Syria

texan

Well-Known Member
Still a sizable difference between missile strikes and full scale invasion. If such an invasion were being discussed, you would see the anti war protesters.
I am neutral or prayerful in this one.

But in all fairness, Reagan bombed Gaddafi to get his attention without much consultation.

A move, I approved of by the way.
 

roadrunner2012

Four hours in the mod queue for a news link
Troll
rr,

You obviously have not read --for years --my posts on these issues --not into "nation building" nor being the policeman of the world.

For the thousand time ---bring ALL troops home from around the world --Japan and Germany included.

Secure our borders, have a U.S. National response team --to rebuild our cities, towns and bridges when Natural disasters occur--New Orleans and the Jersey shore come to mind.

Develop state of the art defensive weapons --such as missle defense --and be prepared to use whatever force is necessary to defend our National security.

Let the middle east sort out their own problems.:wink2:

You left out the part about bashing Obama.
 

moreluck

golden ticket member
rr,

You obviously have not read --for years --my posts on these issues --not into "nation building" nor being the policeman of the world.

For the thousand time ---bring ALL troops home from around the world --Japan and Germany included.

Secure our borders, have a U.S. National response team --to rebuild our cities, towns and bridges when Natural disasters occur--New Orleans and the Jersey shore come to mind.

Develop state of the art defensive weapons --such as missle defense --and be prepared to use whatever force is necessary to defend our National security.

Let the middle east sort out their own problems.:wink2:
Allah Snackbar can help them solve their problems too !!
 

The Other Side

Well-Known Troll
Troll
All the liberals are now crying about gassing civilians --but it was o/k when Saddam gassed the Kurds !!!! Code Pink --My a-- !!!

Ronald Reagan was also cool with gassing the Kurds, since he sent Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney there to provide the chemical weapons Saddam used to gas the kurds in the first place.

What action did Ronald Reagan take when this happened on his watch? Oh yeah, nothing but send in the shell executives to start making deals for the oil in the northern desert of Iraq.

Get serious bro.

There was plenty of outrage against Reagan and his administration for providing chemical weapons to saddam to use against the iranians and ultimately, the kurds.

You were either out of touch with reality at the time, or just blind to the reality of events as they unfolded.

The USA is in a bad position with Syria. First, for you war mongers, attacking Syria would cause the price of oil to spike to $200 per barrel in a heartbeat and you would be paying 5 bucks a gallon at the pumps. The Iranians and Russians would shut down the metiterranian ocean and this would ultimately cause a military conflict with the USA. That would put us in a three way fight.

The US economy would crash and the banks would begin to fail.

Is the gassing horrible? Yes it is. What do we believe we can accomplish by attacking them?

Do we need another few years of patting ourselves on the back for being a superpower? There is no winning with syria.

The people either need to overthrown Assaad or STFU.

Russia and Iran are supplying arms ( as we are) and this proxy war will only get worse for everyone.

The price of oil has already spiked 10 dollars a barrel because of egypts unrest, and Syria will just send it over the edge. Russia could attack Saudi Arabia and really send the markets crashing.

So as you are bashing President Obama, remember, you will destroy your own country with your words and support for military action.

You havent learned your lessons from BUSH and his useless 2 wars.

Maybe a third time will be a charm.

Peace

TOS
 

afterthought

Well-Known Member
US preps military rebuke to Syria chemical weapons - YouTube

The drums are beating louder.

Sorry for posting Maddow, but worth watching just this once ;)
MSNBC Ratings Down Double Digits From a Year Ago

MSNBC’s ratings tumble continued with a poor August showing, with some programs seeing nearly a 50-percent drop in
viewership from a year ago, TV Newser reports.

Among the lowlights were the worst showings yet by its leading program The Rachel Maddow Show, with 43 percent and
47 percent drops in total viewers and the 25-54 demographic, respectively, and 40- and 42-percent drops in the same
areas for The Last Word With Lawrence O’Donnell.
MSNBC Ratings Down Double Digits From a Year Ago | Washington Free Beacon
 

afterthought

Well-Known Member
MSNBC Ratings Down Double Digits From a Year Ago

MSNBC’s ratings tumble continued with a poor August showing, with some programs seeing nearly a 50-percent drop in
viewership from a year ago, TV Newser reports.

Among the lowlights were the worst showings yet by its leading program The Rachel Maddow Show, with 43 percent and
47 percent drops in total viewers and the 25-54 demographic, respectively, and 40- and 42-percent drops in the same
areas for The Last Word With Lawrence O’Donnell.
MSNBC Ratings Down Double Digits From a Year Ago | Washington Free Beacon

But that is ok. She and MSNBC are doing better than this new highly publicized news show:
Al Jazeera America launched last week, and we have the ratings from Nielsen Media Research for its first few days.

Not surprisingly given the low-rated channel it replaced (Current TV), and the fact that it lost a few million homes
from AT&T before launch (it is currently in just over 40 million homes), AJAM’s launch ratings
were pretty low by traditional cable news standards.
Al Jazeera America Launch Ratings - TVNewser
 

roadrunner2012

Four hours in the mod queue for a news link
Troll
What do ratings have to do with that particular segment? It is well worth watching, and the interview with Steve Clemons is illuminating.
 

roadrunner2012

Four hours in the mod queue for a news link
Troll

Just tossing out this comment I saw, not vouching for the source:

Why "intercepted communications" cannot be trusted:

"A Trojan was a special communication device that could be planted by naval commandos deep inside enemy territory. The device would act as a relay station for misleading transmissions made by the disinformation unit in the Mossad, called LAP, and intended to be received by American and British listening stations. Originating from an IDF navy ship out at sea, the prerecorded digital transmissions could be picked up only by the Trojan. The device would then rebroadcast the transmission on another frequency, one used for official business in the enemy country, at which point the transmission would finally be picked up by American ears in Britain.The listeners would have no doubt they had intercepted a genuine communication, hence the name Trojan, reminiscent of the mythical Trojan horse. Further, the content of the messages, once deciphered, would confirm information from other intelligence sources, namely the Mossad. The only catch was that the Trojan itself would have to be located as close as possible to the normal origin of such transmissions, because of the sophisticated methods of triangulation the Americans and others would use to verify the source."
From: "By way of deception" by Victor Ostrovsky
 

wkmac

Well-Known Member
What do ratings have to do with that particular segment? It is well worth watching, and the interview with Steve Clemons is illuminating.

I agree the Maddow piece is worth watching and also agree the red herring of discussing the TV ratings issue are to be kind, irrelevant.

That said, as I watched Maddow in her opening remarks describe how armies send their troops into suicidal situations, does not all warfare on some degree qualify? We celebrate the loss of life on Omaha Beach from storming the German positions but for some, it was suicide. Large numbers of rushing forces increase the odds of more making it but the reality is those war planners and war leaders knew for some it was a death sentence. Doesn't mean there are not times and causes worth facing the potential of losing one's life for but let's not stand here and say it's always "them" who instill the "mass suicide" mindset into "their" people for political, cultural or nation state causes.

And to Kerry's words about the tragic loss of life from these attacks. Agree, it is tragic, regardless who did it and it's true both sides had the capacity to do this not to mention other outside parties in the region with strong reasons of self interest to do so. Kerry goes on to rightfully mourn the loss of life among children and to appear to hold a vastly higher moral ground yet using the means of a power or any power to inflict such harm, especially on children, do we dare stand here and point the boney finger of condemnation of the killers of these children and other innocents when, may I now direct your attention to one Sec. of State Albright, que the tape:

Madeleine Albright Defends Mass-Murder of iraqi Children (500,000 Children dead) - YouTube

We didn't use chemical weapons, we used economic weapons and yet those children like their counterparts in Syria died just the same. I find the moral outrage of our nation state actors contemptible, hypocritical and morally repulsive. I've no doubt the PR machine of both the so-called statist left and statist right will be afoot in the coming days beating the drums of war to once again sacrifice the innocent to the elite ruling class whom otherwise we can call Moloch. Like the ancient practice, the outcome is still the same.
 

wkmac

Well-Known Member
Just tossing out this comment I saw, not vouching for the source:

Why "intercepted communications" cannot be trusted:

"A Trojan was a special communication device that could be planted by naval commandos deep inside enemy territory. The device would act as a relay station for misleading transmissions made by the disinformation unit in the Mossad, called LAP, and intended to be received by American and British listening stations. Originating from an IDF navy ship out at sea, the prerecorded digital transmissions could be picked up only by the Trojan. The device would then rebroadcast the transmission on another frequency, one used for official business in the enemy country, at which point the transmission would finally be picked up by American ears in Britain.The listeners would have no doubt they had intercepted a genuine communication, hence the name Trojan, reminiscent of the mythical Trojan horse. Further, the content of the messages, once deciphered, would confirm information from other intelligence sources, namely the Mossad. The only catch was that the Trojan itself would have to be located as close as possible to the normal origin of such transmissions, because of the sophisticated methods of triangulation the Americans and others would use to verify the source."
From: "By way of deception" by Victor Ostrovsky

Don't disagree. In fact, it's a valid concern and tip of the hat for posting it. But then if intercepted sources can't be trusted and our own information is mostly based on these intercepted sources.......

Just saying.

And do we rare risk being labeled anti-semitic by suggesting Israel has a vested and self serving interest here?

Hell, I've been called worse so knock yourself out. But then the State of Israel is anti-semitic too so there you go!
 
Top