Trump Orders Strikes on Syria Over Suspected Chemical Weapons Attack

[OriZ 3,157]

3 hours ago, jg121783 said:

Your right. They probably don't need us. They would probably prefer our boys die rather than theirs though. I am not trying to attack the people of Israel by the way. Just their corrupt government (not to say government corruption is exclusive to Israel). I still have yet to see anyone provide any solid credible evidence that Assad was behind the attacks and I am not about to take the word of the media or any government officials (even Trump) when governments and the media have a track record of being liars. Especially when the stakes are so high. I can't believe anyone is so gullible (especially Trump) to believe without question that Assad did this when the motive just isn't there. I suppose the war monger Bolton weaseling his way in the White House recently is just a big coincidence too.

Nah sorry but not really. Israel doesn't prefer any other "boys to die", quite the contrary. Israelis like doing things on their own, not just when it pertains to Syria, but even on a personal level. It's in our DNA. And if anything, there have been situations in the past where Israel wanted to be involved and was told no, such as the gulf war, where the US wanted to keep a coalition with Arab nations in tact. Israel by and large prefers to do things by itself so it can make sure it's getting done properly and the exact way it wants it done. BTW the government in Israel is no more corrupt compared to most countries: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_Perceptions_Index

 

The risk of anyone dying in attacks on Syria is very low, not saying it doesn't exist but it's low. Even what happened a couple of months ago where an Israeli warplane was shot down after several decades, was more of a freak situation and a combination of circumstances than any unique Syrian talent, but even then neither of the pilots died. Israeli pilots are known for being some of the best trained in the world, they know how to do their job and for taking down that plane Syria paid a heavy price(within minutes 1/3 of its air defense systems was destroyed).  You want to call people gullible without backing your opinion up except for "you haven't seen evidence"(nobody owes you any evidence, btw) that's your choice. I'm just going to say this - Iran, Syria and Russia are the new Germany, Italy and Japan. Believing them is akin to believing the latter in the 1930's. So not sure who's gullible here.

[jg121783 3,920]

1 hour ago, OriZ said:

I'm just going to say this - Iran, Syria and Russia are the new Germany, Italy and Japan. Believing them is akin to believing the latter in the 1930's. So not sure who's gullible here.

A few things. Germany, Italy and Japan in the 1930s were invading and taking over sovergn nations. Iran, Syria and Russia today don't even remotely compare to that. Which nations have they invaded and taken over recently? I am curious how you justify such an erroneous comparison. The other thing is I never once stated that I believe anything coming out of Iran, Syria or Russia so I have no idea where you got that part. Just because I don't blindly believe my government or the corporate media (both of which have an extensive track record of lying to get us into wars) doesn't mean by default I believe the other side.

 

1 hour ago, OriZ said:

nobody owes you any evidence, btw

. When the lives of my relatives and fellow country men and women who serve in the armed services are on the line and my taxpayer dollars are being spent not to mention the provocation of a superpower capable of ending all life on Earth is taking place you better believe myself along with every US citizen not to mention the rest of the world are in fact owed credible evidence to justify such actions.

[jg121783 3,920]

By the way the so called rebels (ISIS) have been caught using chemical weapons in the past:

 

https://www.globalresearch.ca/syria-un-mission-report-confirms-that-opposition-rebels-used-chemical-weapons-against-civilians-and-government-forces/5363139

 

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/6/syrian-rebels-used-sarin-nerve-gas-not-assads-regi/

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-syria-crisis-un/u-n-has-testimony-that-syrian-rebels-used-sarin-gas-investigator-idUSBRE94409Z20130505

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/10039672/UN-accuses-Syrian-rebels-of-chemical-weapons-use.html

[OriZ 3,157]

5 hours ago, jg121783 said:

A few things. Germany, Italy and Japan in the 1930s were invading and taking over sovergn nations. Iran, Syria and Russia today don't even remotely compare to that. Which nations have they invaded and taken over recently? I am curious how you justify such an erroneous comparison. The other thing is I never once stated that I believe anything coming out of Iran, Syria or Russia so I have no idea where you got that part. Just because I don't blindly believe my government or the corporate media (both of which have an extensive track record of lying to get us into wars) doesn't mean by default I believe the other side.

 

. When the lives of my relatives and fellow country men and women who serve in the armed services are on the line and my taxpayer dollars are being spent not to mention the provocation of a superpower capable of ending all life on Earth is taking place you better believe myself along with every US citizen not to mention the rest of the world are in fact owed credible evidence to justify such actions.

They didn't start invading nations until the very late 30's which is exactly my whole point. Playing nice with them now would be pulling a chamberlain. I don't agree with you that they don't remotely compare - Russia has invaded the Ukraine(Czech of the day) and Iran has sent its long arms to many different countries. I see alot of similarities, actually, and if they're allowed to continue unchecked, it won't be good. Like I said you won't always be shown evidence, at least not right away for multiple reasons, such as protecting the sources, making sure you are able to continue to rely on the same information in the future and others I won't get into. It's a long term play where you have to strategize and think a million times before you do or say anything, but I for one am glad the US, France, Britain and Israel all understand the severity of the threat posed to the world and are willing to do something about it.

[bcking 3,157]

9 hours ago, OriZ said:

The risk of anyone dying in attacks on Syria is very low, not saying it doesn't exist but it's low. Even what happened a couple of months ago where an Israeli warplane was shot down after several decades, was more of a freak situation and a combination of circumstances than any unique Syrian talent, but even then neither of the pilots died. Israeli pilots are known for being some of the best trained in the world, they know how to do their job and for taking down that plane Syria paid a heavy price(within minutes 1/3 of its air defense systems was destroyed).  You want to call people gullible without backing your opinion up except for "you haven't seen evidence"(nobody owes you any evidence, btw) that's your choice. I'm just going to say this - Iran, Syria and Russia are the new Germany, Italy and Japan. Believing them is akin to believing the latter in the 1930's. So not sure who's gullible here.

I get a bit of your comparison but I'm failing to connect each country to their "counterpart" in the 1930's. Who exactly would Syria be? You even admit in this same paragraph that they are weak and their strength pails in comparison to Israel. One plane is shot down and 1/3 of the entire country's air defense is destroyed? That hardly sounds like much of a threat.

 

Germany, Italy and Japan (well a lesser extent Italy) were partly a threat in the 1930's because they were ramping up their military strength and were becoming manufacturing powerhouses. While I think Russia is an obvious thread and something I worry about, I can hardly place the same level of concern on Iran or Syria (possibly Iran, but certainly not Syria). 

[OriZ 3,157]

39 minutes ago, bcking said:

 

Germany, Italy and Japan (well a lesser extent Italy) were partly a threat in the 1930's because they were ramping up their military strength and were becoming manufacturing powerhouses. While I think Russia is an obvious thread and something I worry about, I can hardly place the same level of concern on Iran or Syria (possibly Iran, but certainly not Syria). 

That's what Iran and Russia are trying to do with Syria(and hezbollah), but Israel isn't allowing it. I didn't say it's a 1 to 1 comparison but the situation as a whole is very much reminiscent. I guess if I had to compare them one by one I would say Iran is Germany, Russia is Japan and Syria is Italy but I'm really not trying to compare one by one that wasn't the point.

 

Actually here it says almost half but I remember it being one third:

 

https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-news/israel-took-out-half-of-syria-s-air-defenses-military-beliefs-1.5808981

Edited April 17, 2018 by OriZ

[bcking 3,157]

13 minutes ago, OriZ said:

That's what Iran and Russia are trying to do with Syria(and hezbollah), but Israel isn't allowing it. I didn't say it's a 1 to 1 comparison but the situation as a whole is very much reminiscent. I guess if I had to compare them one by one I would say Iran is Germany, Russia is Japan and Syria is Italy but I'm really not trying to compare one by one that wasn't the point.

 

Actually here it says almost half but I remember it being one third:

 

https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-news/israel-took-out-half-of-syria-s-air-defenses-military-beliefs-1.5808981

I can see Russia as a threat reminiscent of the 30's but I don't find Iran or Syria to be reasonable partners.

 

Again as you pointed out the relative strength of their neighbour (Israel) and its allies (Us) is nothing like the 1930s. France and UK were woefully unprepared with old equipment and complacent divisions.

 

Doesn't sound like it would break much of a sweat for Israel to wipe out Syria militarily. That just doesn't compare. Syria seems like a threat to it's own country and people, and essentially no one else.

Edited April 17, 2018 by bcking

[OriZ 3,157]

43 minutes ago, bcking said:

I can see Russia as a threat reminiscent of the 30's but I don't find Iran or Syria to be reasonable partners.

 

Again as you pointed out the relative strength of their neighbour (Israel) and its allies (Us) is nothing like the 1930s. France and UK were woefully unprepared with old equipment and complacent divisions.

 

Doesn't sound like it would break much of a sweat for Israel to wipe out Syria militarily. That just doesn't compare. Syria seems like a threat to it's own country and people, and essentially no one else.

Well you keep wanting to just look at Syria but I'm talking about a bigger picture of similar deceit here. If Syria could wipe Israel off the map, it would. Iran has declared numerous times that it wants to, and has actively taken steps to ensure it is able to. Thankfully, most of these moves have been thwarted. While you don't find Iran to be as big a threat as Russia I find it to probably be a bigger threat. People like Putin, to me, think alot more rationally than the fundamentalists in Iran. They wouldn't care if their whole country was destroyed as long as it meant they got to destroy their "zionist enemy".

Edited April 17, 2018 by OriZ

[bcking 3,157]

1 minute ago, OriZ said:

Well you keep wanting to just look at Syria but I'm talking about a bigger picture of similar deceit here. If Syria could wipe Israel off the map, it would. Iran has declared numerous times that it wants to, and has actively taken steps to ensure it is able to. Thankfully, most of these moves have been thwarted. While you don't find Iran to be as big a threat as Russia I find it to probably be a bigger threat. People like Putin, to me, think alot more rationally than the fundamentalists in Iran. They wouldn't care if their whole country was destroyed as long as it meant they got to destroy their "zionist enemy".

I agree that Putin is more rational, which is why I don't really buy into the threat of "global annihilation" when dealing with him. He doesn't want to destroy the world in Nuclear War any more than we do.

 

When I think about threat I think about what kind of damage (up to, but generally not including nuclear) a country can do to its neighbours and how far that damage can spread. Russia is a significant military powerhouse and it is surrounded by mostly small, weak countries. The same issues are present that were there decades ago. Perhaps with a coalition people could hold them back, but without the USA Europe would likely not be successful. It would potentially be even worse now than it was in the past because they have had more time to build up their economy and manufacturing strength. 

 

Syria is a non-issue, threat wise on the world stage. The issues I see for Syria are internal. It's horrible what they are doing to their own people, but are they a legitimate threat to anyone else? Not really. You even provided the best example. They shoot down one plane (which itself was a fluke, as you claim) and 1/2 - 1/3 of their entire air defense is wiped out. That isn't a Germany or Japan, it isn't even an Italy.

 

Iran is sort of in the middle. I agree that they are crazy, and I recognize they want to destroy Israel. What shot do they really have? Nuclear disarmament is a good direction to go with them because as long as the nuclear option is off the table I just don't really see them achieving their goal or even coming close. I also don't see them as a big threat to their surrounding neighbours in the way Japan was in Asia and Germany was in Europe (and to a lesser extent Italy...they were really just Germany's lapdog). 

 

---------------

 

I'm not trying to minimize the fact that both Syria and Iran want Israel destroyed. But Israel is well equipped to protect itself, as you point out here often. Syria especially has no chance. I don't think Iran has much of one either. An adequate comparison to the 1930's would show these countries actively ramping up their strength to a level that is out matched among their neighbours. I don't see that from Syria or Iran really. Certainly not surpassing Israel, and especially not with Israel's allies (ourselves included).

[OriZ 3,157]

I have nothing against the people of Iran mind you, only their government, as I mentioned before one of my ex's mother is a muslim from Iran, but I think Iran after the revolution is definitely trying to play the role of Germany prior to WWII, and anyone ignoring that is sticking their head in the sand much like people did back then. The difference is these days, it seems like at least some people aren't willing to be another chamberlain. I was basically comparing Iran to Germany in that sense and being backed by another superpower with it being Russia this time instead of Japan. Syria is part of the puzzle but not as a major force, not as big as Italy. I mean if it helps the comparison we can change Syria to N Korea lol

[bcking 3,157]

2 minutes ago, OriZ said:

I have nothing against the people of Iran mind you, only their government, as I mentioned before one of my ex's mother is a muslim from Iran, but I think Iran after the revolution is definitely trying to play the role of Germany prior to WWII, and anyone ignoring that is sticking their head in the sand much like people did back then. The difference is these days, it seems like at least some people aren't willing to be another chamberlain. I was basically comparing Iran to Germany in that sense and being backed by another superpower with it being Russia this time instead of Japan. Syria is part of the puzzle but not as a major force, not as big as Italy. I mean if it helps the comparison we can change Syria to N Korea lol

Isn't Russia providing significant concrete support to Iran in terms of military equipment and resources? A lot of Iran's military comes from Iran.

 

I don't recall Germany/Japan having that kind of economic relationship. Germany didn't need Japan in that way. It was more of just a strategic relationship.

 

Iran is an Italy to Russia's Germany, at best.

[OriZ 3,157]

I'm not necessarily comparing military strength, but rather objectives and plans to achieve them including deceit. Regarding Iran, I don't think they have a shot at destruction, but they do have the ability to keep being as pesky as they have been and cause casualties here and there via hezabollah mostly but also Hamas which they back and other attacks around the world(like the one in Argentina). Regarding them being a threat to their neighbors just ask Saudi. I'll take Saudi any day over Iran, any day. It's true that Israel is stronger than it has ever been, but it's also taking a toll in that way since so much money that has to go to defense could have been used on other things. I find Iran today to be more dangerous to the world than Italy was in the 40's.

[Póg mo 1,749]

This is the story of a town called Douma, a ravaged, stinking place of smashed apartment blocks – and of an underground clinic whose images of suffering allowed three of the Western world’s most powerful nations to bomb Syria last week. There’s even a friendly doctor in a green coat who, when I track him down in the very same clinic, cheerfully tells me that the “gas” videotape which horrified the world – despite all the doubters – is perfectly genuine.

 

War stories, however, have a habit of growing darker. For the same 58-year old senior Syrian doctor then adds something profoundly uncomfortable: the patients, he says, were overcome not by gas but by oxygen starvation in the rubbish-filled tunnels and basements in which they lived, on a night of wind and heavy shelling that stirred up a dust storm.

 

As Dr Assim Rahaibani announces this extraordinary conclusion, it is worth observing that he is by his own admission not an eyewitness himself and, as he speaks good English, he refers twice to the jihadi gunmen of Jaish el-Islam [the Army of Islam] in Douma as “terrorists” – the regime’s word for their enemies, and a term used by many people across Syria. Am I hearing this right? Which version of events are we to believe?

By bad luck, too, the doctors who were on duty that night on 7 April were all in Damascus giving evidence to a chemical weapons enquiry, which will be attempting to provide a definitive answer to that question in the coming weeks.

 

At the same time, inspectors from the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) are currently blocked from coming here to the site of the alleged gas attack themselves, ostensibly because they lacked the correct UN permits.

Before we go any further, readers should be aware that this is not the only story in Douma. There are the many people I talked to amid the ruins of the town who said they had “never believed in” gas stories – which were usually put about, they claimed, by the armed Islamist groups. These particular jihadis survived under a blizzard of shellfire by living in other’s people’s homes and in vast, wide tunnels with underground roads carved through the living rock by prisoners with pick-axes on three levels beneath the town. I walked through three of them yesterday, vast corridors of living rock which still contained Russian – yes, Russian – rockets and burned-out cars.  

 

Continued on link:

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/syria-chemical-attack-gas-douma-robert-fisk-ghouta-damascus-a8307726.html?amp

 

 

 

[smilesammich 10,727]

2 hours ago, Póg mo said:

This is the story of a town called Douma, a ravaged, stinking place of smashed apartment blocks – and of an underground clinic whose images of suffering allowed three of the Western world’s most powerful nations to bomb Syria last week. There’s even a friendly doctor in a green coat who, when I track him down in the very same clinic, cheerfully tells me that the “gas” videotape which horrified the world – despite all the doubters – is perfectly genuine.

 

War stories, however, have a habit of growing darker. For the same 58-year old senior Syrian doctor then adds something profoundly uncomfortable: the patients, he says, were overcome not by gas but by oxygen starvation in the rubbish-filled tunnels and basements in which they lived, on a night of wind and heavy shelling that stirred up a dust storm.

 

As Dr Assim Rahaibani announces this extraordinary conclusion, it is worth observing that he is by his own admission not an eyewitness himself and, as he speaks good English, he refers twice to the jihadi gunmen of Jaish el-Islam [the Army of Islam] in Douma as “terrorists” – the regime’s word for their enemies, and a term used by many people across Syria. Am I hearing this right? Which version of events are we to believe?

By bad luck, too, the doctors who were on duty that night on 7 April were all in Damascus giving evidence to a chemical weapons enquiry, which will be attempting to provide a definitive answer to that question in the coming weeks.

 

At the same time, inspectors from the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) are currently blocked from coming here to the site of the alleged gas attack themselves, ostensibly because they lacked the correct UN permits.

Before we go any further, readers should be aware that this is not the only story in Douma. There are the many people I talked to amid the ruins of the town who said they had “never believed in” gas stories – which were usually put about, they claimed, by the armed Islamist groups. These particular jihadis survived under a blizzard of shellfire by living in other’s people’s homes and in vast, wide tunnels with underground roads carved through the living rock by prisoners with pick-axes on three levels beneath the town. I walked through three of them yesterday, vast corridors of living rock which still contained Russian – yes, Russian – rockets and burned-out cars.  

 

Continued on link:

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/syria-chemical-attack-gas-douma-robert-fisk-ghouta-damascus-a8307726.html?amp

 

 

 

terrible. https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2018/04/12/602022877/the-u-s-has-welcomed-only-11-syrian-refugees-this-year

[Ban Hammer 13,445]