• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: deficiT | tryptakid | Foreigner

Syrian civil war thread

bloodshed344 said:
You should be president.

Okay, I really doubt Assad set any bombs or anything. He doesn't look like the military type. I doubt he even knows how chemical weapons work. Also no one knows even what FORCE set up those chemical weapons, so why would you assume it's the president of the fucking country? That makes no sense.

Now, you're very cynical of US, yet you support the retardation.

Oh yeah, why should chemical weapons be the fucking red line, when 100,000 have already died and the chemical weapons killed such a small amount compared to that? Oh, 100,000 isn't a big deal but OMG KEMKAL WEPONS WE MUST KILL THE TERRORSTS DEY USIN CHEMICAL WEPONS DEYS DA DEVIL!

You know at this point the supposition is that rebels were the ones that set up the chemical weapons?

All of this at this point screams of false flag, to give OBAMA and HIS CRONIES the chance to intervene. Yeah I just used the phrase Obama and his cronies. lmao

Also, figures you'd be from England. I always see English people having such retarded political ideas like yours. No wonder Ireland doesn't want to be connected to you!

Now you're normally very cynical, but when it comes to the stupidest fucking war yet you want to join in on the stupidity? You were probably just cynical to look cool, because you obviously don't know why people are anti-war.

Tell you what, I don't care if Assad is raping babies and then throwing them in gas chambers... even if he is why should the "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" intervene? Why doesn't Israel, or Russia, or China? Why the United States of America. Now, you're normally cynical, but since you get emotionally charged from headlines (which some people get paid good money to write, and for good reasons because it works on sheep like you!) you forget everything and go "WAR WAR WAR"! Tell you what buddy, your post is obviously emotionally charged and emotion shouldn't factor into war. You know what should factor into war? Defense of state. Syria gave US government permission to investigate this gas attack, so do you really think Syria is going to put the US govt in danger? How is US invading Syria a defense of state? How???

Lets say there's a really bad serial killer in China. Does this mean we should invade China so we can arrest him? Let's say that some in Ukraine is breaking US patent laws. Does that mean we invade Ukraine to protect our patents?

Seriously, you can't give a good reason. You can't formulate a good reply to this post. So go ahead, realize you were being stupid and don't come back to this topic because it's not for people that have no attention span. Because if you did have an attention span, it would have allowed you to pay attention and not make such a stupid post. So yeah, either leave or attempt a (futile) reply.

and by the way, I hear there's some bad drug cartels in Mexico. So why aren't you in Mexico killing drug dealers? I don't understand. As far as I'm aware there's big child pornography trade in Russia, so why aren't you killing those evil fuckers? You must support child pornographers since you're not moving to Russia and killing them. You probably also support people dying from poison gas since you're not in Syria investigating, or at the very least killing random people (Because like you said, you'd love to kill the president of the country who wasn't even linked to the attacks)

I mean, people got gassed in Syria. You would kill their president because their population got gassed. You should probably kill everyone in the country. and if you're too much of a bitch to do it yourself you need to convince England to invade Syria and kill every single man, woman, and child because of the atrocities that were committed by who knows. I mean, next time a crime happens in USA, why doesnt China just invade us and kill everyone? Because you know, like crimes and stuff is happening, people gots to pay!!! So China needs to come kill everyone.

I mean it makes total sense. But if you want to know an alternative, maybe you could let people work it out for themselves. Here's examples of what happens when you don't let people work out stuff for themselves:
http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-po...-split-fight-between-her-daughter-and-son-law
Iraq
Afghanistan
Any kind of domestic dispute ever (Government intervention almost always fucks families over)

People with your mindset... that's why political propaganda is made. It's not gonna work on anyone intelligent.
Click to expand...

Jesus. If you spoke to someone like this in real life, 9 times out of 10 it would result in a fistfight.

Just imagine for a second how impossible rational discussion would be in this forum if everyone spoke like this.
 
23536 said:
Jesus. If you spoke to someone like this in real life, 9 times out of 10 it would result in a fistfight.

Just imagine for a second how impossible rational discussion would be in this forum if everyone spoke like this.
Click to expand...

I just saw a fist fight. Was near a pub surprisingly.
 
We haven't actually supplied any weapons officially yet either. It was green lit in June but concerns as to which hands they'd fall in has delayed it.
 
bloodshed344 said:
You should be president.

Okay, I really doubt Assad set any bombs or anything. He doesn't look like the military type. I doubt he eve.......
Click to expand...

+1 to that whole post!

I'm hoping the UK Parliament smacks down Cameron and Hague (god I hate that man) when it comes back to vote on the Syria issue. It will show whether our government has any spine (ha! i know, i know).. but if they do vote for an attack then there really has to be some massive fucking demonstrations. This is not Iraq or Libya. Whilst I hope Assad would show restraint and not ignite a regional war that could end with chem/bio/nuclear being dropped on Israel and vica-versa.. I wouldn't place stock in him not doing that.

I think it's quite clear someone is pulling Cameron and Hague's strings. I don't think the majority of MP's, or the public, really believe that a limited strike is going to make any difference what so ever and won't start a regional war. This is all ignoring the fact of course that the UN has yet to present its findings, or the "intelligence sources" who claim to know for sure it was Assad. No evidence has yet been presented.
 
morninggloryseed said:
Money for who? There isn't much money to be made in the kind of Syria engagement the US is talking.
Click to expand...

The war industry

Lockheed Martin
Boeing
Raytheon
Northrop Grumman

Just to name a few of the top multi BILLION dollar companies that also have political weight to start wars.

Also Middle east political chess games West vs East who owns more oil reserves and controls armies in strategic places. The US wouldn't want Syria if it didn't play into some middle east strategy.
 
flat-line said:
The war industry

Lockheed Martin
Boeing
Raytheon
Northrop Grumman

Just to name a few of the top multi BILLION dollar companies that also have political weight to start wars.

Also Middle east political chess games West vs East who owns more oil reserves and controls armies in strategic places. The US wouldn't want Syria if it didn't play into some middle east strategy.
Click to expand...

This.
 
The oil and gas pipeline policies in that area are pretty complex as well, and have certainly given some parties motivation to act against Syria. Strategically it is also beneficial to eliminate a close ally to both Russia and Iran.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903591104576467631289250392.html

This puppet show is sickening. How many people have to die in order that western goals be furthered..

The US propaganda has been pretty crazy all along. Comparing US media to German media was quite sobering with regard to how one sided the coverage in the US was.
 
Last edited:
BLOOdSHED 344 reply to your post

Christ man, I'm not saying I'd actually massacre "evil" people with an AK47 -it' was intended as a figure of speech for dramatic intent. You need to relax and learn to read between the lines...I'm no hysterical knee jerk liberal who advocates violence to put an end to violence out of some biblical notion of right or wrong, and btw I abhor when a powerful nation decides to play world police, my own country included.

It's easy to throw insults like "retard" around. I'll give you an example:I believe your a retard for misinterpreting my post as calling for US intervention, jumping to conclusions regarding my political views based on a seven word post,, and for suggesting the rebels have seized the chemical weapons; which is insane- Assad's forces will have that shit locked down tight, and the fact that chemical weapons have been detected at all sounds very much like the last ditch tactics of a desperate dictator facing overthrow. Why have the rebels not used it as a bartering chip? Why have there been no reports of them using other Syrian army equipment?

No, I take that back;I didn't join this forum to trade crass insults with people. My statement was one of simple principle: people are quick to bitch about injustice when their government fucks with them in some trivial way, and imagining myself living in a place where my government are dragging people away, torturing them in the most brutal ways possible for the vaguest suspicion of treachery, has made me pay attention to this topic.

And suggesting intervention in any way is pointless is fucking idiotic. I imagine you believe stopping hitler was a mistake? How about trying to stop Al queda? Or what about if you were being attacked in the street: by your logic I suppose there's no point in there even being a police force?
 
dopemegently said:
BLOOdSHED 344 reply to your post

Christ man, I'm not saying I'd actually massacre "evil" people with an AK47 -it' was intended as a figure of speech for dramatic intent. You need to relax and learn to read between the lines...I'm no hysterical knee jerk liberal who advocates violence to put an end to violence out of some biblical notion of right or wrong, and btw I abhor when a powerful nation decides to play world police, my own country included.

It's easy to throw insults like "retard" around. I'll give you an example:I believe your a retard for misinterpreting my post as calling for US intervention, jumping to conclusions regarding my political views based on a seven word post,, and for suggesting the rebels have seized the chemical weapons; which is insane- Assad's forces will have that shit locked down tight, and the fact that chemical weapons have been detected at all sounds very much like the last ditch tactics of a desperate dictator facing overthrow. Why have the rebels not used it as a bartering chip? Why have there been no reports of them using other Syrian army equipment?

No, I take that back;I didn't join this forum to trade crass insults with people. My statement was one of simple principle: people are quick to bitch about injustice when their government fucks with them in some trivial way, and imagining myself living in a place where my government are dragging people away, torturing them in the most brutal ways possible for the vaguest suspicion of treachery, has made me pay attention to this topic.

And suggesting intervention in any way is pointless is fucking idiotic. I imagine you believe stopping hitler was a mistake? How about trying to stop Al queda? Or what about if you were being attacked in the street: by your logic I suppose there's no point in there even being a police force?
Click to expand...

I don't think Hitler is really comparable to this situation. See, Assad isn't a dictator trying to take over the world. Also, the US waited quite awhile to intervene in that case.
 
I didn't mean any offence with what I was saying there; I'm clucking hard today. No, Assad is in no way comparable to Hitler- I was just using that as an analogy that intervention is justified in some cases- Ill admit, I do tend to reduce things to simple principle sometimes. We obviously shouldn't fall over ourselves to rush into Syria, as there would be ramifications with regard to Russia.
 
dopemegently said:
I didn't mean any offence with what I was saying there; I'm clucking hard today. No, Assad is in no way comparable to Hitler- I was just using that as an analogy that intervention is justified in some cases- Ill admit, I do tend to reduce things to simple principle sometimes. We obviously shouldn't fall over ourselves to rush into Syria, as there would be ramifications with regard to Russia.
Click to expand...

Yeah, this sounds a bit more reasonable. I'll admit it, my other post was a bit crazy, but think of it as a suboxone-fueled fuck-the-USA rant. Of course as my good friend, the moderator, pointed out it would have started a fight in real life, but in real life you would have had the chance to have your word before I said all that. So there is a certain difference to online posts in that way, I can go uninterrupted.

I don't think the United States should intervene in Syria at all. It's not our place. Sounds like a job for interpol.
But, in regards to ramifications to Russia, I had no idea. No, I'm just quite against the idea of intervention. I don't think the US should invade anywhere except for defense. I'm kind of amazed that you knew about ramifications to Russia and yet you still condoned intervention. But there is a theme I notice in people from the UK. They believe in more government action than everyone else I've ever talked to as a relative whole. I obviously haven't talked to that many, but I have had quite a few internet friends from there.
 
Haha your not wrong about us in the UK-we live in "health and safety culture" and are used to big government attempting to save us from ourselves.

My original meaning was that we should provide indirect assistance to these people training weapons etc and let them fix their own country then slap assad in the hague on war crimes charges. I think its difficult for one country to swoop in and overhaul anothers entire political system: just look at our involvement in Iraq. I should have explained myself more, i make that mistake. My original post was tacky as hell though, I'm literal cringing..l

I imagine the real juicy info is kept strictly closed-doors, making an informed opinion impossible, but i know russia and syria are tight, russia have provided an insane ammount of support over the years and Its likely any syrian chemical weapons have russian trademarks on

BTW I'm on suboxone also and was clucking like a chicken for 48 damn hours
 
Last edited:
I think anytime the Saudis are willing to to just give Russia oil to get them to back off, you know they are afraid of something, and I cheer for it.

Most governments of the world right now are using their citizens, especially those in the military, as pawns. People generally want the same thing: peace, love, harmony, tasty food...

Sickens me that the USA can ally itself with groups like Al Nusra Front. American policymakers and the administration are out of their minds. Chances are pretty good, these days, that whoever the US attacks, either doesn't use a central bank or interferes with the oil hegemony that the UAE has in place.

WWIII right around the corner.
 
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/sas-hunting-syrian-missiles-allies-2231694

"The British hunt for missiles and chemical weapons – which includes the SAS, Special Boat Service, Special Reconnaissance Regiment and MI6 spies – is one of the most hazardous in modern times as they are up against Assad’s forces as well as some rebel elements.

At the top of the hit list are the President’s sophisticated long-range mobile missile batteries – some of which could be used against our jets."

===

As I've sad before, MI6 (and the CIA, Mossad etc) have been operating inside Syria for a long time. Now the SAS is in there, probably been in there a long time too. This is exactly what happened with Libya.. preparing the ground, arming and helping the opposition. If we hadn't been helping these 'rebels' this whole thing might have resolved itself a long time ago.
 
I think its a one BIG set up just for the UK and U.S folks to invade an another Islamic nation. Call me crazy if you want but I would not put it past the assumption that the west is lying and making up excuses just to go into Syria, for whatever reason, oil pipe lines? natural resources? attacking more Muslims to stop future terrorism? who knows...If anything an military action by west may breed more terrorism...

I just do not believe this is clear cut as our media portrays it to be...We have no evidence the Assad regime used chemical weapons, hell for all we know it could have been the US? or Israel or even UK, just to set up an excuse in taking military actions...
 
Also like it or not, the only way to run these countries with all these different Muslims is to be quite brutal. Assad was the glue holding Syria together as was Saddam Hussein in Iraq. Yes they are evil brutes, but it seems to be the only way to have any kind of cohesion due to all the cases of Sectarianism

If Assad goes there will be ethnic cleansing going on all over the place, there already slaughtering Kurds, Christians and of course Alawaites and Shias, probably forgotten one or two here also.

PreWar they had Christians, Muslims ect all living on the same street in some instances.

Look at the state of Lybia now also. Another utter mess.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top