goemaw.com
General Discussion => The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit => Topic started by: ednksu on December 05, 2012, 09:19:44 PM
-
http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/12/05/15706380-syria-loads-chemical-weapons-into-bombs-military-awaits-assads-order?lite
The Syrian military is prepared to use chemical weapons against its own people and is awaiting final orders from President Bashar Assad, U.S. officials told NBC News on Wednesday.
Andrea Mitchell, Robert Windrem, Courtney Kube and Catherine Chomiak of NBC News contributed to this report. Follow M. Alex Johnson on Twitter and Facebook.
The military has loaded the precursor chemicals for sarin, a deadly nerve gas, into aerial bombs that could be dropped onto the Syrian people from dozens of fighter-bombers, the officials said.
As recently as Tuesday, officials had said there was as yet no evidence that the process of mixing the "precursor" chemicals had begun. But Wednesday, they said their worst fears had been confirmed: The nerve agents were locked and loaded inside the bombs.
Sarin is an extraordinarily lethal agent. Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's forces killed 5,000 Kurds with a single sarin attack on Halabja in 1988.
U.S. officials stressed that as of now, the sarin bombs hadn't been loaded onto planes and that Assad hadn't issued a final order to use them. But if he does, one of the officials said, "there's little the outside world can do to stop it."
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton reiterated U.S. warnings to Assad not to use chemical weapons, saying he would be crossing "a red line" if he did so.
Speaking Wednesday at NATO headquarters in Brussels, Clinton said the Syrian government was on the brink of collapse, raising the prospect that "an increasingly desperate Assad regime" might turn to chemical weapons or that the banned weapons could fall into other hands.
Kevin Lamarque / AFP - Getty Images
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, speaking Wednesday at NATO headquarters in Brussels, said the fall of Syrian President Bashar Assad's government was "inevitable."
"Ultimately, what we should be thinking about is a political transition in Syria and one that should start as soon as possible," Clinton said. "We believe their fall is inevitable. It is just a question of how many people have to die before that occurs."
Aides told NBC News that Clinton was expected next week to officially recognize the main opposition movement, the National Coalition of Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces, with which she is scheduled to meet in Morocco. Britain, France, Turkey and some key Arab leaders have already recognized the opposition.
Fighting intensified Wednesday in the 21-month civil war, which has left 40,000 people dead. The U.N. withdrew its personnel from Damascus, saying conditions were too dangerous.
The government said this week that it wouldn't use chemical weapons on its own people after President Barack Obama warned that doing so would be "totally unacceptable."
But U.S. officials said this week that the government had ordered its Chemical Weapons Corps to "be prepared," which Washington interpreted as a directive to begin bringing together the components needed to weaponize Syria's chemical stockpiles.
That process would involve mixing "precursor" chemicals for the deadly nerve gas sarin, which could be used in artillery shells, U.S. officials told NBC News, stressing that there was no evidence that process had as yet begun.
Watch World News videos on NBCNews.com
U.S. officials had long believed that the Syrian government was stockpiling the banned chemical weapons before it acknowledged possessing them this summer.
NBC News reported in July that U.S. intelligence agencies believed that in addition to sarin, Syria had access to tabun, a chemical nerve agent, as well as traditional chemical weapons like mustard gas and hydrogen cyanide.
Officials told NBC News at the time that the Syrian government was moving the outlawed weapons around the country, leaving foreign intelligence agencies unsure where they might end up.
Syria is one of only seven nations that hasn't ratified the 1992 Chemical Weapons Convention, the arms control agreement that outlaws the production, stockpiling and use of such weapons.
Bombshells filled with chemicals can be carried by Syrian Air Force fighter-bombers, in particular Sukhoi-22/20, MiG-23 and Sukhoi-24 aircraft. In addition, some reports indicate that unguided short-range Frog-7 artillery rockets may be capable of carrying chemical payloads.
In terms of longer-range delivery systems, Syria has a few dozen SS-21 ballistic missiles with a maximum range of 72 miles; 200 Scud-Bs, with a maximum range of 180 miles; and 60 to 120 Scud-Cs, with a maximum range of 300 miles, all of which are mobile and are capable of carrying chemical weapons, according U.S. intelligence officials.
-
dicks.
-
That guy needs death by drone strike
-
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.qkme.me%2F3pdgth.jpg&hash=b70f448c42c5bc808df1e6b5bff647d0d5f26a29)
-
Fire up the war machine baby the Axis of Evil is back
-
Didn't read the post, but great thread title
-
I like how we draw the line at killing your own citizens efficiently.
Hey, hey, Syria! You do that crap one at a time or you don't do it AT ALL!
:sidewinders:
-
I like how we draw the line at killing your own citizens efficiently.
Hey, hey, Syria! You do that crap one at a time or you don't do it AT ALL!
:sidewinders:
40000 is kind of alot.
-
http://www.theatlantic.com/infocus/2013/02/diy-weapons-of-the-syrian-rebels/100461/ (http://www.theatlantic.com/infocus/2013/02/diy-weapons-of-the-syrian-rebels/100461/)
can someone explain to me what is happening in syria?
-
I like how we draw the line at killing your own citizens efficiently.
Hey, hey, Syria! You do that crap one at a time or you don't do it AT ALL!
:sidewinders:
We're sending in Steve Dave's dojo... :runaway:
-
I like how we draw the line at killing your own citizens efficiently.
Hey, hey, Syria! You do that crap one at a time or you don't do it AT ALL!
:sidewinders:
We're sending in Steve Dave's dojo... :runaway:
Yep, SD is a 1 on 1 kind of guy and the Sidewinders are well versed in keeping a line of combatants in orderly single file
-
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/israeli-official-chemical-weapons-syria-18769446
-
I thought Obama told them not to do this. :lol:
-
Welp, looks like we don't need to worry about what we should do against Syria. Israel just threw their hat in the invaders ring.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/05/world/meast/syria-violence/index.html?hpt=hp_t1 (http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/05/world/meast/syria-violence/index.html?hpt=hp_t1)
-
I think the last country I would ever want to eff with would be Israel. I mean they're like a family of zebras that pitched their tent in a lion's den and wake up every day like "rough ridin' BRING IT"
-
I think the last country I would ever want to eff with would be Israel. I mean they're like a family of zebras that pitched their tent in a lion's den and wake up every day like "rough ridin' BRING IT"
If it wasn't for overwhelming US support, Israel would be quite weak
-
I think the last country I would ever want to eff with would be Israel. I mean they're like a family of zebras that pitched their tent in a lion's den and wake up every day like "rough ridin' BRING IT"
If it wasn't for overwhelming US support, Israel would be quite weak
Meh, we haven't always given them overwhelming support, they did just fine defending themselves in the 50's and 60's. We really didn't become their sugar daddy until the 70's and that was gain more influence with them and stop the constant wars between them and the arab's, also gave egypt a ton of money too.
*Just IMO, no research done to back any of this up
-
I think the last country I would ever want to eff with would be Israel. I mean they're like a family of zebras that pitched their tent in a lion's den and wake up every day like "rough ridin' BRING IT"
If it wasn't for overwhelming US support, Israel would be quite weak
Meh, we haven't always given them overwhelming support, they did just fine defending themselves in the 50's and 60's. We really didn't become their sugar daddy until the 70's and that was gain more influence with them and stop the constant wars between them and the arab's, also gave egypt a ton of money too.
*Just IMO, no research done to back any of this up
I bet they weren't fighting in their own tanks back then. They definitely supply their own martial mentality though. I read a story about a Lithuanian born Jew who killed nazis during the war and continued to try to poison them after the war. He said people in Israel still talk about the holocaust every single day.
-
I think the last country I would ever want to eff with would be Israel. I mean they're like a family of zebras that pitched their tent in a lion's den and wake up every day like "rough ridin' BRING IT"
If it wasn't for overwhelming US support, Israel would be quite weak
Meh, we haven't always given them overwhelming support, they did just fine defending themselves in the 50's and 60's. We really didn't become their sugar daddy until the 70's and that was gain more influence with them and stop the constant wars between them and the arab's, also gave egypt a ton of money too.
*Just IMO, no research done to back any of this up
Early on they didn't have as much US support and were still strong. In the Six Day War they kicked some major Egyptian, Jordanian and Syrian ass in less than a week all on their own. A major reason that war was so lopsided is because Israeli airstrikes ambushed and crippled the entire Egyptian Air Force and the majority of their defensive infrastructure, such as SAMs and radars, at the very beginning. Israel's enemies also had very poor military leadership. But if the US stopped all financial, military and political support of Israel today there would not be an Israel 10 years from now. US backing is pretty much all that's keeping enemy nations from attacking.
-
Israel is nuclear right?
-
Israel is nuclear right?
Yep
-
Israel is nuclear right?
Yep
NO!*
*okay they are, but not officially
-
I think the last country I would ever want to eff with would be Israel. I mean they're like a family of zebras that pitched their tent in a lion's den and wake up every day like "rough ridin' BRING IT"
If it wasn't for overwhelming US support, Israel would be quite weak
Meh, we haven't always given them overwhelming support, they did just fine defending themselves in the 50's and 60's. We really didn't become their sugar daddy until the 70's and that was gain more influence with them and stop the constant wars between them and the arab's, also gave egypt a ton of money too.
*Just IMO, no research done to back any of this up
Early on they didn't have as much US support and were still strong. In the Six Day War they kicked some major Egyptian, Jordanian and Syrian ass in less than a week all on their own. A major reason that war was so lopsided is because Israeli airstrikes ambushed and crippled the entire Egyptian Air Force and the majority of their defensive infrastructure, such as SAMs and radars, at the very beginning. Israel's enemies also had very poor military leadership. But if the US stopped all financial, military and political support of Israel today there would not be an Israel 10 years from now. US backing is pretty much all that's keeping enemy nations from attacking.
All I'm saying is they survived the first 20 years without overwhelming US help, if we decided to stop all support of Isreal they would still exist in 10 years and in the future. Despite their size they have the most developed economy and military in the middle east, not to mention nuclear weapons that they would not hesitate to use if they felt their country was on the verge of being wiped out.
-
I think the last country I would ever want to eff with would be Israel. I mean they're like a family of zebras that pitched their tent in a lion's den and wake up every day like "rough ridin' BRING IT"
If it wasn't for overwhelming US support, Israel would be quite weak
Meh, we haven't always given them overwhelming support, they did just fine defending themselves in the 50's and 60's. We really didn't become their sugar daddy until the 70's and that was gain more influence with them and stop the constant wars between them and the arab's, also gave egypt a ton of money too.
*Just IMO, no research done to back any of this up
Early on they didn't have as much US support and were still strong. In the Six Day War they kicked some major Egyptian, Jordanian and Syrian ass in less than a week all on their own. A major reason that war was so lopsided is because Israeli airstrikes ambushed and crippled the entire Egyptian Air Force and the majority of their defensive infrastructure, such as SAMs and radars, at the very beginning. Israel's enemies also had very poor military leadership. But if the US stopped all financial, military and political support of Israel today there would not be an Israel 10 years from now. US backing is pretty much all that's keeping enemy nations from attacking.
All I'm saying is they survived the first 20 years without overwhelming US help, if we decided to stop all support of Isreal they would still exist in 10 years and in the future. Despite their size they have the most developed economy and military in the middle east, not to mention nuclear weapons that they would not hesitate to use if they felt their country was on the verge of being wiped out.
Ummm first 20 years? '48 Arab-Israeli War.
But I agree with the rest.
-
We (the US) should support Israel for their technological contributions alone. I wouldn't be surprised if they cured cancer.
-
Syria does not have the syrianess to match up with us. Bring it on.
-
But if the US stopped all financial, military and political support of Israel today there would not be an Israel 10 years from now.
When people say stuff like this, I can never tell if they're for or against supporting Israel.
-
But if the US stopped all financial, military and political support of Israel today there would not be an Israel 10 years from now.
When people say stuff like this, I can never tell if they're for or against supporting Israel.
I'm against supporting Israel (and most other countries for that matter). They have been around long enough to stand on their own two feet. They don't need Uncle Sam propping them up any longer. I wouldn't be terribly upset if the US went extremely isolationist and stopped all foreign intervention/support unless there was a direct threat to US soil (and by that I mean the 50 states, not the vague "US interests"). Keep a handful of bases in strategic locations in countries we are friendly with in case crap hits the fan and send the remainder of our military home. Let the rest of the world fight their own fights and let them determine the outcome, so long as America isn't threatened. Forcing democracy in areas that aren't used to it is a horrible idea, people won't appreciate or want the same type of government we have unless they are willing to fight and die for it.
Israel was placed in a horrible location. As long as it exists there will be big problems in the Middle East and as long as we support them a lot of countries that are hotbeds for producing terrorists are going to hate us. A Jewish nation should have been placed in Germany or Italy - they lost WWII and wouldn't have been able to do a damn thing about having to surrender some of their land. I understand there were religious motives in Israel's placement, but long-term safety and stability should have taken priority. Perpetual warfare should have been an easily foreseeable outcome when Palestine was displaced for Israel and a Jewish nation was plopped down in the middle of a lot of Muslim countries. If we stopped supporting Israel and they managed to survive on their own, good for them. If not...oh well, it wouldn't be the first country to be conquered. Not meddling in affairs on the other side of the globe that have nothing to do with us would do a lot to reduce the risk of foreign terrorist attacks against the US, and at some point that should be the primary concern over playing world police.
-
But if the US stopped all financial, military and political support of Israel today there would not be an Israel 10 years from now.
When people say stuff like this, I can never tell if they're for or against supporting Israel.
I'm against supporting Israel (and most other countries for that matter). They have been around long enough to stand on their own two feet. They don't need Uncle Sam propping them up any longer. I wouldn't be terribly upset if the US went extremely isolationist and stopped all foreign intervention/support unless there was a direct threat to US soil (and by that I mean the 50 states, not the vague "US interests"). Keep a handful of bases in strategic locations in countries we are friendly with in case crap hits the fan and send the remainder of our military home. Let the rest of the world fight their own fights and let them determine the outcome, so long as America isn't threatened. Forcing democracy in areas that aren't used to it is a horrible idea, people won't appreciate or want the same type of government we have unless they are willing to fight and die for it.
Israel was placed in a horrible location. As long as it exists there will be big problems in the Middle East and as long as we support them a lot of countries that are hotbeds for producing terrorists are going to hate us. A Jewish nation should have been placed in Germany or Italy - they lost WWII and wouldn't have been able to do a damn thing about having to surrender some of their land. I understand there were religious motives in Israel's placement, but long-term safety and stability should have taken priority. Perpetual warfare should have been an easily foreseeable outcome when Palestine was displaced for Israel and a Jewish nation was plopped down in the middle of a lot of Muslim countries. If we stopped supporting Israel and they managed to survive on their own, good for them. If not...oh well, it wouldn't be the first country to be conquered. Not meddling in affairs on the other side of the globe that have nothing to do with us would do a lot to reduce the risk of foreign terrorist attacks against the US, and at some point that should be the primary concern over playing world police.
You, sir, are a rough ridin' moron.
-
But if the US stopped all financial, military and political support of Israel today there would not be an Israel 10 years from now.
When people say stuff like this, I can never tell if they're for or against supporting Israel.
I'm against supporting Israel (and most other countries for that matter). They have been around long enough...
You could have just stopped right there.
-
Great counter-arguments, fellas. You really have convinced me that getting involved in other country's problems halfway across the globe is worth billions of dollars and the loss of American lives while giving terrorists a good reason to target the US.
-
You should read Start-Up Nation.
-
When you're opening gambit is that you support Israel ceasing to exist via violent means, I'm not really interested in further discussion. Still friends, though.
-
When you're opening gambit is that you support Israel ceasing to exist via violent means, I'm not really interested in further discussion. Still friends, though.
Fair enough, I worded it poorly. I'm not for the demise of Israel. I don't support the US supporting Israel so heavily, and if a byproduct of the US not supporting Israel is the demise of Israel so be it. It's my opinion that it is more beneficial for the US to save money and lives and improve relations with countries that are terrorist breeding grounds than it is to back one country so much. It's just my educated guess that Israel wouldn't exist without US support, but 1) I could easily be wrong, I've never claimed to be a psychic and 2) why does it fall on America's shoulders to make sure another country can hold off its enemies? Why is it our responsibility?
This isn't solely an Israel thing or a Jew thing. I'm a big isolationist and I apply this reasoning to all countries that the US supports. It's more beneficial for America to not get involved in affairs between other nations unless there is a direct threat to our country. Tampering with affairs in various Middle East countries is a major reason why the US is targeted by terrorists, and I think it's foolish to propagate that by continuing to back anyone in that area of the world.
-
How many Americans are killed a year by terrorism?
-
Dear WWIII,
What is taking you so long?
Sincerly,
Shacks
-
How many Americans are killed a year by terrorism?
How many freedoms have we lost for the sake of protecting ourselves from terrorism? How many Americans have died fighting other people's wars?
Dear WWIII,
What is taking you so long?
Sincerly,
Shacks
If Middle East countries nuke each other, it only turns into WWIII if countries like America and China and Russia decide to involve themselves. If everyone just sat back and :popcorn: while Middle East countries turn themselves into glass, it ends when they're done nuking each other.
-
But if the US stopped all financial, military and political support of Israel today there would not be an Israel 10 years from now.
When people say stuff like this, I can never tell if they're for or against supporting Israel.
It's a certain level of mystery that keeps the relationship fresh.
-
How many Americans are killed a year by terrorism?
How many freedoms have we lost for the sake of protecting ourselves from terrorism? How many Americans have died fighting other people's wars?
Dear WWIII,
What is taking you so long?
Sincerly,
Shacks
If Middle East countries nuke each other, it only turns into WWIII if countries like America and China and Russia decide to involve themselves. If everyone just sat back and :popcorn: while Middle East countries turn themselves into glass, it ends when they're done nuking each other.
Yeah, I'm totally cool with the countries sitting on over 50% of proven oil reserves turning each other into glass. What could possibly go wrong?
-
When you're opening gambit is that you support Israel ceasing to exist via violent means, I'm not really interested in further discussion. Still friends, though.
The way Israel came into being is bad news. The whole thing on both sides. Why we felt compelled to give it to them after what they had been through, taking away the land of the Palestinians, putting them in the middle of a region that hates them, etc.
But now that we're here and at this point, what are you gonna do? You can't just let them get slaughtered.
-
I don't think "we" "put them there."
-
How many Americans are killed a year by terrorism?
How many freedoms have we lost for the sake of protecting ourselves from terrorism? How many Americans have died fighting other people's wars?
Dear WWIII,
What is taking you so long?
Sincerly,
Shacks
If Middle East countries nuke each other, it only turns into WWIII if countries like America and China and Russia decide to involve themselves. If everyone just sat back and :popcorn: while Middle East countries turn themselves into glass, it ends when they're done nuking each other.
Yeah, I'm totally cool with the countries sitting on over 50% of proven oil reserves turning each other into glass. What could possibly go wrong?
We finally get serious about developing effective alternative energy sources instead of delaying it until we're out of oil. Also, Hiroshima and Nagasaki weren't turned into permanently uninhabitable wastelands after they were bombed.
-
I don't think "we" "put them there."
Yeah, the British decided to replace Palestine with Israel. They should be the ones bearing the military and financial burden of supporting Israel since they wanted to place it in the Middle East instead of a much safer European location.
-
Well there were already a crap ton of Jews there. It's not like the Brits picked a spot on a map and said "okay all you Jews, move right here."
-
You're right, there were some conditions that made Israel's location attractive. But Europe also had a sizable Jewish population and it really should've been obvious that a bunch of Muslim countries just might be aggressive towards a Jewish country that replaced a fellow Muslim nation. What do you think the reaction in America would be if Canada was replaced with a Muslim theocracy and all Canadians were either kicked out or turned into lower class citizens? Whose side do you think we would take?
-
Would you accept Jewish Israelis into the US?
-
I would. The US turned away some Jewish refugees during WWII, and I think that was despicable. Like I said earlier, it's not a Jewish thing. I'm not scattering racial slurs and Holocaust denials in my posts. It's a "don't eff with stuff on the other side of the world that doesn't concern you" thing.
-
Would you accept Jewish Israelis into the US?
Only if they go to Montana/Wyoming/Idaho
-
I would. The US turned away some Jewish refugees during WWII, and I think that was despicable. Like I said earlier, it's not a Jewish thing. I'm not scattering racial slurs and Holocaust denials in my posts. It's a "don't eff with stuff on the other side of the world that doesn't concern you" thing.
Fair enough. FWIW I'd take them all, too.
-
But Europe also had a sizable Jewish population
Google "Dreyfus case."
What do you think the reaction in America would be if Canada was replaced with a Muslim theocracy and all Canadians were either kicked out or turned into lower class citizens? Whose side do you think we would take?
Not comparable. But what if we gave it back to an Eskimo diaspora living in Central America?
-
felix can you give us some thoughts on coverage in the media (from what you've seen in the region) on these airstrikes?
-
http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/08/tech/syria-internet-outage/index.html?hpt=hp_t3 (http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/08/tech/syria-internet-outage/index.html?hpt=hp_t3)
Dear ppl of Syria,
We are on it!*
Sincerely,
The Govt
* by "on it" we mean go eff yourselves and prepare to die
-
But Europe also had a sizable Jewish population
Google "Dreyfus case."
Jews have encountered anti-Semitism everywhere they have lived, don't see how that one case means Germany or Italy wouldn't have been a suitable location for a Jewish nation
-
But Europe also had a sizable Jewish population
Google "Dreyfus case."
Jews have encountered anti-Semitism everywhere they have lived, don't see how that one case means Germany or Italy wouldn't have been a suitable location for a Jewish nation
Short version of Jewish sentiment at the time: "if we can't get a fair shake in France, we can't get a fair shake anywhere".
Everyone else (including Germany or Italy; there's the lol you wanted) agreed.
-
But Europe also had a sizable Jewish population
Google "Dreyfus case."
Jews have encountered anti-Semitism everywhere they have lived
In retrospect, your first sentence was a much more succinct way to explain the motivation for a "Jewish homeland".
-
Germany or Italy wouldn't have been able to do anything about losing part of their land to a Jewish nation. They were effectively neutered following WWII. Germany was split in half by the US and Russia and they didn't fight that. Jews were persecuted in Germany before and during the war, but once Germans no longer had a government trying to actively exterminate Jews it was an alright place for them to live. I'm not saying it would have been all cupcakes and lollipops but come on, a Jewish nation located in Europe wouldn't be nearly as controversial or violent as replacing Palestine with Israel.
-
But Europe also had a sizable Jewish population
Google "Dreyfus case."
Jews have encountered anti-Semitism everywhere they have lived
In retrospect, your first sentence was a much more succinct way to explain the motivation for a "Jewish homeland".
I don't disagree with the motivation/necessity for a Jewish homeland, it's the location of it and American support that I'm opposed to
-
Germany or Italy wouldn't have been able to do anything about losing part of their land to a Jewish nation. They were effectively neutered following WWII. Germany was split in half by the US and Russia and they didn't fight that. Jews were persecuted in Germany before and during the war, but once Germans no longer had a government trying to actively exterminate Jews it was an alright place for them to live. I'm not saying it would have been all cupcakes and lollipops but come on, a Jewish nation located in Europe wouldn't be nearly as controversial or violent as replacing Palestine with Israel.
The thing about anti-semitism is that it has a tendency to follow Jews around. Look up anti-semitism in the Arab world before the 20th century.
-
Germany or Italy wouldn't have been able to do anything about losing part of their land to a Jewish nation. They were effectively neutered following WWII. Germany was split in half by the US and Russia and they didn't fight that. Jews were persecuted in Germany before and during the war, but once Germans no longer had a government trying to actively exterminate Jews it was an alright place for them to live. I'm not saying it would have been all cupcakes and lollipops but come on, a Jewish nation located in Europe wouldn't be nearly as controversial or violent as replacing Palestine with Israel.
Yeah, there were already quite a few places in Germany full of Jews (and a few guards). Could have put them there.
-
Russia mixed with Obama is a terrible combo for all people living in conflict. One is an overt instigator, they other a finicky moron.
-
felix can you give us some thoughts on coverage in the media (from what you've seen in the region) on these airstrikes?
It's about what you'd expect. Syria doesn't have oil, so we don't really care except that it may endanger Israel so we support their air strikes meanwhile we all sit back and count our money and wait for Assad to finally fall while more innocent brown people suffer and die.
-
Here's some excerpts from the "Angry Arab" interviewing himself about Syria. Just about sums it up:
AA: How is the conflict likely to be resolved?
AA: This will ultimately end in a best case scenario for the Zionist entity, and in fact all the details have been decided a long time ago. My sources tell me that even the location of the Zionist embassy in Damascus has been decided and a Syrian businessman will offer it to them free of charge. Thanks Laila.
AA: Astounding. This is the first time I hear this. So the uprising was engineered by outside forces to create a situation that is favourable to the Zionist entity.
AA: Fascinating. It’s always a learning experience with you. So what about the role of the Western mainstream media which as we both know is one homogeneous body and there’s no point talking about specific newspapers or writers?
AA: Of course, the Western mainstream media is the propaganda arm of Western governments and we saw this from day one in Syria.
AA: And what about the Western journalists that are reporting from the ground in Syria? Sometimes it sounds like you think you know better than them?
AA: My observation of the events on the ground isn’t polluted by proximity like most of them.
-
LOL, where's the complete interview? That seems fantastic.
-
LOL, where's the complete interview? That seems fantastic.
I love this guy:
http://www.karlremarks.com/2013/05/the-angry-arab-interviews-himself-about.html
-
Syrian guy eats the heart of a dead Assad soldier: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z48Ji7COV3Y&feature=youtube_gdata_player (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z48Ji7COV3Y&feature=youtube_gdata_player)
-
Syrian guy eats the heart of a dead Assad soldier: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z48Ji7COV3Y&feature=youtube_gdata_player (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z48Ji7COV3Y&feature=youtube_gdata_player)
liveleak links?
-
Syrian guy eats the heart of a dead Assad soldier: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z48Ji7COV3Y&feature=youtube_gdata_player (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z48Ji7COV3Y&feature=youtube_gdata_player)
liveleak links?
Per yoosh, goEMAW was waaaaay out in front of the "breaking (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22519770)" story:
14 May 2013 Last updated at 03:07 ET
Outrage at Syrian rebel shown 'eating soldier's heart'
A video which appears to show a Syrian rebel taking a bite from the heart of a dead soldier has brought strong condemnation.
US-based Human Rights Watch identified the rebel as Abu Sakkar, a well-known insurgent from the city of Homs, and said his actions were a war crime.
The main Syrian opposition coalition said he would be put on trial.
The video, which cannot be independently authenticated, seems to show him cutting out the heart.
"I swear to God we will eat your hearts and your livers, you soldiers of Bashar the dog," the man says referring to President Barash al-Assad as he stands over the soldier's corpse.
-
seems weird that something you do to a dead body is a war crime
-
Dead bodies. Can't pee on 'em, can't eat 'em. Amirite, guys? Pussification of America.
-
seems weird that something you do to a dead body is a war crime
HE CUT OUT HIS HEART AND ATE IT
I put that it big caps because I thought maybe you missed it.
-
a Jewish nation located in Europe wouldn't be nearly as controversial or violent as replacing Palestine with Israel.
"Palestine" was not "replaced" with Israel. "Palestine" was not a sovereign nation, nor was it the size and shape of modern-day Israel. Pre-WWII, it was a territory controlled by the British and was populated by Jews and Arabs. There were a lot of Jews already living there and, of course, the Jews have deep historical roots to the region. In 1936, in response to the growing conflict between the Jews and Arabs, the British decided to partition Palestine, telling the Jews to live in the western portion, and the Arabs to live in the eastern portion. Ultimately, the western portion (roughly) became Israel, and the eastern portion became Jordan.
-
I bet the soldier who ate the other guy's heart ended up with a tummy ache and feels bad about it now.
-
Maybe check dates
-
seems weird that something you do to a dead body is a war crime
HE CUT OUT HIS HEART AND ATE IT
I put that it big caps because I thought maybe you missed it.
yeah, I mean it's pretty rough ridin' wild, but insignificant (imo) compared to living people getting killed.
-
Well, 80k have died. Just one had his heart cut out.
-
Is this the main Syria thread? I don't know. But I need someplace to put this picture of an ISIS muji with a kitten:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BjaC06AIYAAAaI2.jpg)
-
probably cut the kittens head off screaming allllllllaaaaah hu akbar
-
The picture has triggered a huge debate over whether Mohamed liked cats. Not kidding.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
The picture has triggered a huge debate over whether Mohamed liked cats. Not kidding.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I would not want a kitten around a live grenade. At least not around both me and a live grenade
-
I thought we we're going to bomb Syria. What happened?
-
Israel is doing it
-
So I think that dude is rocking a Steyr AUG....which is a very very nice, not cheap at all, Austrian bullpup weapon. Definitely not your average haji with an AK.
-
Also, OBAMA!'s failed diplomacy has led the Syrians to give up half of their chem weapons at this point. Total, behind schedule by about a week or two. Guys at this rate, Syria will give up the biggest real power playing card a month behind schedule. :horrorsurprise:
-
Also, OBAMA!'s failed diplomacy has led the Syrians to give up half of their chem weapons at this point. Total, behind schedule by about a week or two. Guys at this rate, Syria will give up the biggest real power playing card a month behind schedule. :horrorsurprise:
Oh yeah, they're turning them over to our pal Putin. What a plan....
-
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.memegenerator.net%2Finstances%2F500x%2F47623832.jpg&hash=32019a9a2669df264736cf9f73ff3476d84c8078)
-
So I think that dude is rocking a Steyr AUG....which is a very very nice, not cheap at all, Austrian bullpup weapon. Definitely not your average haji with an AK.
Only the best for Western Intelligence (via Qatar/SA) backed terrorists.
I don't see that, I'm guessing its from somewhere else. I mean the US gave everyone AKs or M16 variants back in the day.
-
Do you think he gave that kitten an adorable name? Like Abu Patches or Bin Kitten or Socks? I bet he did. :D
-
Al-Qitten
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Al hadrameowt
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Abdullah Paw-Zam
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Al-Zawafurry
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Mr. Halal Pickles
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Al-Meow Kittenazi
-
Meow Jazeera
-
Tuna Akbar
-
Meowhammad
-
Purrxes
-
Purrxes
These are all great, but I lost it with Purrxes. So CUTE!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
so what was the consensus on whether or not Muhammed liked cats?
-
so what was the consensus on whether or not Muhammed liked cats?
It was not Mohamed, but rather one of the companions. And it was a Hadith rather than a Sura, so everyone politely agreed to disagree, as is their custom.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
But to clarify, everyone agreed that Mohamed was almost certainly respectful, if not overly affectionate, to cats.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
so what was the consensus on whether or not Muhammed liked cats?
It was not Mohamed, but rather one of the companions. And it was a Hadith rather than a Sura, so everyone politely agreed to disagree, as is their custom.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If there was an Egyption Seinfeld, this would have been an episode.
-
Someday, I'll work it into the "Embassy Cairo" sitcom.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
In my best SD impression -
So, a NATO country planning a false-flag attack... no big deal. (can't translate, but audio starts at about :30)
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-03-27/here-youtube-false-flag-attack-syria-clip-erdogan-wanted-banned
I think it is safe to say that some major shizz is going down in the next couple of years, if not sooner. It really is too bad that power hungry assholes can't let us all get along (channeling Rodney King). I've been lucky to be behind the scenes at some major international sporting events, and have seen Iranian athletes walking and chatting with Americans, and so on. Sport can save the world, but politics and money-power stand in the way.
-
In my best SD impression
the eff
-
In my best SD impression
the eff
*dax
-
The youngsters can't tell dax and SD apart! :lol:
LOL!
-
Son, I wish I was young.
-
In my best SD impression -
So, a NATO country planning a false-flag attack... no big deal. (can't translate, but audio starts at about :30)
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-03-27/here-youtube-false-flag-attack-syria-clip-erdogan-wanted-banned
I think it is safe to say that some major shizz is going down in the next couple of years, if not sooner. It really is too bad that power hungry assholes can't let us all get along (channeling Rodney King). I've been lucky to be behind the scenes at some major international sporting events, and have seen Iranian athletes walking and chatting with Americans, and so on. Sport can save the world, but politics and money-power stand in the way.
Good find, and of course we're getting virtually no coverage that I've seen of this here.
But many can play that game, and Putin stands a good chance of doing the same.
BBC was pumping this hard, American media is usually a day or two behind them on international stories like this, so probably early next week.
-
More Kittens! This time from a different militant Islamic group requesting ISIS release two journalists or something who knows why in the hell are their kittens?!?!
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bj9e0haCEAAVFvM.jpg)
-
If you only follow one potentially parody Syrian jihadi Twitter account, it should be this one:
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Here's the American who joined the Syrian jihadis (apparently, you get a kitten with membership):
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BotC6gKCMAAuwiI.jpg)
-
I think it's really suspicious how the Western media is completely ignoring the Syrian jihadis with kittens story. Are we providing the kittens? Maybe. Maybe.
-
Here's the American who joined the Syrian jihadis (apparently, you get a kitten with membership):
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BotC6gKCMAAuwiI.jpg)
looks like a Gareth. Go get'em, Gareth!
-
Ha ha
-
I love this guy. This is regarding the ummah's (Islamic world's) response to those lukewarm about the Syrian jihad.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
This is Zahran Alloush. He leads the the Islamic Front and fights against the extremists formerly known as ISIS. Also, he uses a Hello Kitty notebook.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
ISIL/ISIS/DAESH now offers a bus tour of the caliphate for honeymooning jihadis: http://english.alarabiya.net/en/variety/2014/07/23/ISIS-takes-jihadists-on-honeymoon-in-Iraq-and-Syria.html
-
According to a Coptic friend, this is the Caliph version of the pope-mobile. I have no reason to believe it's true except that I really want to:
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Death to America, except for the people who make 22's, paint Cali Style and build custom extended SUV's.
-
It took over a month and a few thousand decapitations, but our dithering weakling has finally decided to start bombing ISIS.
Iraq: One of Obama's Greatest Achievements -Joe Biden
-
Idea: new pit thread to keep track of the places we should bomb, keep track of if they have been bombed, why we should/ have bomb(ed) them, and when so that we can be sure to not miss an oppy. Seems like there are a lot of possible bombable offenses in the world and I don't think we, as the worlds policeman, should lose track.
-
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/syria-sarin-gas-attack-in-2013-60-minutes/
:frown:
-
Mr. Trump chose the right response: a limited missile strike against the Syrian air base that, according to American intelligence, had launched the vicious gas attack. This resonated well nearly everywhere. At home, it won approval from Jacksonians and others who want a strong president. The strikes vindicated America’s prestige and dealt a clear setback to those who seek to humiliate or marginalize the U.S. But no ground troops were involved and Mr. Trump made no move toward long-term counterinsurgency or nation-building, the type of campaign that many Americans, his base in particular, have learned to view skeptically.
Internationally, the strike was also popular. Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, putting awkward phone calls behind him, spoke up forthrightly in Mr. Trump’s support. So did Canada’s Justin Trudeau, not usually considered a member of the Trump Fan Club, and Germany’s foreign minister, a Social Democrat whose party has been among the most critical of past American military action.
:emawkid:
-
:sdeek:
https://twitter.com/WSJ/status/887839997570813952
-
Wow.
-
The "freedom fighters" were getting paid a salary by the CIA.