Syria Sarin Gas Attack - 100+ Casualties

[Deleted]

The US should focus on Russia, then China.

This falls squarely under "Russia".

And you're right, I'm never going to watch some ridiculous conspiracy theorist video. The fact the mods haven't IP banned the lot of you Russian Internet Research Agency-type folks makes an ongoing mockery of to their so-called "moderation".

Frankly I should be reporting you for posting that.

Look who is the conspiracy guy here, anyone who disagrees with you is Russian and apparently Putin cares about some off-topic forum to 1 decade + game, wow.

Paul summed up nicely in his video a lot of sound arguments.

Lol "it hurts Russia" says the guy who complains about middle east entanglements?

Reporting me? You are the one who is arguing on the side of al qaida narrative in Syria, simply because it coincides with your slimy allies like Saudi-Arabia.

- - - Updated - - -

So you didn't actually report him for trolling, even though you said you did, thus lying?

I should report you for trolling.

No, I did report him, I said what I should do in such a situation. Not that anything will happen, mods agree too much with Skroe n such war mongers too much to police them.

[Skroe]

Wow, it sure would be convenient for people who want a military intervention in Syria if Assad was to do something totally insane and unnecessary like using chemical weapons just before US troops are to start withdrawing from the area.

Irony is a bitch, isn't it? Buckle up. This is gonna hurt.

Now let's talk to our starting line up.


National Security John Bolton, Neocon. Hates Russia. hates China. REALLY hates Iran. Bucket list: want's to wipe a small Arab country off the face of the Earth.



Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis. Architect (along with McMaster) of the new US National Defense Strategy that defined Russia as our primary geopolitical foe. Apostle of the US Military orthodoxy that the US must militarily contain Russian aggression in Eastern Europe and the Middle East. Fired by Obama for saying the Iran deal was a bad idea. No fan of Iran. Wanted to launch a larger strike on Assad last year.



CIA Director Michael Pompeo, perhaps soon Secretary of State. Directed the CIA to take significant anti-Russian, anti-Iran and Anti-Assad measures over the last year.


Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, MArine General Joe Dunford. Close friends with Mattis. Dunford has been a leading advocate for a containment strategy for Russia and a transition away from counter-terrorism towards traditional military roles... namely, tanks, bombers, submarines and Marines doing actual Marine things. Trump likes him.
https://www.nbcnews.com/video/joseph...-1006599235729

Called Russia "the greatest thrat to American Security" last year.

In fact he's been saying it for years now:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.07de907b7206




In short, I hope you like what you bought Venant. I'm going to sit over here and /popcorn.

[Deleted]

This contrasts against what Russia does, what China does, and what Assad does... which is to build military power to intimidate the enemy... the enemy almost meaning exclusively the people they rule. That explains Russia's farcical new nuclear weapons programs that are militarily useless horror weapons. That explains China's TV prop weapons. This explains Assad's use of chemical weapons.

Which is a perfectly rational explanation of why the Syrian regime Acquired Chemical weapons, Not why they would be so pants on head retarded as to use them.

We in the west are obsessed with the military utility, that we rarely consider the utility of horror for a regime like Assad. He doesn't just want to secure his military objectives. He wants to invoke terror in order to compel the remaining resistance to collapse and there leave scars that prevent future uprisings.

A perfectly reasonable argument, which is why indiscriminately used them several years ago when his regime was on the ropes - Oh wait No he didn't. Because he knows that the west has an arbitrary dislike of chemical weapons and so would very likely provoke a very unwelcome response from the the west. If he didn't use them when he was losing, why in gods name would he use them now when everyone, and i mean, Everyone is pretty much in agreement that the war is effectively over, the only thing that could change this is large scale action by the west.
He simply he would have to be mentally retarded or completely unaware of how the western world functions - I'd honestly say, that i think it's more likely that this a gulf of tonkin incident, rather than something Assad ordered.

And in so far as the "Resistance being literally months away from collapsing".... yeah, we've been hearing that one for the past 3 years. Fact is, Assad doesn't have the resources to hold more than about 50-55% of the country.

Three years ago the rebels were advancing and engaging in offensive actions.
Well after the US involvement, which is guaranteed if he ever put Chemical weapons into anything even approximating strategic use, he is likely to control 0% of the country - Besides, your figure's are a bit off - He already controls about 65% of the country, and if you add in the Kurdish bits (who aren't stupid enough to think being independent is a good idea) that's even more of the country, it's over, it's been over for 6-12 months.

[Deleted]

Do Syrians ever get a say in what happens? or does imperial hubris stop anyone from caring?

[Deleted]

Who knew that utter ignorance of the rest of the world happened in Europe, too.

You are suggesting that the hispanic world, on average, doesn't have beter educational systems than the MENA region?
Because you would be wrong.

[Mormolyce]

That's what Western media claims. Surely it must be true

You tried this one the last time he gassed his own citizens, remember?

- - - Updated - - -

Do Syrians ever get a say in what happens? or does imperial hubris stop anyone from caring?

They get to scream helplessly while their government gasses them?

[Deleted]

I'll be blunt because the European obsession with refugees has become the most eye-rollingest of episodes: you'll be okay champ.

Skroe, just No - your experience is fundamentally different than the EU experience.

The US will do something. You will probably hate it. And that's the way it's going to be.

Skroe literally every thing the west has done in the ME region has been a clusterfuck since the first Gulf war - Wait that's a lie, there is the Iran treaty, that one seems to not have been a fuckup (as of now).
At some point, Not doing something is probably your best bet.

[Skroe]

Which is a perfectly rational explanation of why the Syrian regime Acquired Chemical weapons, Not why they would be so pants on head retarded as to use them.

He would use them because of the deterrent effect on his population going forward, and the immediate demoralizing effect. And as to why... you qualify it as "pants on head" retarded. That's a strange argument to make. He has used them for years, and up to this point, he has endured very mild consequences. A hand-slapping. Strikes on a single air base with the wrong kind of ordinance by the US.

It is in fact, ENTIRELY RATIONAL for him TO use them at this point. Years ago it wouldn't have been. The fear of consquences by the west was still there. Now though? He's walked over Red lines so many times he doesn't believe in them. So his use is entirely reasonable. In fact, from him his perspective, he'd be crazy not to order their use.

A perfectly reasonable argument, which is why indiscriminately used them several years ago when his regime was on the ropes - Oh wait No he didn't.

This reflects the Western thinking, again, of military utility. Militarily chemical weapons change little on the battlefield from a utility perspective in the manner Assad us using them. Bombing of civilians with normal bombs versus chemically filled drums kills people all the same. The difference is the horror due to chemical effects versus explosions.

Assad, reasoned, rightly, that he could (especially with Russian help) regain the military initiative using conventional weapons. Having done that, he now seeks to secure his power base by using terror weapons. Again, perfectly rational.

In fact, I want to offer a comparison if I could. Recall some of the hypothetical "US / Russian war in the Baltics" posts/discussions this form has had over th years. One thing that weirds most westerners out in reading it is being informed that Russia might use nuclear weapons pre-emptively, as part of their so called Escalate to De-escalate doctrine... that Russia may use low-yield weapons against something - like say an Estonian tank brigade - as a terror weapon against the marshaling of a NATO military response. Westerners, who think of Mutually Assured Destruction like some kind of ridiculous force of nature, rather than the emergent property it is, keep getting weirded out by the fact that not all nuclear weapon use (or even most) is likely to end in a nuclear holocaust.

So with reference to that, i look at your post, and I see an individual who can't comprehend savage use of military technology for strategic ends (rather than tactical) through savagery. You keep saying that it is irrational for Assad to do this or that, but that's not the case if his intent - as it is - is to impose horror, rather than, in a very western way, secure tactical objectives. He is, with the rest of his campaign, doing both. Walking and chewing bumble gum. Retaking the country and making sure that the rebel's children will tell stories of the time they were gassed.

Why is this difficult to accept?

Because he knows that the west has an arbitrary dislike of chemical weapons and so would very likely provoke a very unwelcome response from the the west.

A response that, up to this point, has been limited in scope and has not changed the reality for him whatsoever.

If he didn't use them when he was losing, why in gods name would he use them now when everyone, and i mean, Everyone is pretty much in agreement that the war is effectively over, the only thing that could change this is large scale action by the west.

Because you're still thinking of it like a Westerner and not a bloodthristy monster who wants to make sure there isn't Syrian Civil War Part II, in 2028. And he isn't doing that with peacekeepers, a truth and reconcillation commission or any other western contrusuct.

He's doing that through murder of his enemy and terror, pure and simple. Wanna know why? Because historically it works. He will absolutely succeed in doing this, if he is allowed to.

He simply he would have to be mentally retarded or completely unaware of how the western world functions

Except it doesn't work like this, because Obama let him get away with it, Europe has a decade of military rebuilding ahead of them, and Trump did only a modest thing.

He reckons - rightly - that some air strikes against stuff he barely uses are worth the strategic effect of using chemical weapons.

- I'd honestly say, that i think it's more likely that this a gulf of tonkin incident, rather than something Assad ordered.

That's just sick. Really. I'm not going to even dignify this with a response.

Three years ago the rebels were advancing and engaging in offensive actions.

Then Russia showed up.

Well after the US involvement, which is guaranteed if he ever put Chemical weapons into anything even approximating strategic use,

Is it? Because we've been here before. Several times. He's a gambler and he's winning his gambles. He's making the smart gamble: that the US response will be about the scale of previous responses.

My argument is it needs to be far more than that to rebuild this norm that you're, mistakingly, thinking is still in effect. It's not. The only way we put it back in effect is actually delivering stern consequences. Because right now, there is no effective international prohibition against the use of chemical weapons.

Hell, you'd think Russia's terrorist attack in the UK last month would have underscored that. These people are not afraid of consequences. And people like yourself, GoblinP - yes you - with what you wrote one quote above, keep giving them the opening not to be. They exploit plausible deniability. And you _let_ them. You. The lot of you.

I honestly think if he gassed an entire City, and 10,000 people died, this thread would be the exact same, almost word for word. Conspiracy theorists in need of medication. ISIS-blamers because they want to not focus on Russia. And other assorted detached from reality bullshit.

And let me be perfectly clear. I think you're detached from reality on this subject, with that quote above.

- - - Updated - - -

Skroe, just No - your experience is fundamentally different than the EU experience.

I gotta be honest. The weekly German-Muslim-Refugees are all rapists and the daily Sweden-is-going-to-shit nonsense threads have entirely convinced me that the refugee crisis is more about European fears about change (change in general) than it is a plausable security threat.

I'm going to throw what a lot of Europeans said at us Americansabout 15 years ago right at you. Catch.

"If you got a problem with terrorists, it's a job for the police and security services".

Have fun with that.

Skroe literally every thing the west has done in the ME region has been a clusterfuck since the first Gulf war - Wait that's a lie, there is the Iran treaty, that one seems to not have been a fuckup (as of now).
At some point, Not doing something is probably your best bet.

We tried doing nothing in late 2013.

And look where we are.

And that is going to be the argument John Bolton himself gives to Trump tomorrow. Not the Fox News Audience. The President (for now). So get ready for very much a "something".

I love Europe but jesus-tapdancing-christ. You people never change. It's always passivity with you people. I'm terribly sorry if this impacts your 'holidays' to Turkey.

No wait. I don't care.

[Deleted]

bunch of aircrafts just whipped over Lebanon to Syria

[Tic Tacs]

bunch of aircrafts just whipped over Lebanon to Syria

Yes, most likely air strikes on SAA positions, make sure they don't forget who actually runs the show in Syria, happened before, not going to solve anything, business as usual.

[anveena]

Nice. Now hopefully Trump isn't lacking a pair of balls like Obama was.

[Deleted]

Yes, most likely air strikes on SAA positions, make sure they don't forget who actually runs the show in Syria, happened before, not going to solve anything, business as usual.

Regime sources are reporting that Assad's T4 Airbase in Homs is under attack, unconfirmed reports

Could have been cruise missiles going over Lebanon not jets

[Orbitus]

You should have just linked Infowars. Paul Joseph Watson is fucking retarded.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes I can, he replied faster than the run time, which means he didn't watch it, unless he has a time machine, and he is "replying" to a post where the only thing that was on it, was that video. So yeah, I should report him for trolling.

There is no rule saying that someone has to watch a video. Jesus fucking christ.

[Deleted]

https://twitter.com/Dalatrm/status/983150912846880768

looks like its punative measures have started

Syrian State TV confirms an attack on T4 AB in central Syria

judging by the videos of possible cruise missiles its the US

Pentagon officials say there is no truth to reports that US has launched an attack against Assad bases in Syria.

Israel?

Unconfirmed reports that Al-Seen and Shayrat air bases have also been targeted.

[DinardJoulien]

Yes yes, it is therefore perfectly reasonable to blame any chemical attack anywhere automatically on Russia, and as a consequence take immediate anti-Russian actions.

For example, if it so happens that Trump intends to withdraw US troops from Syria, arranging a convenient "gas attack by Assad" is all that is needed to not only stop Trump's plans but also to escalate the neo-cold war against Russia.

Blaming someone who acts like a shithead is easier.
If Russia didn't act like an aggressive bully for the last few years, no-one would have assigned blame to it. Putin wanted to preserve his power at any cost? Well, now he has his power, by ruining relationship with the rest of the world.
What we have here is a result of his own doing.

Also, it was Russia that had kickstarted new cold war. Obviously it plays in favor of US. Only an idiot wouldn't use mistakes and weakness of the opponent to promote themselves.

[Santti]

Yes I can, he replied faster than the run time, which means he didn't watch it, unless he has a time machine, and he is "replying" to a post where the only thing that was on it, was that video. So yeah, I should report him for trolling.

Well someone is butthurt nobody is watching a video made by a lunatic, employed by a stable genius Alex Jones.

Link something more credible next time.

[Venant]

In short, I hope you like what you bought Venant. I'm going to sit over here and /popcorn.

I'm pretty sure you said the same thing the last time there was a false flag attempt at drawing the US into war in Syria.

[Skroe]

I'm pretty sure you said the same thing the last time there was a false flag attempt at drawing the US into war in Syria.

Oh no. John Bolton wasn't there last time pal. Last time was McMaster.

Enjoy your Arch Neocon.

And if you think this is a false flag... you don't need a forum conversation. You need a board licensed therapist.

[CostinR]

So what's going on. Is Syria being hit by the US or not? Seeing a lot of confusion right now.

I read reports saying 3 major Syrian airbases had been hit and that fighter jets where entering Syrian air space while US navy were firing cruise missiles.

[psiko74]

I dont think we should get involved.