Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Geezil

So, we are going to war with Syria?

Recommended Posts

And he is rage tweeting again this morning about failed generals and he hasn’t been treated as a national hero for destroying ISIS. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John Bolton is going around to our allies telling them that we’re not leaving Syria until ISIS is defeated and until Turkey gives us guarantees that they won’t attack the Kurds. When this was reported yesterday, Trump said “I never said it would be a quick withdrawal.” It looks like we’re not leaving at all. Or maybe we are. Who knows? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, timschochet said:

John Bolton is going around to our allies telling them that we’re not leaving Syria until ISIS is defeated and until Turkey gives us guarantees that they won’t attack the Kurds. When this was reported yesterday, Trump said “I never said it would be a quick withdrawal.” It looks like we’re not leaving at all. Or maybe we are. Who knows? 

https://twitter.com/murphymike/status/1082067367528620032

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/30/2018 at 8:34 PM, The Z Machine said:

Xi Jinping and Putin must be laughing at the clown show we have over here.

Who cares

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ren hoek said:

Who cares

Every democratic country on earth?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, timschochet said:

John Bolton is going around to our allies telling them that we’re not leaving Syria until ISIS is defeated and until Turkey gives us guarantees that they won’t attack the Kurds. When this was reported yesterday, Trump said “I never said it would be a quick withdrawal.” It looks like we’re not leaving at all. Or maybe we are. Who knows? 

Wow, the resistance, news media and generals sure owned Trump here.  Instead of pulling troops out of Syria, like Trump wanted- a move Elizabeth Warren, Ro Khanna, Rand Paul and Justin Amash all supported- John Bolton has whisked us back to safely occupying Syria forever.  What a relief.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, timschochet said:

John Bolton is going around to our allies telling them that we’re not leaving Syria until ISIS is defeated and until Turkey gives us guarantees that they won’t attack the Kurds. When this was reported yesterday, Trump said “I never said it would be a quick withdrawal.” It looks like we’re not leaving at all. Or maybe we are. Who knows? 

So the already leaving, ISIS isndefeated was?  Wait for it...a lie?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, timschochet said:

John Bolton is going around to our allies telling them that we’re not leaving Syria until ISIS is defeated and until Turkey gives us guarantees that they won’t attack the Kurds. When this was reported yesterday, Trump said “I never said it would be a quick withdrawal.” It looks like we’re not leaving at all. Or maybe we are. Who knows? 

Clearly not Trump...

Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump 58m58 minutes ago

The Failing New York Times has knowingly written a very inaccurate story on my intentions on Syria. No different from my original statements, we will be leaving at a proper pace while at the same time continuing to fight ISIS and doing all else that is prudent and necessary!.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ren hoek said:

Wow, the resistance, news media and generals sure owned Trump here.  Instead of pulling troops out of Syria, like Trump wanted- a move Elizabeth Warren, Ro Khanna, Rand Paul and Justin Amash all supported- John Bolton has whisked us back to safely occupying Syria forever.  What a relief.  

Whatever your viewpoint is on the right vs wrong of pulling out our troops- and we’re probably going to have to agree to disagree there- the one truth that comes out of all this is that the Trump White House is truly dysfunctional, that he really has no idea what he’s doing. Surely after this sorry episode, even you have to acknowledge that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Skoo said:

Clearly not Trump...

Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump 58m58 minutes ago

The Failing New York Times has knowingly written a very inaccurate story on my intentions on Syria. No different from my original statements, we will be leaving at a proper pace while at the same time continuing to fight ISIS and doing all else that is prudent and necessary!.....

A proper pace could be 1 year or 100 years. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, timschochet said:

A proper pace could be 1 year or 100 years. 

He doesn't know what's proper or prudent, but whatever that is that's what he'll do!

Dude is just so incredibly insecure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Whatever your viewpoint is on the right vs wrong of pulling out our troops- and we’re probably going to have to agree to disagree there- the one truth that comes out of all this is that the Trump White House is truly dysfunctional, that he really has no idea what he’s doing. Surely after this sorry episode, even you have to acknowledge that. 

For heaven’s sake the US is in Syria ILLEGALLY as an occupying army.  They don’t want us there.  There is no national interest in staying there.  There wasn’t even a congressional debate about it, let alone an authorization to invade in the first place.  Sorry but Trump is right here and the neocons are dead wrong.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ren hoek said:

For heaven’s sake the US is in Syria ILLEGALLY as an occupying army.  They don’t want us there.  There is no national interest in staying there.  There wasn’t even a congressional debate about it, let alone an authorization to invade in the first place.  Sorry but Trump is right here and the neocons are dead wrong.  

Lol you completely ignored my question. 

Anyhow, what is Trump right about: pulling out all the troops in 30 days or leaving them in there until Isis is destroyed? Removing them immediately or having them leave at “a proper pace”? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Lol you completely ignored my question. 

Anyhow, what is Trump right about: pulling out all the troops in 30 days or leaving them in there until Isis is destroyed? Removing them immediately or having them leave at “a proper pace”? 

I didn’t realize you’d asked one?

Pulling the troops out.  We are occupying their country illegally, they don’t want us there, and there was never any popular support to start this war or stay there indefinitely.  Just leave.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ren hoek said:

I didn’t realize you’d asked one?

Pulling the troops out.  We are occupying their country illegally, they don’t want us there, and there was never any popular support to start this war or stay there indefinitely.  Just leave.  

Turns out your arguments are irrelevant because we're not leaving.

Whatever you think of the President's decision two weeks ago, it was made on a whim.  Now he's been talked out of it. He may be talked back into it tomorrow. He has no clue as to what he's doing.  And in the meantime he lies about it- "I never said I'd leave quickly!" So full of ####.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, ren hoek said:

 Just leave.  

The sad thing is Trump doesn't really care. There's an argument for pacifism, and there's an argument for intervention, and people making these argument care, and they fairly pretty much understand why they say what they want. The awful reality is Trump doesn't know why he says or does what he says. No links here, happy to go through the trouble as always, but as I understand it Trump got on a call on Erdogan and he was supposed to demand that Erdogan would ensure the safety of the Kurds and our allies before we would discuss leaving. Trump apparently said the complete opposite. Why? Who knows. He just heard "withdrawal" and that was his takeaway. Then of course he rushed out to defend this damned thing he did. Then his SOD quit, his envoy to our allies quit, the surrounding staffers quit (that process is still underway). Now our PNSA Bolton says that the US course is the exact same thing as it was before, and our SOS Pompeo says that was what Trump said all along! That's happening. The pacifists are screwed, the interventionists are screwed, Kurds, Erdogan, Israel, Palestine, administration, cabinet members, PLA, everyone, everyone is screwed, because who knows what the hell is going on.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

The sad thing is Trump doesn't really care. There's an argument for pacifism, and there's an argument for intervention, and people making these argument care, and they fairly pretty much understand why they say what they want. The awful reality is Trump doesn't know why he says or does what he says. No links here, happy to go through the trouble as always, but as I understand it Trump got on a call on Erdogan and he was supposed to demand that Erdogan would ensure the safety of the Kurds and our allies before we would discuss leaving. Trump apparently said the complete opposite. Why? Who knows. He just heard "withdrawal" and that was his takeaway. Then of course he rushed out to defend this damned thing he did. Then his SOD quit, his envoy to our allies quit, the surrounding staffers quit (that process is still underway). Now our PNSA Bolton says that the US course is the exact same thing as it was before, and our SOS Pompeo says that was what Trump said all along! That's happening. The pacifists are screwed, the interventionists are screwed, Kurds, Erdogan, Israel, Palestine, administration, cabinet members, PLA, everyone, everyone is screwed, because who knows what the hell is going on.

There's only an interventionist argument if the US is a rogue state and international law doesn't matter.  I read a great comment yesterday: "Here in US we are obsessed with the rule of law; internationally, not quite so much. Have we been unclear about that?"

I don't care what Trump's reasons are for pulling troops out of Syria or Afghanistan.  I don't care what John Bolton thinks.  Trump should be faulted for not following through on his words, but not as much as the national security state for perpetuating this quagmire with no end in sight.  

You should realize, too, that if Trump ramped up the militarism on NK/Syria/Iran/Russia, the establishment press would start blowing him tomorrow.  People that were ####ting on Trump the second he tried to bring some troops home from an illegal occupation should be grateful, they got their wish.  The troops are staying 'until the time is right.'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, ren hoek said:

There's only an interventionist argument if the US is a rogue state and international law doesn't matter.  I read a great comment yesterday: "Here in US we are obsessed with the rule of law; internationally, not quite so much. Have we been unclear about that?"

I don't care what Trump's reasons are for pulling troops out of Syria or Afghanistan.  I don't care what John Bolton thinks.  Trump should be faulted for not following through on his words, but not as much as the national security state for perpetuating this quagmire with no end in sight.  

You should realize, too, that if Trump ramped up the militarism on NK/Syria/Iran/Russia, the establishment press would start blowing him tomorrow.  People that were ####ting on Trump the second he tried to bring some troops home from an illegal occupation should be grateful, they got their wish.  The troops are staying 'until the time is right.'

That's kind of my point, he doesn't have a reason. He had an impulse. Later the impulse might be different. And his words don't matter to him but they matter to everyone else. Syria is your issue, but for someone else it's been other issues, and whatever Trump says is pretty meaningless. His words matter because what the president says is policy - and people and countries act on that - but Trump's words as policy are destructive. Even from a pacifist, strictly anti-wart POV Trump's words will just cause more damage here because it will cause greater conflict.

I'm not too interested in the press here, they're like everyone else. To the extent any reporters rely on Trump, it's their own fault. - NK is probably a pretty good example. Trump tells the world we have a deal to denuke. No we don't. NK thinks the deal is for the US to withdraw all its nukes from the Pacific rim. Trump told the world he would force NK to denuclearize and suggested it was because he was intimidating them into doing so. Result is miscommunication. NK continues to expand its nuclear program, and the US administration around Trump gets increasingly alarmed because they seem to think NK is acting against the deal. - Trump tells different people different things, the result is greater risk of conflict. 

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Liz Sly @LizSly

The US withdrawal from Syria is on. That ship in the photo is heading to the Middle East to help get the troops out. "We don't take orders from Bolton" said a Pentagon official. Good story by @nancyayoussef & @DionNissenbaum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ariel Edwards-Levy @aedwardslevy

In April 2018, 38% of Clinton voters said the U.S. had a responsibility in Syria. In December, after Trump announced the withdrawal of U.S. forces, 60% did. https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/americans-views-of-trump-are-shaping-their-opinions-on-syria_us_5c37aecce4b05cb31c40c927 …

That shift is especially notable because the questions included no mention of Trump, nor any cues about which of the positions he currently holds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unknown number of U.S. Service members killed by terrorists in Syria today.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

U.S. Troops Among Dead in Islamic State Bombing in Syria
 

Quote

 

American troops were among 15 people killed on Wednesday in a suicide bombing in northern Syria that was claimed by the Islamic State, just weeks after President Trump ordered the withdrawal of United States forces with what he declared the extremist group’s defeat.

The attack targeted a restaurant in the northern city of Manbij where American soldiers would sometimes stop to eat during their patrols of the area, residents said. After the blast, a number of Americans were evacuated by helicopter, they said. It was not immediately clear how many had been in the area at the time of the blast.

A statement by the Baghdad-based American headquarters for the fight against the Islamic State said the attack happened while the troops were on a patrol.

“U.S. service members were killed during an explosion while conducting a routine patrol in Syria today,” said the statement, which was posted on Twitter. “We are still gathering information and will share additional details at a later time.”

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights put the death toll at 15 and said one American soldier was among the dead. Additionally, a Defense Department official said there were multiple Americans killed or wounded but did not give specific numbers. Another United States official said as many as three American troops and an American civilian were killed.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But Trump said ISIS has bee defeated. And Pence announced the very same TODAY.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jobber said:

But Trump said ISIS has bee defeated. And Pence announced the very same TODAY.

Obama FOUNDED ISIS!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hearing 4 service members killed/injuried and several SDF killed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My thoughts are with our soldiers and their family.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SYRIA SAYS U.S. SHOULD GIVE ISRAEL 'SOUTH CAROLINA' INSTEAD OF GOLAN HEIGHTS, 'IT'S THE LAND OF SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM'

Syria's envoy to the United Nations suggested that the United States offer Israel land that Washington actually had jurisdiction over rather than the occupied Golan Heights.

Bashar al-Jaafari, Syria's permanent representative to the United Nations, made the remarks at a Security Council session organized Thursday at his country's request in the wake of President Donald Trump's decision to recognize Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights. He called the decision "null and void" and warned of "a serious and unprecedented delinquency in the current U.S. administration toward undermining international law and insulting the United Nations."

"The Syrian Arab Golan is ours and will return to us," Jaafari asserted, arguing the disputed land would not "be part of some damned and wicked deal, or a pawn to be exchanged for support in your electoral games," which should instead concern "the territory of the American administration."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://syriapropagandamedia.org/working-papers/assessment-by-the-engineering-sub-team-of-the-opcw-fact-finding-mission-investigating-the-alleged-chemical-attack-in-douma-in-april-2018

The dimensions, characteristics and appearance of the cylinders, and the surrounding scene of the incidents, were inconsistent with what would have been expected in the case of either cylinder being delivered from an aircraft. In each case the alternative hypothesis produced the only plausible explanation for observations at the scene.

The conclusion of the Engineering Assessment is unequivocal: the “alternative hypothesis†(sic) that the cylinders were manually placed in position is “the only plausible explanation for observations at the scene”.

Our last Briefing Note listed two other key findings:

It is no longer seriously disputed that the hospital scene was staged: there are multiple eyewitness reports supported by video evidence

The case fatality rate of 100%, with no attempt by the victims to escape, is unlike any recorded chlorine attack.

Taken together, these findings establish beyond reasonable doubt that the alleged chemical attack in Douma on 7 April 2018 was staged. ..

We conclude that the staging of the Douma incident entailed mass murder of at least 35 civilians to provide the bodies at Location 2. It follows from this that people dressed as White Helmets and endorsed by the leadership of that organization had a key role in this murder. ..

In our last Briefing Note, we concluded by asserting that “It is doubtful whether [OPCW’s] reputation as an impartial monitor of compliance with the Chemical Weapons Convention can be restored without radical reform of its governance and working practices”. The new information we have removes all doubt that the organization has been hijacked at the top by France, UK and the US. We have no doubt that most OPCW staff continue to do their jobs professionally, and that some who are uneasy about the direction that the organization has taken nevertheless wish to protect its reputation. However what is at stake here is more than the reputation of the organization: the staged incident in Douma provoked a missile attack by the US, UK and France on 14 April 2018 that could have led to all-out war.

The cover-up of evidence that the Douma incident was staged is not merely misconduct. As the staging of the Douma incident entailed mass murder of civilians, those in OPCW who have suppressed the evidence of staging are, unwittingly or otherwise, colluding with mass murder. We think that in most jurisdictions the legal duty to disclose the cover-up of such a crime would override any confidentiality agreement with an employer. We would welcome legal opinions on this, given publicly, by those with relevant expertise. OPCW employees have to sign a strict confidentiality agreement, and face instant dismissal and loss of pension rights if they breach this agreement. We would welcome any initiative to set up a legal defence fund for OPCW staff members who come forward publicly as whistleblowers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I, for one, am shocked that the official narrative on WMDs in the Middle East turned out to be false. But I'm sure next time they'll tell us the truth.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Murph said:

I, for one, am shocked that the official narrative on WMDs in the Middle East turned out to be false. But I'm sure next time they'll tell us the truth.

Probably why they were in such a hurry to bomb a middle eastern country before the evidence had materialized- they knew it was bs.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/7/2019 at 4:46 PM, timschochet said:

He has no clue as to what he's doing.  And in the meantime he lies about it.... So full of ####.

This is basically the tagline for this Presidency. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You’d think it’d be a big deal that the intelligence western countries used as an excuse to bomb Damascus turned out to be staged by the same rebels those countries were backing in Syria.  

You’d think it’d be a big deal that the OPCW, which is supposed to be neutral, suppressed evidence that ran counter to the commonly accepted narrative.  

But instead it’s radio silence.   Anyone who questioned this was painted as a conspiracy theorist.  There’s all the coverage and network buzz in the world for a regime change narrative.  Where’s the “free press” on this one?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A September ceasefire deal between Russia and rebel backer Turkey was supposed to prevent a massive regime offensive in the region, which is home to some 3 million people.

Under the terms of the agreement, hardliners and jihadists were to withdraw from a planned buffer zone, allowing traffic to flow along two strategic highways, M4 and M5, which connect government-held areas with the Turkish border.

But Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), which is dominated by members of a former al-Qaeda affiliate, has failed to leave, apparently leading to a spike in deadly airstrikes and shelling by the regime and ally Russia.

On 9/8/2018 at 6:44 PM, ren hoek said:

Deputy Special Presidential Envoy for the Global Coalition to Counter ISIL, Brett McGurk, comments on the status of Idlib Province in Syria. These comments took place at a forum hosted by The Middle East Institute, titled: "Assessing the Trump Administration's Counterterrorism Policy". The forum took place on July 27, 2017.

https://youtu.be/IwbJrL96zlI

 

On 9/11/2018 at 4:18 PM, ren hoek said:

Hayat Tahrir al-Sham and its jihadi brothers-in-arms do not share the international community’s concern about the consequences of an attack by the Syrian regime and its backers. The bloodier the better, in their score, as it increases pressure on Syria and Russia to end the fighting and allow the jihadis to keep their enclave. If the Syrian government uses chemical weapons, the United States has signaled that it will likely respond again with military force.

Those in Idlib who would be inclined to take up the Turkish offer to prevent the slaughter don’t stand a chance. The Washington Post reported that Hayat Tahrir al-Sham and its Salafi partners have erected gallows around Idlib province for public execution of traitors — that is, those who want to negotiate an exit, as well as opponents of their brutal style of Islamic law. “Several groups monitoring the situation confirmed the existence of detention facilities across a network of basements and caves,” the Post reports. The paper said the group JAN Violations, which records allegations of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham abuses, reported that the "group had at least five prisons in the province, several of them notorious for torture.” JAN stands for Jabhat al-Nusra.

https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2018/09/turkey-syria-hts-alqaeda-idlib-erdogan-ceasefire.html

Reminder that Idlib is the Al Qaeda capital of the world.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Rove! said:

Yep.  A literal ghost town in here all of a sudden.  All the people who called me a conspiracy theorist, who got it completely dead wrong while I got it right, have disappeared completely.  

Look at the traffic in this thread when US/France/UK were bleating about chemical weapons compared to now.  Where's CNN, Brian Williams and the "international community" now that their reporting has been exposed as straightup war propaganda?  Where's the correction now that the narrative they pushed has been exposed as a complete falsehood?  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, ren hoek said:

Yep.  A literal ghost town in here all of a sudden.  All the people who called me a conspiracy theorist, who got it completely dead wrong while I got it right, have disappeared completely.  

Look at the traffic in this thread when US/France/UK were bleating about chemical weapons compared to now.  Where's CNN, Brian Williams and the "international community" now that their reporting has been exposed as straightup war propaganda?  Where's the correction now that the narrative they pushed has been exposed as a complete falsehood?  

 

 

I dunno. I tend to trust the mainstream media. Here is Reuters: 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKCN1ST2F3

In order to believe what you’re asserting I would also have to believe that all of the sources I trust: Reuters, Associated Press, CNN, the New York Times, the Washington Post- are all deliberately lying to me in a coordinated effort. I just find that extremely implausible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, timschochet said:

I dunno. I tend to trust the mainstream media. Here is Reuters: 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKCN1ST2F3

In order to believe what you’re asserting I would also have to believe that all of the sources I trust: Reuters, Associated Press, CNN, the New York Times, the Washington Post- are all deliberately lying to me in a coordinated effort. I just find that extremely implausible. 

Whatever you think plausible, the Douma chemical weapons attack that led to the bombing of Damascus appears to have been staged.  The article you link to makes no reference to the buried findings from the OPCW FFM.  It also cites a State Dept. spokesman at length, while a one-sentence blurb represents the Syrian side.  

In fact, none of Reuters, CNN, FoxNews, MSNBC or WaPo have written anything at all about the leaked OPCW report (or if they did, they made no mention of the OPCW).  

That you think they couldn't lie or intentionally mislead people- after their work in Iraq, the Russia collusion falsehood, and with so much overlap between the media/intelligence/govt and think tank spheres- I mean, I just don't know what to say to that.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reminder of the gaslighting and trolling you were subjected to for expressing basic skepticism about the official story:

On 4/13/2018 at 9:33 PM, Bucky86 said:

He's just pro-Russia.

 

On 12/22/2018 at 12:10 PM, timschochet said:

I agree with this. At times his critiques are quite interesting. But he mixes in thoughtful criticism with conspiracy nonsense that is way out there, and his conclusions are IMO so totally off base as to weaken many of his more valid points. 

 

On 4/15/2018 at 11:00 AM, timschochet said:

This isn’t like Saddam and WMDs. Responsible people don’t have any question about this. 

 

On 4/15/2018 at 11:09 AM, Bucky86 said:

Agree.

Just important to remind the people that continue to defend Russia/Assad what they're supporting.

 

On 7/7/2018 at 2:09 PM, Bucky86 said:

Something, something... Illuminati... Soros.

 

On 4/12/2018 at 8:42 AM, JerseyToughGuys said:

You are linking Russian election interference with substantiated claims that Assad has gassed his people (multiple times), and blaming it on regime change folks?

you can’t see how tenuous and conspiracy theorist that is?

 

On 4/11/2018 at 12:56 PM, Slapdash said:

So now that Trump is blaming Assad for the chemical attacks are we done with the false flag conspiracy theories?

 

On 4/11/2018 at 1:01 PM, Bucky86 said:

No. Ren already said we can’t believe anything Trump says because we didn’t believe him before. 

Renny Logic™️

 

On 4/11/2018 at 12:22 AM, timschochet said:

Ren, minus the conspiracy theories and your lack of moral outrage at Assad, I find myself in this instance agreeing with you, at least to this extent: I am wary of a military action by the US against Syria. I don’t know what we’re getting involved with here. 

 

On 4/9/2018 at 12:20 PM, randall146 said:

Can someone who isn't ren explain why anyone would be posting pro-Assad conspiracy theories?

 

On 4/8/2018 at 3:38 PM, sho nuff said:

No...Ren wouldn’t ever push bogus conspiracy theories.

 

On 4/8/2018 at 10:49 AM, timschochet said:

I wish we could have a separate thread for the crazy conspiracy stuff, and devote THIS thread to a serious discussion, among adults, about what is the proper action to take in response to what Assad is doing. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Rove! said:

From that link: "Just because the OPCW took the extraordinary decision to cover up some of its evidence in Douma does not mean that gas has not been used in Syria by the government or even by the Russians or by Isis and its fellow Islamists. Undoubtedly it has. All stand guilty of war crimes in the Syrian conflict. The OPCW’s dishonesty – for that is what it amounts to – does not let war criminals off the hook."

So, what is the point you are trying to make here, @Rove!?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
19 hours ago, timschochet said:

I dunno. I tend to trust the mainstream media. Here is Reuters: 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKCN1ST2F3

In order to believe what you’re asserting I would also have to believe that all of the sources I trust: Reuters, Associated Press, CNN, the New York Times, the Washington Post- are all deliberately lying to me in a coordinated effort. I just find that extremely implausible. 

Wow, didn't realize there was another suspected chemical attack last week.  Thanks Tim.

Edited by Slapdash

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/26/2019 at 12:57 AM, timschochet said:

I dunno. I tend to trust the mainstream media. Here is Reuters: 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKCN1ST2F3

In order to believe what you’re asserting I would also have to believe that all of the sources I trust: Reuters, Associated Press, CNN, the New York Times, the Washington Post- are all deliberately lying to me in a coordinated effort. I just find that extremely implausible. 

This follows the same pattern the Syrians have followed before. It’s part of their strategy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/26/2019 at 12:30 AM, ren hoek said:

Yep.  A literal ghost town in here all of a sudden.  All the people who called me a conspiracy theorist, who got it completely dead wrong while I got it right, have disappeared completely.  

Look at the traffic in this thread when US/France/UK were bleating about chemical weapons compared to now.  Where's CNN, Brian Williams and the "international community" now that their reporting has been exposed as straightup war propaganda?  Where's the correction now that the narrative they pushed has been exposed as a complete falsehood?  

 

 

A “correction”? “Exposed as a complete falsehood”?

Do you know what a dissenting opinion is?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Henry Ford said:

A “correction”? “Exposed as a complete falsehood”?

Do you know what a dissenting opinion is?

Do you think they were being good journalists when they pushed the state dept. narrative so credulously?  It seems they took the official line at face value, closed ranks around it, and then badgered people that had the wherewithal to question it.  There was hardly any dissent at all.  

This interview with Admiral Lord West comes to mind.  The military man asks the tough questions, and the journalist gaslights him about whether he's "muddying the waters" in an "information war with Russia"!  It's supposed to be the other way around!  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
42 minutes ago, ren hoek said:

Do you think they were being good journalists when they pushed the state dept. narrative so credulously?  It seems they took the official line at face value, closed ranks around it, and then badgered people that had the wherewithal to question it.  There was hardly any dissent at all.  

This interview with Admiral Lord West comes to mind.  The military man asks the tough questions, and the journalist gaslights him about whether he's "muddying the waters" in an "information war with Russia"!  It's supposed to be the other way around!  

Are we changing the subject again to whether journalists properly investigated? I thought we were talking about your comments that the official report by the OPCW had been “exposed as a complete falsehood.”  Because of a single dissenting opinion that wasn’t put in that report. 

Edited by Henry Ford

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Henry Ford said:

Are we changing the subject again to whether journalists properly investigated? I thought we were talking about your comments that the official report by the OCWP had been “exposed as a complete falsehood.”  Because of a single dissenting opinion that wasn’t put in that report. 

What part of the chemical attacks in Douma being staged- and the countervailing evidence of the staging being suppressed- are you not getting?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.