Report; Three new chemical attacks.

If you automatically assumed that the thread topic pertained to illegal actions by the Syrian government then hadn't you better ask yourself- ' Am I a propaganda victim ' ?

Who wants us to bomb Syria ? Shouldn't we ask the Syrians if they want to be bombed ? After all, aren't they the ones we're, supposedly, going to war to 'help ' ?
Why are the Brits so anxious to take their people into another war ? Don't they want soldiers returning from Afghanistan to go home and tell it like it is ? Do they see Syria as offering a diversion of public attention ? What's in it for the Brits ? Helping foreigners ? Geez, they can't get them out of the UK fast enough.



Nope, helping foreigners isn't their concern.

 

Now this is hilarious.

Accused of using nerve agents by dozens of countries backed up with rather convincing YouTube videos, and it takes four days for the Syrian government to complain that the rebels "gassed" syrian troops?

Not surprised you'd buy it immediately and unquestioningly.

 

It didn't take them four days. It took four days for the news to penetrate thick foreign skulls.

 

And YOU jump to the tune of proven warmongers and liars. No surprise there. Based on probability and logic, the idea that Assad used chemical weapons is absurd.

 

Americans aren't being asked if they want Syria bombed. Brits aren't being asked if they want Syria bombed. Not even Syrians are being asked if they want Syria bombed. Doesn't ' representative ' democracy stink ?

 

Accusations mean nothing and are not evidence. What about the accusations against rebels? They're not proof of course, right? OF COURSE those who have an agenda against Assad are going to make that accusation.

And what youtube video depicts Syrian government forces using chemical weapons? Or munitions tied to the Syrian government? None. They merely depict that an attack took place. Not the whodunnit.

 

No, I don't jump to any tune. I merely question this particular story.

But I do see those who support the dictator Assad and his facist baathist alewhite minority eating up a story that stinks of propaganda.

I happen to believe that the UN inspectors should be allowed to complete their investigation, before any action is taken.

 

What would be the US response to use of Agent Orange ?

 

Well maybe. It looks like Labour are going to demand that an amendment is made to the vote tomorrow that Parliament is brought back after the UN Weapons Report has been made. It is thought that may well attract sufficient votes from the conservatives and others to stop Parliament agreeing to an immediate strike.

 

Good. And what of the government claim that an attack would not breach international law ? Have any international lawyers been wheeled in yet ? Straw can be disregarded. He's an established liar.

!!!!!!! It's just unbelievable that this ghoul should hold public office.

 

You misunderstood my point.

In a situation where the world is accusing the Syrian government of using chemical weapons while the world is watching viral videos of what appear to be victims of those weapons, it takes four days for the "innocent" Syrian government to claim that rebels used chemical weapons against the syrian army for three consecutive days in DAMASCUS.

Now that is either incompetent reporting, or propaganda. since it supposedly happened in the capital of syria, I tend to lean towards propaganda.

I don't know which side actually has used the gas. I have absolutely no doubt that there are some Islamist ********s running around that are fully capable of using it without batting an eye. I also have absolutely no doubt that there are Baathists ********s running around who are just a capable. I think the main issue is access to the weapons. I can't imagine the syrian army losing control of such weapons.

It remains to be seen.

 

totally irrelevant.

I suggest you research sarin gas and agent orange.
YOu might be surprised that nerve agents designed to kill people is somewhat different than a defoliant with carcinogenic properties.

Keep reaching.

 

Or Israeli use of chemical weapons on the Palestinian's?

 

Again, what would be the US response to the use of Agent Orange ? After all, it's only ' a defoliant with carcinogenic properties '

Fencesquatters with figleafs- ...beware.

 

You overlook the fact that it is totally illogical for Assad to have used them.

 

No the Government are not going to bother with International lawyers. It will be up to British Lawyers to find a way to say it is ok as with Iraq. The Government claims no need for International Law as this falls under the need to protect criteria.

 

I happen to believe that the UN Security Council should decide on any eventualities. It's a step you seem to have overlooked.

- - - Updated - - -

Well, denouncement for certain, followed by a veto of any punitive measures.

 

You fell for the old label switch routine. It's not a chemical weapon if you call it something else. Defoliating was the guise in which they justified the attacks. And your use of "carcinogenic" is sugarcoating. It burns people up, not just increases the risk of cancer.

Here's the facts:

WE DROPPED TOXIC CHEMICALS ON CIVILIANS TO KILL THEM.

Hundreds of thousands were killed, and hundreds of thousands to be born later had birth defects, continuing even now.

Operation Ranch Hand was to attack their food crops. One of the most despicable war crimes, starving villagers.

It is caustic and burns through organic matter. If it kills people, it'll kill leaves too. So I suppose you could call it an herbicide, and an insecticide AND a humanicide.

Call it whatever you want. Call it Agent Orange, call it roundup, call it cocaine, call it pixie dust. It is what it is.

The fact is: USA dumped a KNOWN toxic chemical on 5 million acres.

Also, they dropped it in concentrations FIFTY TIMES as concentrated as needed for normal defoliant use. This is proof they used it as MORE than a defoliant.

What's the definition of a chemical weapon attack? Attacking people with chemicals. Simple as that.

Please allow me to acertain your opinion. Do you believe the agent orange program was justified?

- - - Updated - - -

Syria made the allegations days ago. It's now which they ask for the UN inspections.

 

Leaders do lots of illogical things all the time.

 

You mean to say that backed by a partisan hawkish media, they wouldn't override international law by bombing the crap out of Israel?

 

Not if such illogicality would almost certainly result in the destruction of ones country.

 

Um yes, actually OFTEN times when it leads to the destruction of the country. Many a mighty empire has fallen due to illogical decisions. Even the USA is slated for that, with policies that were similar to those which destroyed the Soviet Union.

Look at Hitlers RETARDED decision to split his force and send half of them to Stalingrad, instead of a linear conquest which would allow them to maintain numerical advantages. He could have secured the oil supplies first, then advanced all to Stalingrad and secured the river. The oil supplies would then be behind his lines and so those troops could go to Stalingrad simultaneous. This was of course, the deciding factor. He could have won in Stalingrad, and the Soviets wouldn't have ever made it anywhere near the Reichsteig.

There's many more examples.

 

You misunderstand me. Military decisions of the kind you highlighted can clearly be seen in hindsight as retarded or whatever although they were highly contested at the time. I'm talking about something different. It is simply nonsensical for Assad to have used chemical weapons in the clear knowledge that such use would be widely accepted to be self-inflicted suicide.

 

A defoliant with carcenogenic properties that weren't discovered until after its wide spread use.

keep reaching.

 

Oh, ok, so that just used them for fun. Your semantic wriggling is, frankly, disturbing.