US and Coalition strikes Syria

[El Kabong]

Why is it that all these countrys, that are attacked have two things in common. Mineral wealth and no Rothschild bank. Could someone explain.

Because Alex Jones?

[Scrap]

Why is it that all these countrys, that are attacked have two things in common. Mineral wealth and no Rothschild bank. Could someone explain.

Because Alex Jones?

is it his fault.

[El Kabong]

Why is it that all these countrys, that are attacked have two things in common. Mineral wealth and no Rothschild bank. Could someone explain.

Because Alex Jones?

is it his fault.

Nope but it's good for his brand of radio

[brocktonblockbust]

You can't discount everything he says.

[Beanz]

If you put on a blindfold and throw a hundred darts at a board, one of them might hit the bullseye. It's not a validation of that method though. Better to look before taking aim.

[El Kabong]

[El Kabong]

The left, American or otherwise is defeatist and consistently working AGAINST any progress. Commies, socialists, anarchists. ...they are all worthless

[Beanz]

The left, American or otherwise is defeatist and consistently working AGAINST any progress. Commies, socialists, anarchists. ...they are all worthless

Better throw out your record collection then.

[Andre]

The left, American or otherwise is defeatist and consistently working AGAINST any progress. Commies, socialists, anarchists. ...they are all worthless

You call them Liberals ?

Our Liberal branch are the rich politicians here, right wing. Labour party are our left.
We also drive on the other side of the road and all hang upside down off the bottom of the Earth as well.

[El Kabong]

The left, American or otherwise is defeatist and consistently working AGAINST any progress. Commies, socialists, anarchists. ...they are all worthless

You call them Liberals ?

Our Liberal branch are the rich politicians here, right wing. Labour party are our left.
We also drive on the other side of the road and all hang upside down off the bottom of the Earth as well.

The left uses terms which suit their narrative, so they've hijacked the term "Liberal" just as they have used the term "Progressive".

Liberal means by definition "(in a political context) favoring maximum individual liberty" and that is what I am for, however, the people who are "Liberal Democrats" want the exact opposite. They want to draw and quarter free speech, the Second Amendment, freedom to practice religion, etc.

[El Kabong]

And again the MAIN point here is that the New York Times has now admitted that there WERE WMDs in Iraq and so Iraq War justification CHECK!

Anyone ready to admit that once again Lyle was right? When will you learn Kirkland? Mustard gas, nerve agents, and a leader who wanted to rekindle production of those weapons AND get nuclear weapons....a leader who used those weapons on the regular....but naaaah no need to remove Saddam. Sing yourself another lullaby Kirkland and chalk up another loss for yourself when it comes to debate.

[Kirkland Laing]

And again the MAIN point here is that the New York Times has now admitted that there WERE WMDs in Iraq and so Iraq War justification CHECK!

Anyone ready to admit that once again Lyle was right? When will you learn Kirkland? Mustard gas, nerve agents, and a leader who wanted to rekindle production of those weapons AND get nuclear weapons....a leader who used those weapons on the regular....but naaaah no need to remove Saddam. Sing yourself another lullaby Kirkland and chalk up another loss for yourself when it comes to debate.

No, the NYT haven't admitted that there were WMDs. You need to risk shelf overload and read more than the first few lines of articles. You should be able to manage at least one full newspaper article a day without suffering a shelf collapse/screw loose catastrophe.

That Iraq had artillery shells full of various chemical was known by all sides in 1992 when the weapons inspectors first went into Iraq. But artillery shells are not weapons of mass destruction. In the case of the shells discussed in the article, some of which were sold to Iraq by America, the worst destruction caused was somebody getting a big blister.


From your own fucking link:

The discoveries of these chemical weapons did not support the government’s invasion rationale.

All had been manufactured before 1991, participants said. Filthy, rusty or corroded, a large fraction of them could not be readily identified as chemical weapons at all. Some were empty, though many of them still contained potent mustard agent or residual sarin. Most could not have been used as designed, and when they ruptured dispersed the chemical agents over a limited area, according to those who collected the majority of them.
In case after case, participants said, analysis of these warheads and shells reaffirmed intelligence failures. First, the American government did not find what it had been looking for at the war’s outset, then it failed to prepare its troops and medical corps for the aged weapons it did find.




Participants in the chemical weapons discoveries said the United States suppressed knowledge of finds for multiple reasons, including that the government bristled at further acknowledgment it had been wrong. “They needed something to say that after Sept. 11 Saddam used chemical rounds,” Mr. Lampier said. “And all of this was from the pre-1991 era.”
Others pointed to another embarrassment. In five of six incidents in which troops were wounded by chemical agents, the munitions appeared to have been designed in the United States, manufactured in Europe and filled in chemical agent production lines built in Iraq by Western companies.


In September 2004, months after Sergeant Burns and Private Yandell picked up the leaking sarin shell, the American government issued a detailed analysis of Iraq’s weapons programs. The widely heralded report, by the multinational Iraq Survey Group, concluded that Iraq had not had an active chemical warfare program for more than a decade.
The group, led by Charles A. Duelfer, a former United Nations official working for the Central Intelligence Agency, acknowledged that the American military had found old chemical ordnance: 12 artillery shells and 41 rocket warheads. It predicted that troops would find more.
The report also played down the dangers of the lingering weapons, stating that because their contents would have deteriorated, “any remaining chemical munitions in Iraq do not pose a militarily significant threat."


And so on.

[El Kabong]

During Vietnam? Nooo the left's subversive nature goes back waaaay longer. At the very least the muckrackers of the 1900's, the International Workers of the World, the Spanish Civil War International Brigades....those commies sewed the seeds of the draft dodger anarchists of the 60's.

[pacfan]

During Vietnam? Nooo the left's subversive nature goes back waaaay longer. At the very least the muckrackers of the 1900's, the International Workers of the World, the Spanish Civil War International Brigades....those commies sewed the seeds of the draft dodger anarchists of the 60's.

I was just talking about the world-wide anti-americanism, not the whole communist thing, of course. I hope it's clear, buddy...

[pacfan]

The left, American or otherwise is defeatist and consistently working AGAINST any progress. Commies, socialists, anarchists. ...they are all worthless

You call them Liberals ?

Our Liberal branch are the rich politicians here, right wing. Labour party are our left.
We also drive on the other side of the road and all hang upside down off the bottom of the Earth as well.

That's what I mean, the concept of political right and left for americans are much different from rest of the world. America was created with the ideals of freedom so they're naturally a rightist state by world standard. Even what they consider left is tame compared elsewhere, their liberals are just about the center by world standard while their progressives is at about the center-left compared to the progressives elsewhere, and for americans they will undoubtedly be classified as reds or communists.

So what the heck am I driving at? Well I've seen the same folks here debating essentially the same issues over and over ever since I came here nearly 10yrs back and still nothing is resolved. Why? the answer is simple, they are ideologically wide apart and they'll never understand each other. It's like trying to mix oil with water...

That's why I said I hate politics. Take the case of this thread's topic, to me it's just a simple case of group of headhunting beasts trying to conquer their part of the world, the heck with oil and what not, I say just nuke 'em... ...I'll take back the nuke part, conventional bomb will do. BTW, is there oil in Syria?