What's new
By:

Will there be American invasion in Syria?

Stoked said:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/20...piles-on-demands-amid-chemical-weapons-talks/

So now Assad is making demands for turning over his chemical weapons. So far they are:

1. US must drop all plans, publicly, to attack Syria
2. US must stop arming the rebels
3. He said "all countries in the area must honor anti-chemical weapons agreements, "and the first country to do so is Israel because it possesses nuclear, chemical and biological weapons -- all types of weapons of mass destruction"

If he will only do so under those cirmcumstances than this proposal/plan is dead on arrival. There is no chance that Israel does that. None.
Click to expand...

Wow that's a bad move.

The ball is very much now in Russia's court. I know the article leads with the impression Russia is backing it, but it doesn't exactly say how... and it is from fox news.. so......... yeah.

Now, a quote from the NY Times:

Mr. Assad outlined his demands on Thursday, telling a Russian TV interviewer that the arms-control proposal floated by his patron in Moscow would not be finalized until “we see the United States really wants stability in our region and stops threatening, striving to attack and also ceases arms deliveries to terrorists.”
Click to expand...

Note that it does not say Russia knew about Assad's demands; only that no deal would be finalized until blah blah blah. This could simply mean that Assad won't sign it until he gets what he wants. There's also reports of newspapers saying they're in it together, but it could also just be the little brother getting the big brother further into this than they want.

No matter how I look at it, I see this as the ball being in Russia's court. That's not to say, at this point, than we shouldn't steal and shoot for three... and now that we've given the guy a chance I'm not against carefully planned missile strikes.
 
Now mind you, we have no public plans to attack. So to diffuse this situation all we have to say is "Well, we didn't make plans. We just said we were going to if you don't comply, dorkus". And then be like "Ok, sure, we'll stop arming the rebels"(even though there's a 2.5 month delay, so they'll still be getting weapons for another two months). The third might be a little complicated....

We shouldn't, as it was never a negotiation to get him to stop using chemical weapons. He will stop, one way or another. And if another middle eastern country decides they want to use chemical weapons, we'll do the same thing to them.

I feel like this was the worst move Assad could have made. Kerry and Lavrov felt like they were on the same page, and then boom. There goes the world.
 
ElRoach0 said:
Wow that's a bad move.

The ball is very much now in Russia's court. I know the article leads with the impression Russia is backing it, but it doesn't exactly say how... and it is from fox news.. so......... yeah.

Now, a quote from the NY Times:



Note that it does not say Russia knew about Assad's demands; only that no deal would be finalized until blah blah blah. This could simply mean that Assad won't sign it until he gets what he wants. There's also reports of newspapers saying they're in it together, but it could also just be the little brother getting the big brother further into this than they want.

No matter how I look at it, I see this as the ball being in Russia's court. That's not to say, at this point, than we shouldn't steal and shoot for three... and now that we've given the guy a chance I'm not against carefully planned missile strikes.
Click to expand...

It amuses me how much people harp on Fox News. It is no worse than Huffington Post or MSNBC and they are widely used here without comment. Which is fine and proper. The obvious bias just amuses me.
 
Stoked said:
It amuses me how much people harp on Fox News. It is no worse than Huffington Post or MSNBC and they are widely used here without comment. Which is fine and proper. The obvious bias just amuses me.
Click to expand...

I suppose they both use their respective methods of slanging the truth. It's just that Fox borders on racism lots, and it really ****ing irks me
 
ElRoach0 said:
Now mind you, we have no public plans to attack. So to diffuse this situation all we have to say is "Well, we didn't make plans. We just said we were going to if you don't comply, dorkus". And then be like "Ok, sure, we'll stop arming the rebels"(even though there's a 2.5 month delay, so they'll still be getting weapons for another two months). The third might be a little complicated....

We shouldn't, as it was never a negotiation to get him to stop using chemical weapons. He will stop, one way or another. And if another middle eastern country decides they want to use chemical weapons, we'll do the same thing to them.

I feel like this was the worst move Assad could have made. Kerry and Lavrov felt like they were on the same page, and then boom. There goes the world.
Click to expand...

I disagree. The US obviously has plans to attack Syria. They have moved assets into the region, had a Senate commite approve a strike, had a speach by the President laying out the case for a strike and had a looming senate and house vote. It is very obvious that we are/were going to strike.

Hell Kerry was even floating the idea that the President did not need congress approval to strike Syria.
 
dalamon said:
I suppose they both use their respective methods of slanging the truth. It's just that Fox borders on racism lots, and it really ****ing irks me
Click to expand...

So does MSNBC. In my opinion they are far worse than Fox in the racism dept. Anytime anyone disagrees with the President on any issue for any reason MSNBC hosts and guests will drop charges of racism.

In principle hate and disdain based on party affiliation is no better than hate based on race. I am not claiming they have the same history so relax One Brow.
 
Stoked said:
So does MSNBC. In my opinion they are far worse than Fox in the racism dept. Anytime anyone disagrees with the President on any issue for any reason MSNBC hosts and guests will drop charges of racism.
Click to expand...

That's not racism.

In principle hate and disdain based on party affiliation is no better than hate based on race. I am not claiming they have the same history so relax One Brow.
Click to expand...

Did I say one was worse than the other? I was simply giving my perspective on why I PERSONALLY think Fox is worse.



Don't get too jumpy, mon ami.
 
And I suppose your statement makes sense in principle, but we all know that racism is a much bigger deal than disliking a party. 'In principle', communism is the perfect political system
 
dalamon said:
That's not racism.



Did I say one was worse than the other? I was simply giving my perspective on why I PERSONALLY think Fox is worse.



Don't get too jumpy, mon ami.
Click to expand...

Using MSNBCs arguement: If a non white says it than its racist and if a white does so than they are an Uncle Tom.

I'm not jumpy. We are good. Over at MSNBC the automatically assume you are racist, bible thumping, gun loving, unsympathetic...

That is no different in principal than thinking that a member of the opposite race is a certain way just based on race.

Also I said racism dept. Not racism. I'd go so far as to say 80% of what MSNBC labels racism is not.

But yes Fox news has its idiots. For example Hannity. Guy should be kicked off TV and radio for ever. He is a political hack and is a disgusting sham.
 
dalamon said:
And I suppose your statement makes sense in principle, but we all know that racism is a much bigger deal than disliking a party. 'In principle', communism is the perfect political system
Click to expand...

Yes racism is the bigger problem, history alone tells you that.

Edit: I can tell you that people are getting pretty damn sick of being labeled racist if they disagree with anything the President says or does.
 
Last edited:
Stoked said:
Using MSNBCs arguement: If a non white says it than its racist and if a white does so than they are an Uncle Tom.

I'm not jumpy. We are good. Over at MSNBC the automatically assume you are racist, bible thumping, gun loving, unsympathetic...
Click to expand...

I don't think I said anything that negates this. And thats because its a valid point. I think I've watched 20 minutes of MSNBC in the last year


That is no different in principal than thinking that a member of the opposite race is a certain way just based on race.
Click to expand...

What this is boiling down to, is that you think racism is equally bad to people accusing others of being racist. I simply disagree-- and it would be too long and drawn out for me to explain why.

Also I said racism dept. Not racism. I'd go so far as to say 80% of what MSNBC labels racism is not.

But yes Fox news has its idiots. For example Hannity. Guy should be kicked off TV and radio for ever. He is a political hack and is a disgusting sham.
Click to expand...


I cannot name very many Faux journalists that I enjoy. Whether its that blonde, Beck, O'Reilly-- they all seem the same to me.
 
dalamon said:
I don't think I said anything that negates this. And thats because its a valid point. I think I've watched 20 minutes of MSNBC in the last year




What this is boiling down to, is that you think racism is equally bad to people accusing others of being racist. I simply disagree-- and it would be too long and drawn out for me to explain why.




I cannot name very many Faux journalists that I enjoy. Whether its that blonde, Beck, O'Reilly-- they all seem the same to me.
Click to expand...

Obviously racism can be worse. But you are seeing a horrendous trend of attacking the moral character of of a person just because they disagree. Where do you think that road leads?
 
The Thriller said:
Let Allah sort this out.

And why not?
Click to expand...

Allah doesn't exist? The Book says Jesus will.

But if Jesus doesn't exist/doesn't care, we could at least stop arming western-style ideologues pretending to be Islamic Fundamentalists. Especially when the methods they use are straight outta communist handbooks for fomenting discord and insinuating control cells into the conflict they are creating on both sides.

American taxpayers oughtta be about done with financing these games through our "intelligence" agencies, and supplying the arms to both sides.
 
Stoked said:
I disagree. The US obviously has plans to attack Syria. They have moved assets into the region, had a Senate commite approve a strike, had a speach by the President laying out the case for a strike and had a looming senate and house vote. It is very obvious that we are/were going to strike.

Hell Kerry was even floating the idea that the President did not need congress approval to strike Syria.
Click to expand...

But the only way to prove we have/had plans is to expose your own espionage

Sent from your moms room.... While she was sleeping.
 
ElRoach0 said:
But the only way to prove we have/had plans is to expose your own espionage

Sent from your moms room.... While she was sleeping.
Click to expand...

https://www.latimes.com/world/la-fg-syria-strikes-20130908,0,6708714.story

https://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/06/...th-a-focus-on-forces.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

https://www.cnn.com/2013/08/23/world/meast/us-syria-military-options/

https://world.time.com/2013/09/06/obama-orders-military-to-expand-syrian-targets/

Need I continue? The pentagon was ordered to draw up attack plans and they did. Clearly we are planning to attack Syria.

Come on man.
 
Stoked said:
https://www.latimes.com/world/la-fg-syria-strikes-20130908,0,6708714.story

https://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/06/...th-a-focus-on-forces.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

https://www.cnn.com/2013/08/23/world/meast/us-syria-military-options/

https://world.time.com/2013/09/06/obama-orders-military-to-expand-syrian-targets/

Need I continue? The pentagon was ordered to draw up attack plans and they did. Clearly we are planning to attack Syria.

Come on man.
Click to expand...

You're not thinking like a criminal lawyer, dinkleburg.

Ofcourse it's clear there are plans. Duh. But to get out of that all we have to do is sink to their level of stretching time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top