Do you support the arming of Syrian 'rebels'?

[Gandalf]

There is no doubt that Syria is a serious clusterfuck with civilian casualties seemingly fast approaching 100,000. All this time we have sat back and watched and then with the assertion that chemical weapons have been deployed apparently killing 144 that we must get involved, and by obvious coincidence, America too. Personally, I don't know what makes death by chemical weapons more important than other deaths, but I must be ignorant. I am only following the example led by the bastions of honesty (Britain and America) in assuming that chemical weapons such as those used by Israel against the Palestinians (white phosphorous) was just one of those unfortunate things in a combat situation. I have seen zero evidence of the British nor the Americans arming the Palestinians, and yet the US does supply Israel with billions of dollars of aid each year. Seemingly we support the use of chemical weapons when our friends use them, but not when others deploy them. However, unlike in Palestine where the claims appear to have been backed up, we are here relying on Britain and America which are nations that do make up evidence (lie) in order to carry out an agenda.

I am against the arming of the Syrian rebels as I largely feel that the conflict is being misreported by mainstream media and that atrocities commited by the rebels are being swept under the rug. I also think the arming of rebels will escalate the conflict in the region with potentially devastating consequences. I also think that once again dictatorial decision making is being made by the US and the UK with NO regard as to what the general populace within those countries is thinking. Again, we are not all that different. We support terrorist states, we invade countries, we torture and rendition, we are all the things that the Middle East should and largely does despise.

Do you support the arming of Syrian 'rebels'?

[El Kabong]

I answered 'NO' only because there was no 'FUCK NO!' to select

Listen we've all seen how this story plays out before. We helped the Muslims fight off the Serbs in Bosnia, we helped the Mujahedeen fight off the Soviets in Afghanistan, we (at the request of the British) stuck our noses in Iran to put the Shah back in power....every single time we attempt to help in the Middle East (bar when we help Israel.....miles & Kirkland) it has backfired on us tremendously.

If we are truly and honestly worried about someone getting their hands on WMDs then we shouldn't "pick a side" we should find the actual weapons and capture them and leave the Syrians to fight amongst themselves and when I say "we" I mean the UN because I sure as fuck don't want the US blamed anymore for the morons leading other nations.


All that said this is EXACTLY like Bosnia it is a "Wag the dog" war and will be used to hush up the media about recent controversies and scandals. There's no reason to go into Syria UNLESS we wanted to capture those weapons and that's not what we will do. We're picking a side thinking its the lesser of two evils and that is just fucking stupid because those people only have loyalty to tribe and if they are Shia/Persian or Sunni/Arab.

[VictorCharlie]

I have no issue with arming the rebels but I don't want the US involved in it. Oh and Miles, White Phosphorus isn't considered a chemical weapon.

[El Kabong]

Good point on the rebels being touted as "the good guys" miles...those guys would take weapons from us and immediately plot to use them against us! They are mean and merciless and I don't trust them at all.

[Gandalf]

I have no issue with arming the rebels but I don't want the US involved in it. Oh and Miles, White Phosphorus isn't considered a chemical weapon.

I don't buy into the notion that Israel and America can define chemical weaponry as they wish and certainly not from a country that has used nukes, napalm and white phosphorous on people in 2 out of 3 wars built on lies and the other on a defeated country.

[El Kabong]

I have no issue with arming the rebels but I don't want the US involved in it. Oh and Miles, White Phosphorus isn't considered a chemical weapon.

I don't buy into the notion that Israel and America can define chemical weaponry as they wish and certainly not from a country that has used nukes, napalm and white phosphorous on people in 2 out of 3 wars built on lies and the other on a defeated country.

Woah woah woah.....did you just call Japan a "defeated country" How about you look up the Battle of Okinawa and tell me Japan was "ready to give up".

The atom Bombs ended World War II, SAVED LIVES on both sides AND kept the Cold War COLD....FACT

[Gandalf]

I don't think that many dead innocent Japanese people was really neccessary. It wasn't just the initial nukes themselves, but the cancer and birth malformation fall out rates after. It was a shitty move that has never been repeated in history and for good reason. Having said that, I know your views on the Nukes and you know mine, so we don't need to pull this thread away from that. You think it was just and I say it wasn't. That's plenty for here.

[VictorCharlie]

I have no issue with arming the rebels but I don't want the US involved in it. Oh and Miles, White Phosphorus isn't considered a chemical weapon.

I don't buy into the notion that Israel and America can define chemical weaponry as they wish and certainly not from a country that has used nukes, napalm and white phosphorous on people in 2 out of 3 wars built on lies and the other on a defeated country.

You don't have to take Israel or the US's word on it. The Law of War stipulates how/when it can be used and it is not considered a chemical weapon in the same way say Sarin, Mustard Gas etc are. But hey don't let facts get in the way of your obsession.

[El Kabong]

I don't think that many dead innocent Japanese people was really neccessary. It wasn't just the initial nukes themselves, but the cancer and birth malformation fall out rates after. It was a shitty move that has never been repeated in history and for good reason. Having said that, I know your views on the Nukes and you know mine, so we don't need to pull this thread away from that. You think it was just and I say it wasn't. That's plenty for here.

Nobody knew about fallout until we used the bombs....which is why you see guys at nuclear testing sites checking out ground zero wearing tyvek booties as their only protection against the radiation.


As for the Battle of Okinawa which was the key to be able to make bombing runs on Honshu Island. Almost 100,000 Japanese soldiers were killed defending Okinawa and anywhere from 42,000-100,000 civilians died there too because they either brought up arms against the Allied forces or committed suicide thinking the Allies would murder them anyway because of the propaganda the Japanese put out about how vicious the Allies were.

The bombs saved lives its a fact and it's hard to swallow but it is the truth

[Gandalf]

I have no issue with arming the rebels but I don't want the US involved in it. Oh and Miles, White Phosphorus isn't considered a chemical weapon.

I don't buy into the notion that Israel and America can define chemical weaponry as they wish and certainly not from a country that has used nukes, napalm and white phosphorous on people in 2 out of 3 wars built on lies and the other on a defeated country.

You don't have to take Israel or the US's word on it. The Law of War stipulates how/when it can be used and it is not considered a chemical weapon in the same way say Sarin, Mustard Gas etc are. But hey don't let facts get in the way of your obsession.

It is not an obsession as it is a fact that your country goes after nations based upon lies and ignores others because it uses the same chemical murder methods. You have never really bothered with law of war when it concerns Nuremburg etc, but only when it suits your interests and justifies your prior agenda and world experiences. It is perfectly natural and I understand why you do it. At the least, you will admit that phosphorous is highly controversial and not used in nations that do routinely flog international law.

I've never really let facts get in my way as the facts keep on producing themselves. Britain, America and Israel are continuing the blueprint I have always said they would. This is just the latest. I am not a prophet or even that smart, but I am against it and believe you, me and most our respective populaces are against the downward spiral too.

It is a downward spiral and I am sensing with the Americans that feel strongly they feel it is lost. Those are the Americans I can relate to, but they think it is done too. They are smart, educated and are sold out. There is nothing and only war to back up the military sector. Then will come the next economic crash and further slavery.

You need war to shield the collapse and the markets are due a horrid drop.

[VictorCharlie]

Again Miles you are confused. Where you cannot produce a binding legal document that stipulates when war is legal or illegal I can produce the Law of Landwarfare that stipulates how the US conducts war. I get an annual 4 hour block of instruction on it. This is my business and unlike you I know exactly what I'm talking about. If you want to talk about Syria then lets do that but if you are just going to continue with tangential rants about how the US is the international bogey man then I'll just post some more in YB's tits thread.

[El Kabong]

It is not an obsession as it is a fact that your country goes after nations based upon lies

.....like the ones told to us by England to return the Shah to power in Iran?

[El Kabong]

Anyway....BACK ON TOPIC...no I would not like to see the United States arm the Syrian rebels as they are no friends of ours and never will be.

[Gandalf]

Yes, and your government has also used nuclear bombs, napalm and phosporous. It doesn't matter what your government tells you is okay as it is clear that your government doesn't care about what is okay. Your government tortures, renditions and lies to invade other countries and that is the sector that you have signed up for. Now how any of that can provide a legal framework for anything is insane. I am am sure Hitler had a legal team telling him he was well within his rights etc.

Law is irrelevant as compared to what is moral. Most people would argue that the war in Iraq was wrong and on that basis alone, it doesn't matter about legality. Most would agree on phosphorous too. A country like America talking about chemicals and getting involved in another countries civil war is a joke and not a funny one.

America is the bogeyman and it doesn't take me to make it that way. I am a marginal person, but practically every English and American person I have read is condemning England and America and at the end of the day you are too. We just disagree on phosphorous which any chemist would tell you has all the hallmarks of a chemical weapon. Legalese doesn't hide basic science.

[Gandalf]

It is not an obsession as it is a fact that your country goes after nations based upon lies

.....like the ones told to us by England to return the Shah to power in Iran?

I am not defending Britain, Lyle. You know I am always reliable in placing Britain, Israel and America of the past 40 years quite firmly together.

On the whole I think ALL of us agree that arming the rebels is a poor idea. We are wandering off into tangential arguments as is our will, but we do seem to be on the same page on this.