Syria - Iraq 2.0?
Oh Right. It's more like when we overthrew Mossadegh. I think I follow.
ajc said:
No, like the 50 + Tomahawk Missiles fired into Syria tonight...
when the world is what it is, the case can sometimes be made that the task of saving lives might require some to be lost first.
Anyway - yes, we do like killing people. Watch Trump's approval rating go up. weeeeeee!
terp said:
I might add for a supposedly freedom loving country, we sure do like killing people.
There are a lot of assumptions in the below statement. They are, for the most part, dubious.
Anyhoo, I was inspired to donate to Antiwar.com in what I'm sure is a futile gesture. What can I say. I'm ******* pissed. I do urge those who oppose these sorts of actions to support Antiwar.com or any other cause that fights against war and the associated propaganda.
drummerboy said:
when the world is what it is, the case can sometimes be made that the task of saving lives might require some to be lost first.
Anyway - yes, we do like killing people. Watch Trump's approval rating go up. weeeeeee!
terp said:
I might add for a supposedly freedom loving country, we sure do like killing people.
The world is the way it is because of the weakness of the last administration; and now its going to change... hopefully for the better.
drummerboy said:
when the world is what it is, the case can sometimes be made that the task of saving lives might require some to be lost first.
Anyway - yes, we do like killing people. Watch Trump's approval rating go up. weeeeeee!
terp said:
I might add for a supposedly freedom loving country, we sure do like killing people.
WAT?
ajc said:
The world is the way it is because of the weakness of the last administration; and now its going to change... hopefully for the better.
drummerboy said:
when the world is what it is, the case can sometimes be made that the task of saving lives might require some to be lost first.
Anyway - yes, we do like killing people. Watch Trump's approval rating go up. weeeeeee!
terp said:
I might add for a supposedly freedom loving country, we sure do like killing people.
paulsurovell said:
With regard to sarin, in the link to the article you posted there is a rebuttal in the comments section by an individual who identifies as a "CBRN (Chemical Biological Radiological Nuclear) professional:"
Paveway IV - April 5, 2017
“…To date, all of the nerve agents used in the Syrian conflict have been binary chemical warfare agents…”Curious how you’re so sure about this, Dan. Do you know personally if the Jobar FSA Sarin landmines that sickened/killed SAA troops were binary? How about the Sarin rockets in Kahn al-Assal the rebels used on the SAA? I mean, they certainly could have been, but the OPCW kind of ignored those, didn’t it? Don’t you mean to say that all the UN-destroyed Syrian stockpile, specifically, was binary?And by ‘all’, you mean all one – Sarin. I have not heard any reports or confirmation of VX or any other nerve agent used in Syria (besides speculation), unless you know something we don’t. And we actually have no idea if Sarin was responsible for the deaths and injuries in Khan Sheikhoun. Once again (like East Ghouta) there seem to be many kinds of injuries and symptoms inconsistent with those know to accompany Sarin. Videos emphasize the small number of casualties exhibiting such symptoms, but they seem to be a remarkably small percentage overall. Nonetheless, I see Turkish Civil Defense chem teams showed up surprisingly early, almost like they expected the attack. I’m sure we’ll be presented with their ‘proof’ implicating Assad any time now.“…Even assuming that large quantities of both Sarin precursors were located in the same part of the same warehouse (a practice that seems odd)…”Odd for head-choppers? I didn’t know they were such safety nuts! They didn’t seem to have many worries about precursors close to each other in Jobar. I’m going out on a limb and assuming “in the same tunnel” qualifies as “close to each other”. The SAA seemed suitably terrified to find that – well, the ones that didn’t die and actually made it out of the tunnel.“…an air-strike is not going to cause the production of large quantities of Sarin.”Not large quantities, but the potential for *some*. And you surely know the consequences of methylphosphonyl DF exposure, right? Providing the head-choppers were making Sarin, which we don’t really know. Could have been some other nasty CW agent – not sure what their Turkish suppliers are sending over nowadays. There is no need to presume anything was mixed – the precursors (if there were any) are plenty toxic in their own right.“…The US and USSR had devoted a huge effort to finding a way out of this problem…”Binding the HF wasn’t the problem. It was removing the residual bound fluoride so the mixture was as pure as possible. A consideration for self-life and the small quantity a shell/rocket would hold. Head-choppers certainly wouldn’t have the same worries for a crude bomb or land mine. NATO, Israel and the USSR went to great effort to produce unary Sarin as pure as possible or binary Sarin as concentrated as possible through whatever method. That’s an entirely different engineering problem than just producing a sufficiently neutralized short shelf-life product.“…Dropping a bomb on the binary components does not actually provide the correct mechanism for making the nerve agent. It is an infantile argument…”Well, it’s a stretch, but once again you’re assuming binary Sarin. We have no idea at this point. But the mere suggestion of binary components mixing when the warehouse is bombed: ‘infantile’? What kind of CBRN snobbery is that?“…Another issue is that, if the Syrian regime actually did believe that the warehouse stored chemical warfare agents, then striking it deliberately was an act of chemical warfare by proxy…”Whaaa..? Didn’t you just say that the argument was infantile? And Russia is guilty, not your head-chopper pals? If you remember, there were people salivating at the though of the US unloading a few hundred cruise missiles at Assad’s CW facilities a while back. Would that have constituted CW use by proxy?“…Are we to seriously believe that one of the rebel factions has expended the vast sums of money and developed this industrial base, somehow not noticed to date and not molested by attack?…”Whoa… you led us down the path of “it must be binary Sarin” and now you’re saying that it necessarily must have been home-brewed by the head-choppers? No, sorry – it doesn’t work like that. Head-chopper-backers are MUCH more likely to have supplied the precursors, binary components or whatever. The head-choppers were packaging it in the warehouse, not manufacturing it from scratch by any stretch of the imagination. Why that argument is… oh, never mind.
Just responding to this, even though more important developments have taken place in the interim. That being said -
Really, the identified author who set forth the explanation for debunking the Russian claims that the gas was in a rebel warehouse that was blown up, is a recognized Chemical Biological Radiological Nuclear professional. The anonymous commenter, Mr. "Paveway IV", you decided to rely on (whose comment is included in the excerpt from your long post), may or may not be. Also, while you selected that comment, there are others which do a pretty good job of picking apart his objections to the identified author's points. Also, the commenter you rely on seems more interested in trolling (example of his argument: "And Russia is guilty, not your head-chopper pals?") than in intelligent discussion. I'm surprised you would endorse him as representing your argument.
terp said:
WAT?
ajc said:
The world is the way it is because of the weakness of the last administration; and now its going to change... hopefully for the better.
drummerboy said:
when the world is what it is, the case can sometimes be made that the task of saving lives might require some to be lost first.
Anyway - yes, we do like killing people. Watch Trump's approval rating go up. weeeeeee!
terp said:
I might add for a supposedly freedom loving country, we sure do like killing people.
Obama was supposed to blow up all the brown people, not just a few hundred thousand. Therefore it's up to Trump to blow up all the brown people and that will MAGA.
South_Mountaineer said:
paulsurovell said:
With regard to sarin, in the link to the article you posted there is a rebuttal in the comments section by an individual who identifies as a "CBRN (Chemical Biological Radiological Nuclear) professional:"
Paveway IV - April 5, 2017
“…To date, all of the nerve agents used in the Syrian conflict have been binary chemical warfare agents…”Curious how you’re so sure about this, Dan. Do you know personally if the Jobar FSA Sarin landmines that sickened/killed SAA troops were binary? How about the Sarin rockets in Kahn al-Assal the rebels used on the SAA? I mean, they certainly could have been, but the OPCW kind of ignored those, didn’t it? Don’t you mean to say that all the UN-destroyed Syrian stockpile, specifically, was binary?And by ‘all’, you mean all one – Sarin. I have not heard any reports or confirmation of VX or any other nerve agent used in Syria (besides speculation), unless you know something we don’t. And we actually have no idea if Sarin was responsible for the deaths and injuries in Khan Sheikhoun. Once again (like East Ghouta) there seem to be many kinds of injuries and symptoms inconsistent with those know to accompany Sarin. Videos emphasize the small number of casualties exhibiting such symptoms, but they seem to be a remarkably small percentage overall. Nonetheless, I see Turkish Civil Defense chem teams showed up surprisingly early, almost like they expected the attack. I’m sure we’ll be presented with their ‘proof’ implicating Assad any time now.“…Even assuming that large quantities of both Sarin precursors were located in the same part of the same warehouse (a practice that seems odd)…”Odd for head-choppers? I didn’t know they were such safety nuts! They didn’t seem to have many worries about precursors close to each other in Jobar. I’m going out on a limb and assuming “in the same tunnel” qualifies as “close to each other”. The SAA seemed suitably terrified to find that – well, the ones that didn’t die and actually made it out of the tunnel.“…an air-strike is not going to cause the production of large quantities of Sarin.”Not large quantities, but the potential for *some*. And you surely know the consequences of methylphosphonyl DF exposure, right? Providing the head-choppers were making Sarin, which we don’t really know. Could have been some other nasty CW agent – not sure what their Turkish suppliers are sending over nowadays. There is no need to presume anything was mixed – the precursors (if there were any) are plenty toxic in their own right.“…The US and USSR had devoted a huge effort to finding a way out of this problem…”Binding the HF wasn’t the problem. It was removing the residual bound fluoride so the mixture was as pure as possible. A consideration for self-life and the small quantity a shell/rocket would hold. Head-choppers certainly wouldn’t have the same worries for a crude bomb or land mine. NATO, Israel and the USSR went to great effort to produce unary Sarin as pure as possible or binary Sarin as concentrated as possible through whatever method. That’s an entirely different engineering problem than just producing a sufficiently neutralized short shelf-life product.“…Dropping a bomb on the binary components does not actually provide the correct mechanism for making the nerve agent. It is an infantile argument…”Well, it’s a stretch, but once again you’re assuming binary Sarin. We have no idea at this point. But the mere suggestion of binary components mixing when the warehouse is bombed: ‘infantile’? What kind of CBRN snobbery is that?“…Another issue is that, if the Syrian regime actually did believe that the warehouse stored chemical warfare agents, then striking it deliberately was an act of chemical warfare by proxy…”Whaaa..? Didn’t you just say that the argument was infantile? And Russia is guilty, not your head-chopper pals? If you remember, there were people salivating at the though of the US unloading a few hundred cruise missiles at Assad’s CW facilities a while back. Would that have constituted CW use by proxy?“…Are we to seriously believe that one of the rebel factions has expended the vast sums of money and developed this industrial base, somehow not noticed to date and not molested by attack?…”Whoa… you led us down the path of “it must be binary Sarin” and now you’re saying that it necessarily must have been home-brewed by the head-choppers? No, sorry – it doesn’t work like that. Head-chopper-backers are MUCH more likely to have supplied the precursors, binary components or whatever. The head-choppers were packaging it in the warehouse, not manufacturing it from scratch by any stretch of the imagination. Why that argument is… oh, never mind.
Just responding to this, even though more important developments have taken place in the interim. That being said -
Really, the identified author who set forth the explanation for debunking the Russian claims that the gas was in a rebel warehouse that was blown up, is a recognized Chemical Biological Radiological Nuclear professional. The anonymous commenter, Mr. "Paveway IV", you decided to rely on (whose comment is included in the excerpt from your long post), may or may not be. Also, while you selected that comment, there are others which do a pretty good job of picking apart his objections to the identified author's points. Also, the commenter you rely on seems more interested in trolling (example of his argument: "And Russia is guilty, not your head-chopper pals?") than in intelligent discussion. I'm surprised you would endorse him as representing your argument.
Your criticism is stylistic, not substantive. The point is that for every claim there is a counter-claim. If investigators determine that either (a) the event was staged or (b) the source of the agent was Al Nusra, Trump should be impeached.
All the BS that has been going on. This is what Trump should be impeached for. Where does he have Congressional Approval for this?
And here's what pisses me off. This guy gets elected and there are throngs of protesters. He said nasty stuff about women 11 years ago. He goes and makes war without congressional approval and these same people(by and large) cheer.
If ever there was an indictment of public schools...
I haven't verified this yet, but my sources are saying that McCain and Lindsey Graham are spooning right now.
paulsurovell said:
Your criticism is stylistic, not substantive. The point is that for every claim there is a counter-claim. If investigators determine that either (a) the event was staged or (b) the source of the agent was Al Nusra, Trump should be impeached.
No, it is substantive. I specifically mentioned the other comments, which substantively disagreed with the one commenter you rely on. Regarding, "The point is that for every claim there is a counter-claim", that is especially true on the internet with anonymous commenters. One needs to be a critical reader, and when a commenter's argument is to accuse someone of favoring what he calls the author's "head-chopper pals" that's a "stylistic" clue as to the motivations of the writer.
Post edited to add - Not that I think a further response should be made, but if you do, please note that in my earlier comments I supported continued investigation, and I also wrote: "That being said, the proper course of action is to work with Russia (if not demand cooperation from Putin) to pressure Assad. Russia helping Assad attack doesn't help. Hopefully, somebody in the White House will make it clear to Trump that he can't just attack Assad directly without butting heads with Putin, and that it would be dangerous to do so." Obviously, that comment of mine is kind of moot now.
terp said:
All the BS that has been going on. This is what Trump should be impeached for. Where does he have Congressional Approval for this?
And here's what pisses me off. This guy gets elected and there are throngs of protesters. He said nasty stuff about women 11 years ago. He goes and makes war without congressional approval and these same people(by and large) cheer.
If ever there was an indictment of public schools...
On what basis do you say that the "throngs of protesters" are now cheering?
I'll admit its anecdotal, but I'm watching CNN and MSNBC which have been brutalizing Trump. They are cheering right now.
It seems to have drummerboy's approval as well. How can we forget how apoplectic he has been for the last 6 months?
LOST said:
terp said:
All the BS that has been going on. This is what Trump should be impeached for. Where does he have Congressional Approval for this?
And here's what pisses me off. This guy gets elected and there are throngs of protesters. He said nasty stuff about women 11 years ago. He goes and makes war without congressional approval and these same people(by and large) cheer.
If ever there was an indictment of public schools...
On what basis do you say that the "throngs of protesters" are now cheering?
paulsurovell said:
Your criticism is stylistic, not substantive. The point is that for every claim there is a counter-claim. If investigators determine that either (a) the event was staged or (b) the source of the agent was Al Nusra, Trump should be impeached.
What investigators? When will the investigation take place? Any definitive answer will come, if at all, long after Trump is gone.
conandrob240 said:
I thought Obama asked for military action in 2013 but it was rejected by congress?
While Trump sucks, I don't know that I am opposed to military action against Syria. Sort of long overdue. Problem is from what we know of Trump, I have no confidence it's been very thoughtful or well planned out.
"No confidence"? From what I have seen of and know of DJTI am 99% certain it was not thoughtful or well planned out.
terp said:
I'll admit its anecdotal, but I'm watching CNN and MSNBC which have been brutalizing Trump. They are cheering right now.
I've had them on, and all I saw were solemn faces, experts pointing out the risks of the attack with respect to Russia and Iran, and comments on what members of Congress might be looking into as a result. I wouldn't call it "cheering".
I mean really... https://twitter.com/jeremyscah...
terp said:
I'll admit its anecdotal, but I'm watching CNN and MSNBC which have been brutalizing Trump. They are cheering right now.
It seems to have drummerboy's approval as well. How can we forget how apoplectic he has been for the last 6 months?
LOST said:
terp said:
All the BS that has been going on. This is what Trump should be impeached for. Where does he have Congressional Approval for this?
And here's what pisses me off. This guy gets elected and there are throngs of protesters. He said nasty stuff about women 11 years ago. He goes and makes war without congressional approval and these same people(by and large) cheer.
If ever there was an indictment of public schools...
On what basis do you say that the "throngs of protesters" are now cheering?
I'm listening to Brian Williams talk about the awesome power of our military equipment with footage of missiles going off in the background. America **** Yeah!
South_Mountaineer said:
terp said:
I'll admit its anecdotal, but I'm watching CNN and MSNBC which have been brutalizing Trump. They are cheering right now.
I've had them on, and all I saw were solemn faces, experts pointing out the risks of the attack with respect to Russia and Iran, and comments on what members of Congress might be looking into as a result. I wouldn't call it "cheering".
FWIW, not like Obama, all Trump has to do is listen to his military advisors. They'll do all the planning; and as the best military in the world, he's confident they know what they're doing, and they'll do it well...
LOST said:
conandrob240 said:
I thought Obama asked for military action in 2013 but it was rejected by congress?
While Trump sucks, I don't know that I am opposed to military action against Syria. Sort of long overdue. Problem is from what we know of Trump, I have no confidence it's been very thoughtful or well planned out.
"No confidence"? From what I have seen of and know of DJTI am 99% certain it was not thoughtful or well planned out.
South_Mountaineer said:
paulsurovell said:
Your criticism is stylistic, not substantive. The point is that for every claim there is a counter-claim. If investigators determine that either (a) the event was staged or (b) the source of the agent was Al Nusra, Trump should be impeached.
No, it is substantive. I specifically mentioned the other comments, which substantively disagreed with the one commenter you rely on. Regarding, "The point is that for every claim there is a counter-claim", that is especially true on the internet with anonymous commenters. One needs to be a critical reader, and when a commenter's argument is to accuse someone of favoring what he calls the author's "head-chopper pals" that's a "stylistic" clue as to the motivations of the writer.
Post edited to add - Not that I think a further response should be made, but if you do, please note that in my earlier comments I supported continued investigation, and I also wrote: "That being said, the proper course of action is to work with Russia (if not demand cooperation from Putin) to pressure Assad. Russia helping Assad attack doesn't help. Hopefully, somebody in the White House will make it clear to Trump that he can't just attack Assad directly without butting heads with Putin, and that it would be dangerous to do so." Obviously, that comment of mine is kind of moot now.
If "Head-chopper pals" tells us something about the author's "motivation," then "Your man Trump is escalating the civilian deaths" (your phrase) tells us something about your motivation.
That wasn't his demeanor. He did note the hazardous nature of the duty of the personnel on those ships, but wasn't cheerleading.
terp said:
I'm listening to Brian Williams talk about the awesome power of our military equipment with footage of missiles going off in the background. America **** Yeah!
South_Mountaineer said:
terp said:
I'll admit its anecdotal, but I'm watching CNN and MSNBC which have been brutalizing Trump. They are cheering right now.
I've had them on, and all I saw were solemn faces, experts pointing out the risks of the attack with respect to Russia and Iran, and comments on what members of Congress might be looking into as a result. I wouldn't call it "cheering".
Rentals
Sponsored Business
Promote your business here - Businesses get highlighted throughout the site and you can add a deal.
Advertisement
No more acting with impunity for Bashar Assad...