Breaking: US and Britain pledge to use force within two weeks in Syria.

[KingBeasley08]

fvck Syria. Just stay out of it. dammnit obama

[KeylessEntry]

@keyless entry,
where the hell have you been lately? good to see you here, at least for a moment. :S

Been getting overwhelmed by real life obligations, hard for me to find the time or energy for anything other than lurking these days.

[gigantes]

Been getting overwhelmed by real life obligations, hard for me to find the time or energy for anything other than lurking these days.

ah, that's too bad. hope life gets less hectic and all. you are definitely one of the more interesting people around here IMO.

[RidonKs]

not sure if anybody heard about this recent disclosure, but it's sorta relevant.

these are approx 30 year old declassified documents. they've been sitting untouched in some archive for the past five-ish years... now they're finally making some news.

there's all sorts of details in here but the key revelation is that american intelligence -- and therefore all the high executive offices -- were aware of iraqi use of chemical weapons as early as 1983... and continued to support Iraq in its war with Iran for the next 5 years. these included consistent chemical warfare directed at both the Iranian frontlines (to counter the effective swarming tactic, since iranians had such a major numbers advantage) and against iraqi's uprising population, culminating in the halabja incident that killed 3x as many kurds as iraqis were killed.

what's more, the us provided significant intelligence such as satellite imagery detailing iranian troop movements that allowed saddam's strikes late in the war to be so successful. and of course, this was all a result of Iraqi aggression which started the whole mess.

but of course, all this is irrelevant. those were the old days. we're much more civilized now. except... not. if this were a different regime, not an iranian/russian proxy state paving the flow of aid and arms to hezballah, nobody would care. or everybody would feign outrage and look the other way.


and once again, anybody who is already totally convinced that this attack was undertaken by order of assad is crazy... almost as crazy as assad would have to be to do something like this 10 miles from the un inspectors.

[KeylessEntry]

ah, that's too bad. hope life gets less hectic and all. you are definitely one of the more interesting people around here IMO.

Thanks man, appreciate it.

[KeylessEntry]

not sure if anybody heard about this recent disclosure, but it's sorta relevant.

these are approx 30 year old declassified documents. they've been sitting untouched in some archive for the past five-ish years... now they're finally making some news.

there's all sorts of details in here but the key revelation is that american intelligence -- and therefore all the high executive offices -- were aware of iraqi use of chemical weapons as early as 1983... and continued to support Iraq in its war with Iran for the next 5 years. these included consistent chemical warfare directed at both the Iranian frontlines (to counter the effective swarming tactic, since iranians had such a major numbers advantage) and against iraqi's uprising population, culminating in the halabja incident that killed 3x as many kurds as iraqis were killed.

what's more, the us provided significant intelligence such as satellite imagery detailing iranian troop movements that allowed saddam's strikes late in the war to be so successful. and of course, this was all a result of Iraqi aggression which started the whole mess.

but of course, all this is irrelevant. those were the old days. we're much more civilized now. except... not. if this were a different regime, not an iranian/russian proxy state paving the flow of aid and arms to hezballah, nobody would care. or everybody would feign outrage and look the other way.


and once again, anybody who is already totally convinced that this attack was undertaken by order of assad is crazy... almost as crazy as assad would have to be to do something like this 10 miles from the un inspectors.

Great post.

Its interesting that the western rhetoric regarding these Syrian weapon attacks has been "We need to punish Assad" from the very beginning.

What if UN inspectors find out that the rebels performed the gas attack? Will the US government help Assad and "punish" these rebels for crossing the red line?

Also, we should not forget that this happened a few months ago.

12 people from Syria's al Qaeda-linked al-Nusra Front who allegedly had been planning an attack inside Turkey and were in possession of 2 kg (4.5 pounds) of sarin, had been detained in Adana.

[HarryCallahan]

and once again, anybody who is already totally convinced that this attack was undertaken by order of assad is crazy... almost as crazy as assad would have to be to do something like this 10 miles from the un inspectors.

It's funny that Obama has been saying "Assad has to go" for two years, and now that he's got some (tenuous) reason for invading them it's about "making sure people don't use chemical weapons."

Man the media has done a great job of propagandising on behalf of the state dept. people still don't wanna go kill Syrians though. Maybe there's hope after all.

[tomtucker]

It's funny that Obama has been saying "Assad has to go" for two years, and now that he's got some (tenuous) reason for invading them it's about "making sure people don't use chemical weapons."

Man the media has done a great job of propagandising on behalf of the state dept. people still don't wanna go kill Syrians though. Maybe there's hope after all.

what do obama/ the goverment want insted of assad.........a whole country where islamic terrorists can train and have a jolly old time plotting terror attacks against europe ?............this is fukked

[HarryCallahan]

what do obama/ the goverment want insted of assad.........a whole country where islamic terrorists can train and have a jolly old time plotting terror attacks against europe ?............this is fukked

What better excuse for more "War on terror."

I don't believe that Obama is stupid, so I've got to believe he is morally corrupt.

[Rasheed1]

Has there been an amendment to the constitution that I've not been made aware of? PotUS doesn't have the power to declare war.

War Powers act gives the president power to engage in these kind of activities without congressional approval (I think for 90 days.. I might be wrong though)

He is supposed to brief congress and get their approval, but he doesnt need to go thru them.. This is why we have so many conflicts.. Congress has shirked their responsibility and it makes war to easy for us to engage in..

[HarryCallahan]

War Powers act gives the president power to engage in these kind of activities without congressional approval (I think for 90 days.. I might be wrong though)

He is supposed to brief congress and get their approval, but he doesnt need to go thru them.. This is why we have so many conflicts.. Congress has shirked their responsibility and it makes war to easy for us to engage in..

You've also got to give a number of presidents credit for taking increasing advantage of that.

It's just semantics however, there could be a congressional declaration of war and it still would be morally repugnant.

[tomtucker]

What better excuse for more "War on terror."

I don't believe that Obama is stupid, so I've got to believe he is morally corrupt.

yeah, obama is not dumb like the bush

[niko]

Saw a poll that says 9% of americans when give the choice of saying to attack, not attack, wait or unsure choose attack. NINE percent. I get a president needs to act sometimes for the people's best interests but 9% strikes me as maybe he shouldnt do it.

[HarryCallahan]

Saw a poll that says 9% of americans when give the choice of saying to attack, not attack, wait or unsure choose attack. NINE percent. I get a president needs to act sometimes for the people's best interests but 9% strikes me as maybe he shouldnt do it.

Congress is more popular than a war with Syria, that's hould tell you how unpopular it is.

Nonetheless your reasoning for why the US shouldn't bomb a country that has neither attacked, nor threatened anyone, is really rather poor. Shouldn't bomb Syria for a multitude of reasons; No justification, would greatly help terrorist groups, there are bound to be thousands of civilian casualties, no money, it wouldn't accomplish anything positive, Assad is very important in keeping the balance of power, might very well start WWIII or Cold War part deux....

91% of people could think the earth is flat, and it wouldn't make it so.

[zoom17]

fvck Syria. Just stay out of it. dammnit obama