor in a green coat who, when I track him down in the very same clinic, cheerfully tells me that the “gas” videotape which horrified the world– despite all the doubters–is perfectly genuine.

War stories, however, have a habit of growing darker. For the same 58-year old senior Syrian doctor then adds something profoundly uncomfortable: the patients, he says, were overcome not by gas but by oxygen starvation in the rubbish-filled tunnels and basements in which they lived, on a night of wind and heavy shelling that stirred up a dust storm.

According to the doctor Fisk spoke with, Dr. Assim Rahaibani, the international organization commonly known as The White Helmets had a role in carrying out the false or exaggerated scene depicting a chemical gas attack.

I was with my family in the basement of my home three hundred metres from here on the night but all the doctors know what happened. There was a lot of shelling [by government forces] and aircraft were always over Douma at night–but on this night, there was wind and huge dust clouds began to come into the basements and cellars where people lived. People began to arrive here suffering from hypoxia, oxygen loss. Then someone at the door, a “White Helmet”, shouted “Gas!”, and a panic began. People started throwing water over each other. Yes, the video was filmed here, it is genuine, but what you see are people suffering from hypoxia–not gas poisoning.

At the same time that Fisk was interviewing the doctor and residents, Pearson Sharp of One America News stated he interviewed between 30 to 40 residents of Douma. As with Fisk, Sharp says he found no evidence of chemical attack and the residents he spoke with seemed completely unaware of the apparent incident....
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-...eapons-victims (https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-16/first-western-journalist-syrian-hospital-which-treated-chemical-weapons-victims)




=========

So there was no Chemical Attack by Assad "on his own people"... surprise surprise surprise.

But does that even matter to some people.
I almost didn't post this info here because some here DON'T seem to CARE if the US lies to attack other countries. (or uh attacks without solid evidence or uses "bad intel":rolleyes:).
In their minds if we bomb or kill then they DESERVED IT! and we're right to do it. probably should have done it long ago!
Because of course they THEY HAVE done SOMETHING WRONG sometime... or MIGHT.. Or COULD ONE DAY.
And No matter what the U.S. laws say, or international laws, or what treaty we created and signed, or even the constitution, It's justified.

The U.S. Military blowing up "infrastructure" and people is ALWAYS justified by SOMETHING and it's always "legal" and right... becasue "America". And other people are trying to kill us becasue they hate us.

:saluting2::blowup::flyflag:

[jimnyc]

BREAKING: British journalist who visited Douma, Syria today says there was NO chemical attack
We have just spoken to Robert Fisk (Foreign correspondent with the UK Independent) in Douma, at 13.00 today, who says he is the 1st journalist to visit the clinic where the “alleged” chemical attack took place. He went alone ie. not accompanied by military to see for himself. Everything is operating as per normal in a hospital. He confirms the following:

1. The footage is authentic – he could recognise the location
2. He spoke to doctors there who said that children were admitted coughing and spluttering
3. They were admitted AS A RESULT OF NEARBY SHELLING and DUST FUMES!
4. Someone created panic by shouting “gas, gas, gas” and they began following procedure as they would in a gas attack by hosing them down.
5. THERE WAS NO CHLORINE GAS ATTACK
BREAKING: British journalist who visited Douma, Syria today says there was NO chemical attack – Investment Watch Blog (http://www.investmentwatchblog.com/breaking-british-journalist-who-visited-douma-syria-today-says-there-was-no-chemical-attack/)

https://www.independent.co.uk/author/robert-fisk

Reviewing Ground Reports
Examining Ground Reports From Syria (http://truthinmedia.com/examining-ground-reports-syria/)
...On Monday, April 16, several journalists gained access to Douma and interviewed residents in the area. One of these journalists was Robert Fisk, two-time winner of the British Press Awards’ Journalist of the Year prize and a seven-time winner of the British Press Awards’ Foreign Correspondent of the Year. Fisk is a longtime foreign correspondent who the New York Times referred to as “probably the most famous foreign correspondent in Britain” and The Guardian called “one of the most famous journalists in the world.”

Writing for The Independent, Fisk described the situation in Douma:

This is the story of a town called Douma, a ravaged, stinking place of smashed apartment blocks–and of an underground clinic whose images of suffering allowed three of the Western world’s most powerful nations to bomb Syria last week. There’s even a friendly doctor in a green coat who, when I track him down in the very same clinic, cheerfully tells me that the “gas” videotape which horrified the world– despite all the doubters–is perfectly genuine.

War stories, however, have a habit of growing darker. For the same 58-year old senior Syrian doctor then adds something profoundly uncomfortable: the patients, he says, were overcome not by gas but by oxygen starvation in the rubbish-filled tunnels and basements in which they lived, on a night of wind and heavy shelling that stirred up a dust storm.

According to the doctor Fisk spoke with, Dr. Assim Rahaibani, the international organization commonly known as The White Helmets had a role in carrying out the false or exaggerated scene depicting a chemical gas attack.

I was with my family in the basement of my home three hundred metres from here on the night but all the doctors know what happened. There was a lot of shelling [by government forces] and aircraft were always over Douma at night–but on this night, there was wind and huge dust clouds began to come into the basements and cellars where people lived. People began to arrive here suffering from hypoxia, oxygen loss. Then someone at the door, a “White Helmet”, shouted “Gas!”, and a panic began. People started throwing water over each other. Yes, the video was filmed here, it is genuine, but what you see are people suffering from hypoxia–not gas poisoning.

At the same time that Fisk was interviewing the doctor and residents, Pearson Sharp of One America News stated he interviewed between 30 to 40 residents of Douma. As with Fisk, Sharp says he found no evidence of chemical attack and the residents he spoke with seemed completely unaware of the apparent incident....
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-...eapons-victims (https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-16/first-western-journalist-syrian-hospital-which-treated-chemical-weapons-victims)




=========

So there was no Chemical Attack by Assad "on his own people"... surprise surprise surprise.

But does that even matter to some people.
I almost didn't post this info here because some here DON'T seem to CARE if the US lies to attack other countries. (or uh attacks without solid evidence or uses "bad intel":rolleyes:).
In their minds if we bomb or kill then they DESERVED IT! and we're right to do it. probably should have done it long ago!
Because of course they THEY HAVE done SOMETHING WRONG sometime... or MIGHT.. Or COULD ONE DAY.
And No matter what the U.S. laws say, or international laws, or what treaty we created and signed, or even the constitution, It's justified.

The U.S. Military blowing up "infrastructure" and people is ALWAYS justified by SOMETHING and it's always "legal" and right... becasue "America". And other people are trying to kill us becasue they hate us.

:saluting2::blowup::flyflag:

Well, no need for much of a response I suppose. As usual, you speak for everyone, so I guess that about wraps it up. Thanks! :rolleyes:

[revelarts]

.... ...
So there was no Chemical Attack by Assad "on his own people"... surprise surprise surprise.
But does that even matter to some people. I almost didn't post this info here because some here DON'T seem to CARE if the US lies to attack other countries. (or uh attacks without solid evidence or uses "bad intel":rolleyes:).
In their minds if we bomb or kill then they DESERVED IT! and we're right to do it. probably should have done it long ago!
Because of course they THEY HAVE done SOMETHING WRONG sometime... or MIGHT.. Or COULD ONE DAY.
And No matter what the U.S. laws say, or international laws, or what treaty we created and signed, or even the constitution, It's justified.

The U.S. Military blowing up "infrastructure" and people is ALWAYS justified by SOMETHING and it's always "legal" and right... becasue "America". And other people are trying to kill us becasue they hate us. ...


Well, no need for much of a response I suppose. As usual, you speak for everyone, so I guess that about wraps it up. Thanks! :rolleyes:

"...everyone..."?

i'm not sure how you get that idea.

[jimnyc]

everyone?

i'm not sure how you get that idea.

Perhaps everyone was an overstatement. But seemingly, anyone that disagrees with your anti-government stances and anti-cop stances, ultimately end up with "quotes", and 99% of the time there is no one quoted to backup these "quotes".

[revelarts]

There was an opportunity to teach both Russia and Syria that the use of chemical weapons against civilian populations WILL NOT be tolerated.
That opportunity was taken. It was taken, and as a result, facilities needed by Syria for future such attacks were destroyed. And, this is a BAD thing ?
Revelarts, why do you REALLY hate what was done ? Why do you Lefties always work to support the wrongdoers ?
Please, explain it to me.
Drummond doesn't deny my posted option that the attacks might not be Assad or Chemical. He seems to simply go on and justify the strikes as prevention of future someday maybe attacks. And seems to ask if it's EVER wrong for the U.S. to attack a "wrongdoer".




This was not a bad thing. The international community, for the most part, has agreed that chemical weapons will not and should not be tolerated, and was in need of a response.
IMO, the only issue was once again trying to be nice about it. They should have dropped everything they had and eliminated the entire problem.
eliminating the entire problem is justified, becasue "chemical weapons will not and should not be tolerated"?
So is that the use or simply the possession of ? and what does "eliminate the "entire problem mean? destroy the whole country, destroy the whole Syrian military, kill Assad? what exactly did you mean?
Or was the last part just a joke? Please note these are questions, based on your exact words.





The President, with France, and Great Britain acted IN BEHALF of the U.N. Not Congress.https://www.opcw.org/chemical-weapons-convention/ Chemical Weapons ConventionConvention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction.The Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) comprises a Preamble, 24 Articles, and 3 Annexes—the Annex on Chemicals, the Verification Annex, and the Confidentiality Annex.The Convention aims to eliminate an entire category of weapons of mass destruction by prohibiting the development, production, acquisition, stockpiling, retention, transfer or use of chemical weapons by States Parties. States Parties, in turn, must take the steps necessary to enforce that prohibition in respect of persons (natural or legal) within their jurisdiction.
Because Assad used or even HAS chem weapons Trump/US must take steps... so attack is justified? right?




I think it was a waste of time, money, etc. It accomplished nothing I am aware of. Don't get me wrong and toss me in the fire with rev. I'm not going to rant about it for 4 pages.Trump had little choice but back up his mouth. I hope he learned a lesson. Words mean things and you can have to support them with action. That applies as well to all the chumps that goaded him into it. As for papokarlo you dumbass commie ... here's some scoop for you. The Syrians ran and hid their air force on Russian bases. The US did not attack Russia. Russia didn't shoot down jack shit because they didn't even try. I wish they had tried, myself. This missile system Putin claims to have isn't doing much collecting dust. In THAT regard? Putin got called and did nothing. Here in the US of A, we call that getting punked.
On further review ... it DID accomplish one, priceless task ... all the right people are crying like little bitches
Anyone besides me notice most of the pissing and moaning is coming from the right? Of course gabby and pete are going to cry. They'd find something wrong if Trump cured cancer. And of course Rand Paul is going to have a hissy fit. Where's McLame? He hasn't weighed in?justification for attack? Trump had to attack, becasue he ran his mouth. right?




Think about what you just posted. Putin is bragging about his "new" super missile and threatening to shoot all of ours down. Your first clue could have been Syria hiding all its important stuff on Russian bases so it wouldn't get hit. Now how does the crystal ball know it wouldn't get hit? We weren't shooting at Russia and never was going to. Now your government is saying they were old missiles from whenever. So what exactly IS the truth?
The truth is, we fired some missiles and they hit something Russia doesn't give a crap about. If Russia had shot down any, we would know. CNN would be the first one to laugh and call Trump a failure.
So ... for some genius you aren't very bright. Trump got to shoot off some missiles and fulfill his obligatory response, no Russians got hurt so everybody's happy and moving on to the next meltdown. Even though both Putin and Trump were dumb enough to allow themselves to get caught up in a pissing contest that could have gotten out of hand, neither was dumb enough to cross the line. That's how these things work. Every time. There's nothing new here. Your government lies to you and ours lies to us everybody's fat, dumb n happy. Maybe if you'd ever listen instead of talking shit all the time you might learn something from us "old folks" who aren't at our first rodeo.
Trump was dumb but justified? right?
Not wrong or illegal or premature, just dumb.




**For all the Liberals crying about our Airstrikes last night. (No Casualties). Here’s a Obama Fact for you. Obama approved 26,171 bombs in 2016 overseas. 2,500 Us Soldiers died in while Obama was President. https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/some-2-500-americans-have-died-in-afghanistan-and-iraq-under-obama-20160530 …`America dropped 26,171 bombs in 2016. What a bloody end to Obama's reign`
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/09/america-dropped-26171-bombs-2016-obama-legacy
Attacks justified becasue Obama did it too? right?




I realize that I am late to this discussion, but to me it looked like the chemical attack was a deliberate response to Trump's announcement that America would probably be pulling out of the Syria conflict. Assad, possibly with prompting from Putin or from Iran, decided to do the chemical attack as a throwdown toward Trump. I think that Assad thought there would be no response, which on the world stage would be the equivalent of giving Assad/Putin/Iran permission to use chemical weapons all they wanted after America moved out.
Trump had three options, in my opinion:
1) No response - This is sometimes called the 'Obama response' or the 'Spineless response'. Doing nothing prevents any immediate retaliation, but invites more attacks in the future because everyone know you are now spineless. This is like the kid on the playground that gets hit by another kid and never does anything. You can bet another hit is coming.
2) Hyper response - This is the response where you escalate several levels in the hope that your opponent will be sufficiently wounded and shocked that they are afraid to retaliate. The risk is that the opponent isn't wounded or shocked enough, and they just escalate more. This is like the kid on the playground that gets hit by another kid, and responds by breaking the other kids legs. Bad choice here - very dangerous in this case because of the Russian presence.
3) Calculated response - This is where you respond enough to send a message, but not enough to create escalation. I think this was by far the best choice for America here, and I think Trump may have done it. It is key that the strikes were only against Syria, not against Russian forces. It's not a challenge against Putin. I also like the way the strikes specifically targeted chemical weapons. After all, Syria isn't even supposed to have them, and Russia guaranteed that Syria wouldn't have them. It makes it difficult for Putin to manufacture outrage. And maybe the biggest key is bringing in UK and France on the strikes. Now it looks like it is not specifically America that Assad or Putin would be responding to - it is a coalition. And its not a personal challenge from Trump to Putin.
Going back to the kid on the playground analogy, its the equivalent of punching the other kid back just enough that he decides to go elsewhere to find easier targets.
Overall, the worst option would have been the Hyper response, but the No response/Obama response would have been really bad. I think Trump (and Mattis) did a good job of doing the Calculated response.
Trump only had 3 options because Assad Probably... and therefore justified? right?



Cutting through all your elaborate excuses to avoid confrontation, Revelarts ... how would YOU, given a totally free hand to act as you wished, deal with this whole mess ? You've got Assad, who's very keen to use chemical weapons on his OWN people, even kids. You've got Russia, keen to support him in anything he does, no matter how heinous. You've additionally got a Russia that has one hell of a moral blind spot when it comes to chemical weapons deployments generally .. yet, insanely, expects total respect from the international community, regardless ...
Would you - given the total freedom to do so ...
1. Act militarily ? 2. Dream up yet more excuses not to .. probably indefinitely ? 3. Offer 'talks' to work out differences .. which would no doubt be laughed at ? 4. Ignore it all, trust to blind luck, assume SOMEHOW that things would magically work out (e.g the Kremlin gets an attack of conscience) ? 5. Emigrate, join the British Labour Party, who'd very definitely welcome you with open arms .. ?
Checking for evidence and looking for motives are just excuses not to attack, Attacking is justified because xyz... Assad and Russia are bad? right?

Seems to me there are in fact various reason mentioned by folks here that would justify the attacks even IF the "Assad chemical attack" never happened. (which it seems clear now that it didn't)

But hey, maybe i've misread the meaning of the above post in this thread.
Maybe you're saying that most here really weren't promoting up other reasons to attack Syria.
and now they'll all say that Trump's Attack on Syria was 100% wrong since we see now that Assad did not use chemical weapons.
They will all say that Trump should Apologize, and PAY for the damages done, and rebuild all the facilities destroyed. and make other restitution and should never attack Syria or other countries if they are simply accused of chemical weapons attacks.

Is THAT's what i should have taken from all the post Jim?
Somehow I don't think so, and i think my earlier summery was pretty honest.
(and makes for MUCH shorter post)

[NightTrain]

Well, if a journalist went to Syria and decided that there was no chemical attack 3 weeks later, that's good enough for me.

Hopefully he's heading to Iran to clear that up, too.

[revelarts]

Well, if a journalist went to Syria and decided that there was no chemical attack 3 weeks later, that's good enough for me.

Hopefully he's heading to Iran to clear that up, too.
So yes a famous British journalist went to the exact hospital, Talked to the Drs, and some of the "victims" in the video reports.
And have them on record saying it wasn't a "chemical" attack.
I'm not sure why THAT would be enough? sheesh.
And just becasue it's make absolutely NO sense for Assad to do it, well whatever right?

pffts I mean, Trump the U.K. and France have "SECRET", "CLASSIFIED" evidence that there was a chemical attack there.
Plus Trump wouldn't mislead us. or say something different than he said the day before. right?
And We've got "social media" reports too!
so there ya go.

[revelarts]

Another reporter same story.
7 minute mark specifics

https://youtu.be/lSXwG-901yU?t=7m

[NightTrain]

So yes a famous British journalist went to the exact hospital, Talked to the Drs, and some of the "victims" in the video reports.
And have them on record saying it wasn't a "chemical" attack.
I'm not sure why THAT would be enough? sheesh.
And just becasue it's make absolutely NO sense for Assad to do it, well whatever right?

pffts I mean, Trump the U.K. and France have "SECRET", "CLASSIFIED" evidence that there was a chemical attack there.
Plus Trump wouldn't mislead us. or say something different than he said the day before. right?
And We've got "social media" reports too!
so there ya go.


Rev, did it ever occur to you that 3 weeks is more than ample time to get stories straight in Russian / Syrian controlled areas?

Russia promised us that they'd make sure Syria got rid of their Chem Weapons. Syria promised they'd do it. Clearly, that didn't happen. Whether Syria played the Russians is neither here nor there; the bottom line is that they had them.

Not only that, Rev, this time we blew up their Chem Lab that produced the stuff. And the holding facilities.

I'm kind of surprised that you'd overlook such an obvious cue-in to a conspiracy theory about Doctors that are living there saying what they're told to say. I'm sure Syria could produce a thousand witnesses that say exactly what they want them to say.

"So, Dr. Fatwah, do you like your job as a doctor here?"

"Yes."

"Good. And your family is well? Do they also enjoy having you provide? Do they enjoy being safe?"

"Yes."

"Good. Tomorrow, Comrade, a journalist from the UK will be arriving to investigate the gas attack. Except there was no gas attack, only dust that people mistook for chemicals."

"No chemical weapon attack?"

"Nyet. It was dust. And that, my good doctor, is what you will tell them. Are we clear?"

"Yes."


Seriously, Rev, you don't think after 3 weeks and international condemnation that they wouldn't have produced witnesses?

And why do you think that the Russians & Syrians did not allow access to the site by the UN after the atrocity?


You're so wrapped up in believing that America is evil that you're missing the obvious evildoers.

You are a smart guy. WTF man?

[Drummond]

So yes a famous British journalist went to the exact hospital, Talked to the Drs, and some of the "victims" in the video reports.
And have them on record saying it wasn't a "chemical" attack.
I'm not sure why THAT would be enough? sheesh.
And just becasue it's make absolutely NO sense for Assad to do it, well whatever right?

pffts I mean, Trump the U.K. and France have "SECRET", "CLASSIFIED" evidence that there was a chemical attack there.
Plus Trump wouldn't mislead us. or say something different than he said the day before. right?
And We've got "social media" reports too!
so there ya go.

Well, this is 'fun' ....

Robert Fisk. Yes, I know the name. He's an 'Independent' journalist ... i.e he works for 'The Independent' ... yes ?

The Independent is a British newspaper that originally earned the name. At the time of the Iraq War, though, their reports and editorials veered sharply to the Left. Few, these days, believe that The Independent lacks its own bias.

So anyway --- let's see. How many WEEKS have Syrian authorities, no doubt with Russian help, had, to cover up any and all evidence of a chemical attack .. after both denied permission for foreign journalists and other authorities access to the area ?

How did Fisk know he was dealing with the same people who were there at the time ? How did he verify the bona fides of anyone he interviewed ?

And, how do we judge / conclude the impartiality of Fisk's own reporting, anyway ?

This might be of interest - think of it as a glimpse of Fisk's mind, and, indeed, as others who deal with him, view him:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Fisk


Osama bin Laden
Fisk interviewed Osama bin Laden on three occasions, reporting the interviews in articles published by The Independent on 6 December 1993, 10 July 1996, and 22 March 1997. In Fisk's first interview, "Anti-Soviet warrior puts his army on the road to peace," he wrote of Osama Bin Laden: "With his high cheekbones, narrow eyes and long brown robe, Mr Bin Laden looks every inch the mountain warrior of mujahedin legend. Chadored children danced in front of him, preachers acknowledged his wisdom" while noting that he was accused of "training for further jihad wars".

During one of Fisk's interviews with Bin Laden, Fisk noted an attempt by Bin Laden to convert him. Bin Laden said; "Mr Robert, one of our brothers had a dream...that you were a spiritual person ... this means you are a true Muslim". Fisk replied; "Sheikh Osama, I am not a Muslim. ... I am a journalist [whose] task is to tell the truth". Bin Laden replied: "If you tell the truth, that means you are a good Muslim". During the 1996 interview, Bin Laden accused the Saudi royal family of corruption. During the final interview in 1997, Bin Laden said he sought God's help "to turn America into a shadow of itself".

Fisk strongly condemned the September 11 attacks, describing them as a "hideous crime against humanity". He also denounced the Bush administration's response to the attacks, arguing that "a score of nations" were being identified and positioned as "haters of democracy" or "kernels of evil", and urged a more honest debate on U.S. policy in the Middle East. He argued that such a debate had hitherto been avoided "because, of course, to look too closely at the Middle East would raise disturbing questions about the region, about our Western policies in those tragic lands, and about America's relationship with Israel".

In 2007, Fisk expressed personal doubts about the official historical record of the attacks. In an article for The Independent, he claimed that, while the Bush administration was incapable of successfully carrying out such attacks due to its organisational incompetence, he is "increasingly troubled at the inconsistencies in the official narrative of 9/11"

So, Revelarts, tell us about Fisk's journalistic integrity, and of how he definitely does NOT have his own agenda !

[aboutime]

Rev. Are you now, or have you ever been a relative, or friend of Maxine Waters? Hillary Clinton? Pee Wee Hermann? or Vladimir Putin?

The reason I ask, and give you the opportunity to clear up, and answer my question is....Since you are the SELF-DECLARED expert on the Chemicals used in Syria. You need to assure us that your dependence on WANNABE Journalists for your Documented, Unverified Information is worth so much as a hill of beans.

[Elessar]

(and makes for MUCH shorter post)

1 half page list of research quotes and three others of shorter quotes?

When will you quit preaching with quotes and speak on your OWN terms?

[revelarts]

Rev, did it ever occur to you that 3 weeks is more than ample time to get stories straight in Russian / Syrian controlled areas?

that's a possibility but it's an assumption isn't it NT
why should i assume that?
when the only reports from people on the scene is that there is no evidence.
one of the children that was shown as a victim has been on "social media" and shown to be healthy.
so that also leads to the idea that there was NOT a chemical attack.

add to that that the last time the U.S. claimed that Assad used chem weapons and we attacked him for it it was found to be false as well. Not to mention the "bad intel" we got on Iraq.
How many times does the U.S. govt have to cry wolf before we start to question their reports NT.
Plus Mattis initially said bluntly that he DID NOT have any evidence of the chemical attack... other than "social media" reports. which came from Assads enemies.
should we blindly believe those? is that smart NT?




Russia promised us that they'd make sure Syria got rid of their Chem Weapons. Syria promised they'd do it. Clearly, that didn't happen.
So did Obama.
And so did the U.S.--Bush Senior and Chenny-- in Iraq after the 1st Iraq war. And it seems it was the case, except for a few hundred old basically useless canisters found over 8 years+ of invasion and occupation.

So Clearly? how clearly can we know anything about Assad's chemical weapons?
And if there was no chemical attack. what exactly is the evidence that they have chem weapons?
the U.S. gov't tells us so. well OK. we should not question that.
personally I question just about EVERYONE.
But I would not be surprised that Assad had Chemical weapons OR Chemical weapons facilities. But so far I've got NOTHING to prove it. except pictures of bombed buildings?




and Whether Syria played the Russians is neither here nor there; the bottom line is that they had them.
Not only that, Rev, this time we blew up their Chem Lab that produced the stuff. And the holding facilities.
if there were chem weapons INSIDE wouldn't they spread after being blown up?
And as i said All i've got to go one is pics of bombed buildings.
But again the problem here is that the EXCUSE Trump used to "destroy" that stuff is the NON- fact that Assad used them.

Plus there are other nation that HAVE illegal weapons, heck WE HAVE chemical and bio weapons. We SOLD some to Saddam and he used them on his own people and we Supported him for some time after he did that.
Also last i Checked attacking another nation out of the blue is an ACT of war.




I'm kind of surprised that you'd overlook such an obvious cue-in to a conspiracy theory about Doctors that are living there saying what they're told to say. I'm sure Syria could produce a thousand witnesses that say exactly what they want them to say.
"So, Dr. Fatwah, do you like your job as a doctor here?"
"Yes."
"Good. And your family is well? Do they also enjoy having you provide? Do they enjoy being safe?"
"Yes."
"Good. Tomorrow, Comrade, a journalist from the UK will be arriving to investigate the gas attack. Except there was no gas attack, only dust that people mistook for chemicals."
"No chemical weapon attack?"
"Nyet. It was dust. And that, my good doctor, is what you will tell them. Are we clear?"
"Yes."

Great story, any proof to go with that man?
like Maybe, a few others that were used by Assad and the Russians that way. who've confessed to lying for him before?
My problem with it in general is that I've found more occasions where Assad was SET up negatively by "media reports" than by Assad getting people to lie for him. Can you show me any confirmed FALSE media reports that make Assad look good.
Even when he does something RIGHT, like Fight ISIS and AQ he gets bad reportage for doing it the wrong way.
And there have been several occasions where he was blamed for things that the rebels were doing. Even the initial reports that Syrian troops attacked the public that started the "civil war" is now suspect.
So yes Great STORY and it's possibly but IMO it's unlikely and there's NOTHING that backs up that story except the BELIEF that Assad and Russia are bad guys. which they are , but it doesn't mean they've done everything we can imagine.
Heck i can MAKE up a story where the REBELS have kidnapped the Dr's family and killed them and he saying it wasn't chem attacks becasue he knows it will hurt their cause.

But the thing that's REALLY Suspect here is not WHAT MIGHT be motivating the words, but the very real way that this story is NOT being reported by the MSM in the West. Any guesses or made up reasons why they wouldn't. We both can make up reasons why or why not. But bottom line, the fact is they AREN'T, who does that help? Assad or Trump UK and France?



Seriously, Rev, you don't think after 3 weeks and international condemnation that they wouldn't have produced witnesses?
And why do you think that the Russians & Syrians did not allow access to the site by the UN after the atrocity?
You're so wrapped up in believing that America is evil that you're missing the obvious evildoers.
You are a smart guy. WTF man?
Sheesh, I don't think America is "evil"
Lord have mercy.
I think America has done some things that are wrong and wicked in it's history and recently and it CAN DO BETTER.
Do you agree? But also that Syria and Assad have done things that are evil as well.
Heck the US. and Assad have done evil TOGETHER! When after 9/11 the US gov't sent "detainees" and "suspects" to Assad to be tortured!

NO Country is an Angel NT. You're a smart guy and you know this. And just because i make a point of calling out Americas flaws to be corrected doesn't mean i hate America.
But if we're going to ACCUSE another nation used chemical weapons it needs to be PROVEN PUBLICLY without room for question. Iraq should have taught us THAT much. And at this point the proof points to Assad's innocence For THIS event.

But NT if you have some solid proof or reliable reports otherwise I'm open to see it.
But I won't be convinced by people repeating "he's a bad guy". And scolding me for not taking the U.S. gov't's word for it.

So NT, why do you want to assume that every crime Assad is accused of ...and that you can imagine is TRUE?
And believe that every word from Trump, the DoD and U.S gov't is without flaw and should never be questioned?

[NightTrain]

All you need to know is that the UN Chemical Warfare Experts are not allowed in.



Certain journalists are.



Are your Conspiracy Senses tingling now?

[aboutime]

All you need to know is that the UN Chemical Warfare Experts are not allowed in.



Certain journalists are.



Are your Conspiracy Senses tingling now?

It's not nice to question our resident experts on WMD's, and Foreign Affairs normally run by Government, Qualified, Real Experts who would simply LAUGH at Rev, and our distinct Crew of Trolls like petey who KNOW EVERYTHING about NOTHING.

This covers them pretty well IMO.
http://cdn-webimages.wimages.net/051046ab4a496b808119f859c869446dbdd6c-wm.jpg?v=3

[NightTrain]

And so did the U.S.--Bush Senior and Chenny-- in Iraq after the 1st Iraq war. And it seems it was the case, except for a few hundred old basically useless canisters found over 8 years+ of invasion and occupation.



Don't even think about going there; I've smoked you on that bullshit and I'll do it again.

[revelarts]

All you need to know is that the UN Chemical Warfare Experts are not allowed in.
Certain journalists are.
Are your Conspiracy Senses tingling now?

If that were the only fact sure..
But the OPCW did go to Douma and elsewhere they say.


OPCW Fact-Finding Mission Visits Second Site in Douma, Syria
Wednesday, 25 April 2018

THE HAGUE, Netherlands — 25 April 2018 — The Fact-Finding Mission (FFM) deployed to Damascus on 14 April 2018 to gather facts in connection with the reported use of chemical weapons in Douma, Syrian Arab Republic on 7 April 2018. Security arrangements for the team’s deployment to various locations in Douma were made by the United Nations Department of Safety and Security (UNDSS) in liaison with the Syrian authorities and the Russian Military Police. Due to the security situation the team was only able to visit Douma on 21 April. The team also interviewed some people related to the Douma incident, who were brought to Damascus.


Today, the FFM team carried out a visit to a second location in Douma. It also collected samples at this site. These samples will be brought back, together with other samples, to the OPCW laboratory in Rijswik. They will be split and dispatched for analysis by the OPCW designated labs.

Meanwhile, the OPCW Technical Secretariat was informed by the Russian delegation to the OPCW that it will organise a briefing for States Parties in The Hague on 26 April. The delegation would bring some Syrians to speak about the reported Douma incident. In line with Director-General’s earlier requests to States Parties to share information on the Douma incident, the Secretariat advised the Russian delegation that these persons should be first interviewed by the FFM. It was also recommended that such a briefing take place once the FFM has completed its work. Nevertheless, the Russian delegation stated that it would go ahead with the briefing and that its intention was not to interfere with the FFM’s work.

The FFM will continue to carry out its independent and impartial mission based on interviews with relevant people, its findings from the site visits, analysis of the sample results, as well as any other information and materials collected.

The Director-General is confident that the OPCW FFM will continue to enjoy the support of States Parties to the Chemical Weapons Convention. ...

https://www.opcw.org/news/article/opcw-fact-finding-mission-visits-second-site-in-douma-syria/

the alleged Chemical attack was on April 4, Seems the reporter made it to area in on the 17th maybe 16th, 4 days earlier than the OPCW, (not a 3 weeks earlier).

So how much time does it take to set up families and Dr's to lie to everyone NT?

If this is ALL i need to know, then I'm still not convinced of your great made up story.
Is it possible, sure, is a stretch yes it sorta is frankly.
what else you got to toss at what you consider my "Conspiracy Senses"

because those senses often work off of MULTIPLE pieces of hard information. Not just the idea that someone is a "bad guy", and a somewhat suspicious timing of access to a war zone.

Some people think that Trump is a RUSSIAN Puppet but i DO NOT. Even though there are some very minor but odd things he's done in connection with Russia. Overall I think the accusation of the Russian Conspiracy are PURE BS.
even though i think that Trump is WRONG on many fronts i just don't ASSUME very thing he' does or says is bad.
i didn't think so about Obama , OR BUSH. And I don't BUY into every "conspiracy".
EACH CASE stands or falls on it's merits. Not simply on the rep of the alleged perp.


But hey i've been pretty forth coming in my replies even though you've accused me of several things are you going to answer my questions.

Why do you want to assume that every crime Assad is accused of ...and what you can imagine is TRUE?
And do believe that every word from Trump, the DoD and U.S gov't is without flaw and should never be questioned on this chemical weapons situation?

[NightTrain]

Sheesh, I don't think America is "evil"


I think you do.

The only time I hear from you is when you're revved (!) up about some nefarious plot to kill people because our country is inherently evil.

You always subscribe to some bullshit conspiracy, killing brown/black/yellow/tan people for oil or natural gas or something without regard for the real reasons that the shitbag countries have been killing innocent people or sponsoring terrorism for decades.

It's always America that has nefarious reasons for engaging, for you. Nevermind that there is a legit reason for hammering a dictator engaging in chem weapons attacks against civilians minding their own business in a war zone.


Not once have you waved the American Flag and said, "these bastards deserved it, go USA!!!"

Not once.

[revelarts]

Don't even think about going there; I've smoked you on that bullshit and I'll do it again.

I'm sorry i can't hear you over the fact that W Bush and Rumsfield (and many others in the Bush Admin) have ADMITTED they DID NOT find the chemicals weapons that they all CLAIMED were there NT.

Go smoke them.

[NightTrain]

Real nice guy you're defending, Rev.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation has claimed that at least 10 European citizens were tortured by the Assad government while detained during the Syrian Civil War, potentially leaving Assad open to prosecution by individual European countries for war crimes.[147] Stephen Rapp, the United States Ambassador-at-Large for War Crimes Issues, has argued that the crimes allegedly committed by Assad are the worst seen since those of Nazi Germany.[148] In March 2015, Rapp further stated that the case against Assad is "much better" than those against Slobodan Milošević of Serbia or Charles Taylor of Liberia, both of whom were indicted by international tribunals.[149]


In a February 2015 interview with the BBC, Assad described accusations that the Syrian Arab Air Force used barrel bombs as "childish", stating that his forces have never used these types of "barrel" bombs and responded with a joke about not using "cooking pots" either.[150] The BBC Middle East editor conducting the interview, Jeremy Bowen, later described Assad's statement regarding barrel bombs as "patently not true".[151][152]


Nadim Shehadi, the director of The Fares Center for Eastern Mediterranean Studies stated that "In the early 1990s, Saddam Hussein was massacring his people and we were worried about the weapons inspectors," and claimed that "Assad did that too. He kept us busy with chemical weapons when he massacred his people."[153][154]


In September 2015, France began an inquiry into Assad for crimes against humanity, with French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius stating "Faced with these crimes that offend the human conscience, this bureaucracy of horror, faced with this denial of the values of humanity, it is our responsibility to act against the impunity of the killers".[155]


In February 2016, head of the UN Commission of Inquiry on Syria, Paulo Pinheiro, told reporters: "The mass scale of deaths of detainees suggests that the government of Syria is responsible for acts that amount to extermination as a crime against humanity." The UN Commission reported finding "unimaginable abuses", including women and children as young as seven perishing while being held by Syrian authorities. The report also stated: "There are reasonable grounds to believe that high-ranking officers—including the heads of branches and directorates—commanding these detention facilities, those in charge of the military police, as well as their civilian superiors, knew of the vast number of deaths occurring in detention facilities ... yet did not take action to prevent abuse, investigate allegations or prosecute those responsible".[156]


In March 2016, the United States House Committee on Foreign Affairs led by New Jersey Rep. Chris Smith called on the Obama administration to create a war crimes tribunal to investigate and prosecute violations "whether committed by the officials of the Government of Syria or other parties to the civil war".[157]


In April 2018 an alleged chemical attack occurred in Douma, prompting the U.S. its and allies to accuse Assad of violating international laws and initiating the 2018 bombing of Damascus and Homs. Both Syria and Russia have refuted the involvement of the Syrian government at this time.[158] [159]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bashar_al-Assad

[NightTrain]

I'm sorry i can't hear you over the fact that W Bush and Rumsfield (and many others in the Bush Admin) have ADMITTED they DID NOT find the chemicals weapons that they all CLAIMED were there NT.

Go smoke them.


Jesus, you aren't as smart as I thought.

How the FUCK can you not remember this shit?

Stand by.

[NightTrain]

Jesus, you aren't as smart as I thought.

How the FUCK can you not remember this shit?

Stand by.


On second thought, I will not regurgitate all of this that I've done dozens of times before. I'm done.

Fuck you, Rev. And I mean that.

I know, and you know, that you're full of shit and I've beaten you many times before on this subject.

I really hate repeating myself and I've done this with you many times.



You have just relegated yourself to Troll Status, no better than Petey. Congrats.

[LongTermGuy]

https://i2.wp.com/cdn.inquisitr.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Iraq-Crisis-mass-grave-of-vicitms-of-saddams-chemical-weapons-665x385.jpg
https://i0.wp.com/cdn.inquisitr.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Iraq-WMD-tanks-of-iraqi-chemical-weapons.jpg
https://cpnagasaki.wordpress.com/2014/06/23/isis-in-iraq-find-saddam-husseins-wmd-stockpiles-of-chemical-weapons-george-w-bush-was-right/


JUNE 23, 2014

https://i2.wp.com/cdn.inquisitr.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/destroyed-iraqi-ariel-chemical-bombs.jpg
Iraqi officials inspect a pile of destroyed chemical bombs.

[revelarts]

I think you do.
The only time I hear from you is when you're revved (!) up about some nefarious plot to kill people because our country is inherently evil.
so is Torture good or evil NT? did our gov't support it?
Is Abortion good or evil NT? Does our gov't allow and protect it?
Is war without a cause Good or evil NT? should presidents just have the right to bomb anyone?
Is spying on All the people in the country GOOD or evil NT? It official policy now.
Should anyone SAY it's evil or just be thankful wave the flag and STHU?

Somehow i suspect you and others here will not even honestly answer the questions.
But just be kinda mad that i even asked. rather than be angry that it's going on TODAY in the name of "America".

I speak up for the constitution of the U.S. every time. I LOVE the Ideals and constitution of this country and I HATE when politicians and so called Liberals and conservatives PISS on them and try to get me to CHEER for the crap they want to pass off as "America".

I'm not looking for a PERFECT America but i DO want America and Americans to MOVE in the DIRECTION of the Constitution and the values we SAY we believe in. rather than pretending that we can DO NO WRONG.. because "we're America" or because our party dood it.

It's weird to me that people have such a NARROW view of what "loving" America means.
It seem it only means "the military" for some people.



You always subscribe to some bullshit conspiracy, killing brown/black/yellow/tan people for oil or natural gas or something without regard for the real reasons that the shitbag countries have been killing innocent people or sponsoring terrorism for decades.
So the U.S. never goes to war or kills people over natural resources? is what you're telling me?
you mean like when the CIA admits to overthrowing the Iranian president basically for BP Oil.
Or like what general Smeadly Butler testified to as the reasons for his Active Military service too?
I'll post elsewhere about Iraq and OIL as just 1 of several reasons for Iraq.
But it seems to me there was no need for the US to be in the S--Bag country AT ALL.



It's always America that has nefarious reasons for engaging, for you. Nevermind that there is a legit reason for hammering a dictator engaging in chem weapons attacks against civilians minding their own business in a war zone.
Unconstitutional reasons are what i complain about.
there's NOTHING in the constitution that says we HAVE TO attack ANY country becasue the nation has a dictator or it has chemical weapons. Or "deserves it" . And as i mentioned before our stated reasons are NOT consistent or theyre found to be outright lies. So it only makes sense to see if there are OTHER motives for various attacks we launch NT. But bottom line for me, there's nothing in the constitution that give the president ANY authority to launch an attack on ANY country.
Immediate Self defense to repel an attack is the ONLY thing a president is authorized to do without congress. Good AMERICAN presidents FOLLOW the Constitution. If not then in IMO they are UNamerican and criminals.
We're not the world police.




Not once have you waved the American Flag and said, "these bastards deserved it, go USA!!!
Not once.
If flag waving and CHEERING over unconstitutional military actions is your gauge of determining my LOVE of "America"
then yes you're going to be very disappointed NT.
My gauge for REAL Americans is their love and support of the Constitution and our stated values of freedom, Godliness and peace. Rather than the ability to kick' arse.

But in this case Trump and crew should have to PROVE Assad deserve it don't they NT? Or is ANY excuse to bomb a "bad guy" OK?
And should we just pick up the flag and wave it ANYTIME the U.S. military shoots at something?
Any one waving the Constitution around and Cheering for that? That's when i start waving the Flag, not at questionable Military actions. I Cheer and saying GO USA!!! when a president and congress Follow the Constitution.
Sorry man I don't get a hard on for the flag just because some 3rd world country's scum bag leader is getting shot or bombed by the US military, especially when i'm not really sure WHY.
I've never bought the hype about how evil all the boggie men we've attacked in my lifetime are mainly because we've been Allies with MOST of them at one point or another.
Saddam former ally against Iran...
Assad Former 9/11 ally and torture partner...
Noregia Former Ally and drug partner...
Somalia What were we there for?
Yugoslavia Kosovo.. Um Yay Bill Clinton? Seriously?
Grenada... uh who.. why?
Haiti... yay America? which dictators did what? did we shoot at another former ally i think? maybe but wave the flag, right?...
Drone strikes on Unknown scum with no navy or airforce around the world... including a boatload of innocent civilians....
Drone strikes on American Citizens "suspects" and their kids without trial...

Sorry man I do find it hard to whole heartily raise the flag and cheer over most if not all these and MORE unconstitutional military actions. WAR and Bombing 2nd and 3rd world countries is not my idea of the BEST of what America has to offer.

If that means I your mind that i HATE America, then fine I'll just live with that.
Along with all the other BS slanders folks want to accuse me of.

But Bottom line in THIS CASE,
at this point it looks like the socalled reason the USA BOMBED Syria is BS.
So if it's not the real reason then WHY? Especailly after Trump said he was pulling out just weeks earlier, and Pissed on Obama for even considering bombing Syria. and told the voters and the world during the campaign that he thought it was stupid to attack Syria.

are YOUR Conspiracy senses tinglingly?

[revelarts]

Jesus, you aren't as smart as I thought.
How the FUCK can you not remember this shit?
Stand by.

On second thought, I will not regurgitate all of this that I've done dozens of times before. I'm done.
Fuck you, Rev. And I mean that.
I know, and you know, that you're full of shit and I've beaten you many times before on this subject.
I really hate repeating myself and I've done this with you many times.
You have just relegated yourself to Troll Status, no better than Petey. Congrats.

Just find the link where you "smoked me" NT. even though W says HE DID NOT find the TONS of WMDs he claimed Saddam had.
But if you're right I'll admit it.
And i won't piss on you personally for having a different opinion.

But can you tell what the h3ll s wrong with people here that they can't even have a conversation without acting like asses after 3 or 4 post?
I swear I try reeealll hard to be civil but folks always want to make it personal.
How many names and accusations have you tossed my way so far NT?
How many have i returned in kind? (just the one above in this post by my count)

Makes me wonder if you and others have any real points to make.
the only people here that seems to be able to maintain a civil tone are Kathianne and DRUMMOND and i probably disagree with him more fundamentally than anyone here.

[NightTrain]

Indulge yourself, Rev, in the search engine. I've personally spanked your ass 20 times, and others helped in your paddling.

All your stupid questions are already answered the first 20 times you typed them.

Have fun making a fool of yourself again and again and again and again. I just don't have the energy to do the research again, but both of us know that you got spanked every single time, and all your asinine questions have already been answered with maps and bulletproof articles supported by others.

You love rehashing the same arguments, pretending you didn't already get beaten, but for me - and almost everyone else - it's tiresome.

Cheers!

[revelarts]

Indulge yourself, Rev, in the search engine. I've personally spanked your ass 20 times, and others helped in your paddling.

somehow i don't recall ANY of those "20 times"

"20 times" un huh, Ok NT you smoked me "20 times" but can't find any... or "don't have energy to".
And somehow you can't even mention any one of these "bullet proof" pieces of evidence in a post.
well OK, if you say so.

But I feel comfortable believing Bush and Blair's repeated admissions that they did not find tons of WMDS they claimed.
AND I'd agree with Trump's assertion that they basically LIED about them.

but you know better.

[revelarts]

U.S. Intelligence Officials Who Warned About False WMD Claims Before Iraq War Are Now Warning About Baseless Syrian Chemical Weapons Claims

Posted on April 13, 2018 (http://washingtonsblog.com/2018/04/trump-urged-to-seek-evidence-before-attacking-syria.html) by WashingtonsBlog (http://washingtonsblog.com/author/washingtonsblog)
MEMORANDUM FOR: The President
FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity
SUBJECT: Evidence Required for Military Decision on Syria
Mr. President,
We the undersigned Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity join a number of other credible experts including former UK Ambassador to Syria, Peter Ford (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Ford_(diplomat))
(this recent interview on BBC Radio Scotland
recent interview (https://youtu.be/Jxs53OqAkN8) )

, former UN weapons inspectors and former military officers who are strongly recommending that you obtain and review actual evidence from the site of the alleged chemical attack in Douma, Syria, before ordering any military action. We have long brought to light significant evidence questioning the provenance of chemical weapons (https://consortiumnews.com/2015/12/22/a-call-for-proof-on-syria-sarin-attack/) indicating that rebel forces may have tried to produce and use such toxic agents in Syria.
Contradictory indications exist given that the video and images of victims in the locations purportedly affected by chemical weapons came from rebel-affiliated entities known as the “Douma Revolution (https://www.facebook.com/Douma.Revolution.2011)” and the “White Helmets” while Russian military units which later got physical access to the supposed sites and Syrian Red Crescent personnel working in the area reportedly found no indication of a chemical weapon attack.
The main question that arises is, “What motive would the Syrian government have to attack its own people when it is enjoying popular support for routing anti-government rebels? Why would it risk Western ire?” Rebel fighters and their families were already being evacuated to Turkish occupied Jarabulus by air-conditioned bus. As described in more detail by Scott Ritter (here (http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/trumps-rush-to-judgement-on-syria-chemical-attack/)), only Salafist fighters from the “Army of Islam” (Jaish al-Islam) had refused to surrender at the time of the supposed attacks.
One must therefore consider the possibility that the supposed chlorine gas attack at Douma may have been a carefully constructed propaganda fraud. Such a fraud would have as its purpose the elicitation of precisely the kind of political pressure that now has you contemplating military action. In other words, Mr. President, this may be a bid to mousetrap you into a war that neither you nor your fellow Americans want nor need.
More expert opinion and investigation needs to be applied like that voiced by former U.N. weapons inspector in Syria, Åke Sellström, (translated from original Swedish (https://www.dn.se/nyheter/varlden/expert-svart-att-bedoma-uppgifterna/)):
The attack may have come from Assad’s regime, but you may as well have other explanations. Toxic substances can be dispersed in many ways, for example through explosions or smoke.
– There are many poisonous substances in circulation during the battle.
If the UN were to investigate the attack, it is not enough to see recordings or hear testimony, says Sellström.
It is essential that the United States have complete and compelling evidence before taking any decisive action. We therefore strongly recommend that you await the findings of the OPCW team which is now on its way to Douma to investigate at the actual site of the alleged attack. A competent, objective group of experts needs to conduct a thorough on-the-ground investigation and collect evidence that will either implicate the Government of Syria or exonerate it.
We have, as you have noted, been down this road before with the Iraq WMD debacle in 2003. Let us not repeat this mistake. By launching a war in Syria, we will be entering a military and political morass involving Iran and Russia that could have fatal consequences for the entire planet, especially if any of the parties feel compelled to resort to nuclear weapons.
The American people neither want nor need another military intervention in the Middle East. History tells us that any initiative centered on the use of armed force to compel acceptable behavior will not be containable and will only propagate more violence. Please do not drain the US Treasury for a war that could lead to catastrophic and unprecedented loss of life and endanger the security of Americans everywhere.



For the Steering Group, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)
William Binney, former NSA Technical Director for World Geopolitical & Military Analysis; Co-founder of NSA’s Signals Intelligence Automation Research Center (ret.)
Marshall Carter-Tripp, Foreign Service Officer (ret.) and Division Director, State Department Bureau of Intelligence and Research
Kathleen Christison, Senior Analyst on Middle East, CIA (ret.)
Bogdan Dzakovic, former Team Leader of Federal Air Marshals and Red Team, FAA Security (ret.) (associate VIPS)
Philip Giraldi, CIA, Operations Officer (ret.)
Matthew Hoh, former Capt., USMC, Iraq & Foreign Service Officer, Afghanistan (associate VIPS)
Larry C. Johnson, former CIA and State Department Counter Terrorism officer
Michael S. Kearns, Captain, USAF (ret.), Intelligence Officer & ex-Master SERE Instructor
John Kiriakou, former CIA Counterterrorism Officer and former senior investigator, Senate Foreign Relations Committee
Clement J. Laniewski, LTC, USA (ret) (associate VIPS)
Linda Lewis, WMD preparedness policy analyst, USDA (ret.) (associate VIPS)
Edward Loomis, NSA Cryptologic Computer Scientist (ret.)
David MacMichael, Ph.D., former senior estimates officer, National Intelligence Council (ret.)
Ray McGovern, former US Army infantry/intelligence officer & CIA analyst; CIA Presidential briefer (ret.)
Elizabeth Murray, former Deputy National Intelligence Officer for the Near East, National Intelligence Council & CIA political analyst (ret.)
Todd E. Pierce, MAJ, US Army Judge Advocate (ret.)
Scott Ritter, former MAJ., USMC, former UN Weapon Inspector, Iraq
Coleen Rowley, FBI Special Agent and former Minneapolis Division Legal Counsel (ret.)
Peter Van Buren, US Department of State, Foreign Service Officer (ret.) (associate VIPS)
Lawrence Wilkerson, Colonel, US Army (ret.), former Chief of Staff for Secretary of State; Distinguished Visiting Professor, College of William and Mary (associate VIPS)
Sarah G. Wilton, CDR, USNR, (ret.); Defense Intelligence Agency (ret.)
Robert Wing, former Foreign Service Officer (associate VIPS)
Ann Wright, Colonel, US Army (ret.); also Foreign Service Officer who resigned in opposition to the US war on Iraq

[Drummond]

U.S. Intelligence Officials Who Warned About False WMD Claims Before Iraq War Are Now Warning About Baseless Syrian Chemical Weapons Claims

Posted on April 13, 2018 (http://washingtonsblog.com/2018/04/trump-urged-to-seek-evidence-before-attacking-syria.html) by WashingtonsBlog (http://washingtonsblog.com/author/washingtonsblog)
MEMORANDUM FOR: The President
FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity
SUBJECT: Evidence Required for Military Decision on Syria
Mr. President,
We the undersigned Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity join a number of other credible experts including former UK Ambassador to Syria, Peter Ford (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Ford_(diplomat))
(this recent interview on BBC Radio Scotland
recent interview (https://youtu.be/Jxs53OqAkN8) )

, former UN weapons inspectors and former military officers who are strongly recommending that you obtain and review actual evidence from the site of the alleged chemical attack in Douma, Syria, before ordering any military action. We have long brought to light significant evidence questioning the provenance of chemical weapons (https://consortiumnews.com/2015/12/22/a-call-for-proof-on-syria-sarin-attack/) indicating that rebel forces may have tried to produce and use such toxic agents in Syria.
Contradictory indications exist given that the video and images of victims in the locations purportedly affected by chemical weapons came from rebel-affiliated entities known as the “Douma Revolution (https://www.facebook.com/Douma.Revolution.2011)” and the “White Helmets” while Russian military units which later got physical access to the supposed sites and Syrian Red Crescent personnel working in the area reportedly found no indication of a chemical weapon attack.
The main question that arises is, “What motive would the Syrian government have to attack its own people when it is enjoying popular support for routing anti-government rebels? Why would it risk Western ire?” Rebel fighters and their families were already being evacuated to Turkish occupied Jarabulus by air-conditioned bus. As described in more detail by Scott Ritter (here (http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/trumps-rush-to-judgement-on-syria-chemical-attack/)), only Salafist fighters from the “Army of Islam” (Jaish al-Islam) had refused to surrender at the time of the supposed attacks.
One must therefore consider the possibility that the supposed chlorine gas attack at Douma may have been a carefully constructed propaganda fraud. Such a fraud would have as its purpose the elicitation of precisely the kind of political pressure that now has you contemplating military action. In other words, Mr. President, this may be a bid to mousetrap you into a war that neither you nor your fellow Americans want nor need.
More expert opinion and investigation needs to be applied like that voiced by former U.N. weapons inspector in Syria, Åke Sellström, (translated from original Swedish (https://www.dn.se/nyheter/varlden/expert-svart-att-bedoma-uppgifterna/)):
The attack may have come from Assad’s regime, but you may as well have other explanations. Toxic substances can be dispersed in many ways, for example through explosions or smoke.
– There are many poisonous substances in circulation during the battle.
If the UN were to investigate the attack, it is not enough to see recordings or hear testimony, says Sellström.
It is essential that the United States have complete and compelling evidence before taking any decisive action. We therefore strongly recommend that you await the findings of the OPCW team which is now on its way to Douma to investigate at the actual site of the alleged attack. A competent, objective group of experts needs to conduct a thorough on-the-ground investigation and collect evidence that will either implicate the Government of Syria or exonerate it.
We have, as you have noted, been down this road before with the Iraq WMD debacle in 2003. Let us not repeat this mistake. By launching a war in Syria, we will be entering a military and political morass involving Iran and Russia that could have fatal consequences for the entire planet, especially if any of the parties feel compelled to resort to nuclear weapons.
The American people neither want nor need another military intervention in the Middle East. History tells us that any initiative centered on the use of armed force to compel acceptable behavior will not be containable and will only propagate more violence. Please do not drain the US Treasury for a war that could lead to catastrophic and unprecedented loss of life and endanger the security of Americans everywhere.



For the Steering Group, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)
William Binney, former NSA Technical Director for World Geopolitical & Military Analysis; Co-founder of NSA’s Signals Intelligence Automation Research Center (ret.)
Marshall Carter-Tripp, Foreign Service Officer (ret.) and Division Director, State Department Bureau of Intelligence and Research
Kathleen Christison, Senior Analyst on Middle East, CIA (ret.)
Bogdan Dzakovic, former Team Leader of Federal Air Marshals and Red Team, FAA Security (ret.) (associate VIPS)
Philip Giraldi, CIA, Operations Officer (ret.)
Matthew Hoh, former Capt., USMC, Iraq & Foreign Service Officer, Afghanistan (associate VIPS)
Larry C. Johnson, former CIA and State Department Counter Terrorism officer
Michael S. Kearns, Captain, USAF (ret.), Intelligence Officer & ex-Master SERE Instructor
John Kiriakou, former CIA Counterterrorism Officer and former senior investigator, Senate Foreign Relations Committee
Clement J. Laniewski, LTC, USA (ret) (associate VIPS)
Linda Lewis, WMD preparedness policy analyst, USDA (ret.) (associate VIPS)
Edward Loomis, NSA Cryptologic Computer Scientist (ret.)
David MacMichael, Ph.D., former senior estimates officer, National Intelligence Council (ret.)
Ray McGovern, former US Army infantry/intelligence officer & CIA analyst; CIA Presidential briefer (ret.)
Elizabeth Murray, former Deputy National Intelligence Officer for the Near East, National Intelligence Council & CIA political analyst (ret.)
Todd E. Pierce, MAJ, US Army Judge Advocate (ret.)
Scott Ritter, former MAJ., USMC, former UN Weapon Inspector, Iraq
Coleen Rowley, FBI Special Agent and former Minneapolis Division Legal Counsel (ret.)
Peter Van Buren, US Department of State, Foreign Service Officer (ret.) (associate VIPS)
Lawrence Wilkerson, Colonel, US Army (ret.), former Chief of Staff for Secretary of State; Distinguished Visiting Professor, College of William and Mary (associate VIPS)
Sarah G. Wilton, CDR, USNR, (ret.); Defense Intelligence Agency (ret.)
Robert Wing, former Foreign Service Officer (associate VIPS)
Ann Wright, Colonel, US Army (ret.); also Foreign Service Officer who resigned in opposition to the US war on Iraq

I see that you have had no comment to make regarding my other post on Robert Fisk. Evidence of your selectivity in considering only what you WANT to consider ?

Fisk's bias is obvious. Heyy .. it even made Osama bin Laden think he might be recruitable for HIS side ...

But now, you're happily referring to a grouping called the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity. Any bias there, then ?

... Well .....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veteran_Intelligence_Professionals_for_Sanity


After the Ghouta chemical attack in Syria, VIPS issued an "open letter" to President Obama stating that "former co-workers" and "numerous sources in the Middle East" had informed them that Syrian government forces were not responsible for the attack, contrary to the position of the US government and foreign intelligence agencies. The letter stated that there was instead "a strong circumstantial case" that the incident was a "pre-planned provocation by the Syrian opposition and its Saudi and Turkish supporters". Muhammad Idrees Ahmad, writing in The New Republic, criticized the letter's reliance on anonymous sources and stated that its "most sensational claims" appeared to be largely "plagiarized" from an article written by Yossef Bodansky and republished by "conspiracy site" Global Research. Ahmad characterizes Bodansky as "an Israeli-American supporter of Assad's uncle Rifaat." Ahmad also noted that one of the letter's signatories—Philip Giraldi—cited dubious sources related to the Ghouta attack in a piece for The American Conservative, including Alex Jones's Infowars. Ahmad concluded that the VIPS letter was "exceptional in its shoddiness."

Ho hum. More of the same, Revelarts. You're highly attentive to 'sources' that'll support you in your agenda. You'll ignore entirely, if need be, anything not serving your agenda.

Fisk is a joke. The latest grouping you have cared to cite has its own record of bias.

As do you .. and it always veers in one particular direction. Doesn't it ?

I suggest a litmus test for offerings such as these ...

'Would Balu have approved of this' .. ??

[aboutime]

I might join REV. and LIGHT UP whatever he's smoking that distorts, and causes so much hatred..enough to sound like a member of the
"Obama Liars/Fabricators and BS club"