No thread on Syria's chemical/gas attack massacre...

MVike28

right around the ACC
Joined
Jun 9, 2013
Messages
24,723
Reputation
4,614
Daps
102,290
Reppin
T.O.
@MVike28 you in here talking about dictators when the Saudi Arabia government would not even let women drive. One of the most vile shyts in the universe and you got their back. Really Breh?
Negroooo

motherfukk Al Saud when did I ever back those scumbags?

:pachaha:
 

Jello Biafra

A true friend stabs you in the front
Supporter
Joined
May 16, 2012
Messages
46,184
Reputation
4,943
Daps
120,888
Reppin
Behind You
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/09/06/obama-syria-g-20-congress/2775159/
So Pres. Obama is going to give an address from the White House on Tuesday to make his case for why Congress should vote for military action in Syria.
My question to those who are not feeling this whole Syria thing is: what could Obama say to change your mind?
And to those in favor of strikes against Syria: what do you want to hear the president say to bolster his case?
 

Digga38

The seperation between what's fake and what's real
Joined
May 20, 2012
Messages
8,601
Reputation
-1,295
Daps
7,987
Reppin
Dub-C
The "Assad might not have gassed his people" theory has officially hit the mainstream. Joe Scarborough of all people just tossed it out there that his sources in the intelligence community have told him it is not a slamdunk that Assad was the one who did the gas attack and that there are questions about who benefits from the use of chemical weapons more than Assad.
Its like I am in Bizarro world...Nancy Pelosi and Howard Dean are all gung-ho to blow shyt up, Obama and the architects of the Iraq debacle are in agreement, Marco Rubio all of a sudden changes his stance on intervening in Syria and Joe Scarborough is introducing conspiracy theories on his TV show.

Just shows how truly transparent the US govt is....two sides of the same coin
 

Dyce25

Rookie
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
125
Reputation
0
Daps
67
Reppin
NULL
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/09/06/obama-syria-g-20-congress/2775159/
So Pres. Obama is going to give an address from the White House on Tuesday to make his case for why Congress should vote for military action in Syria.
My question to those who are not feeling this whole Syria thing is: what could Obama say to change your mind?
And to those in favor of strikes against Syria: what do you want to hear the president say to bolster his case?

I can't speak for anyone but myself, but I just need concrete evidence that the chemical weapons were used by Assad. All other emotional pleas are worthless to me; I need facts. I still wouldn't be in favor of boots on the ground, but I would be in favor of some type of strike at that point. Even then, though, I would still rather have this be an issue handled by the international community. I think this is one of those situations where, if there is ever concrete proof provided, unilateral action would or could be warranted, but I would much rather that be a last resort.

What's telling to me, though, is that if you read the U.S.'s initial report on this chemical weapons attack, they're very specific in their language when saying they have proof that the weapons were used (well, duh). However, that's all they're specific about. The rest of the document just tries to provide vague arguments for why it was more than likely Assad that released the gas. Well, that's all well and fine. Logical arguments are great when they're backed up by evidence, but in this case, even the U.S.'s official report was nowhere near specific in saying Assad was definitely responsible. All they have on that point (you know, the main point) is conjecture and assumptions. Pay attention to the rhetoric being used officially. Only now are politicians even daring to state out loud that they "feel sure" or "have no doubts" that the weapons were used by Syria (which the language has to become more sure, because we haven't been buying it). Most of the rhetoric up to this point, though, has been more geared toward convincing the public of a logical, but possibly fallacious, argument... Chemical weapons were used; therefore, it was Syria who used them. We all know things are hardly ever that simple and straight-forward, and anyone with any average degree of logic can spot the fallacy in that blanket statement. They (politicians) know most Americans don't have even an average degree of logic though, so this rhetorical trick usually works. Hell, the only reason it didn't work to convince the public this time is because the memory of Iraq is simply too fresh. Otherwise, we'd be dropping bombs already.
 

Grams

Grams Grands Gucci G'd Up
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
11,245
Reputation
2,716
Daps
22,517
Reppin
Eastside
A Russian site is now claiming that China sent ships to the Mediterranean now too

http://telegrafist.org/2013/09/04/83711/

tumblr_mg8hg38FzR1rddl6ho1_500.gif


it's happening brehs
 
Top