- Joined
- Jan 28, 2012
- Messages
- 16,386
- Reaction score
- 7,793
- Location
- Where I am now
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Sounds like what Obama is really saying is:
'Hey Rebels? We want to help you...now give us an excuse.
So get hold of some chemical weapons (we will smuggle some to you if you need it), use them on a small group of people (sorry, they must be sacrificed - think of them as martyrs)...include at least one child so the world get TRULY outraged when they see it on the news, make it look like the government did it, make sure you take LOTS of pictures/video of the scene.
And voila - we will then be able to start bombing the bleep out of Assad.'
Yes - my opinion of ALL U.S. Presidents and politics in general is that low.
That is a ludicrously paranoid perspective. Which means its par for the course on an internet forum.
So the message for Bashar is: 'You can kill, but not with WMD'.
I do not believe anyone is seeking or giving permission in this instance for conventional warfare. Parameters are simply being established.
Not that Bashar has followed the other parameters we have already set up for him.
Us: Don't kill your people.
Them: You right, we shouldn't kill our people. /kills people
Us: Hey...
Them: Crazy times over here. We will get back to you once we get this under control.
Russia has been Syria's ally, IIRC they were not looking to the US or NATO for any permission, condemnation or comment to begin with.
Asad won't use any chemical weapons unless he is sure he is going to go down. Once that point has been reach, he will use anything he has because he has nothing else to lose at that point.
We said that about Saddam too.
And he didn't have those "stockpiles" of WMDs as they claimed either did he?. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying we should go invade on the premise he has them. However, I won't disagree with the international community going after him if he actually uses them.
My point is Syria isn't listening to the interanational community. Russia, as you point out, is helping them circumvent the international community. We honestly can't set parameters on this guy and expect them to follow it. It feels very 2002ish to me.
On 21 March 1986, the United Nations Security Council made a declaration stating that "members are profoundly concerned by the unanimous conclusion of the specialists that chemical weapons on many occasions have been used by Iraqi forces against Iranian troops and the members of the Council strongly condemn this continued use of chemical weapons in clear violation of the Geneva Protocol of 1925 which prohibits the use in war of chemical weapons." The United States was the only member who voted against the issuance of this statement
And your link to unbiased evidence that it is 'ludicrously paranoid' is what exactly?
You think I am wrong - fine. I admit I could well be - and I hope I am.
But if I was going to call someone ludicrously paranoid, I would at least have some hard evidence to back it up.
Assuming you do not have any, I guess you don't care about having hard evidence when you accuse/insult others.
Noted.
Have a nice day.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?