Israel Says It Has Proof That Syria Has Used Chemical Weapons

Started by jimmy olsen, April 24, 2013, 02:27:43 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

11B4V

"there's a long tradition of insulting people we disagree with here, and I'll be damned if I listen to your entreaties otherwise."-OVB

"Obviously not a Berkut-commanded armored column.  They're not all brewing."- CdM

"We've reached one of our phase lines after the firefight and it smells bad—meaning it's a little bit suspicious... Could be an amb—".

Viking

Quote from: 11B4V on June 04, 2013, 07:13:05 PM
Obama is waiting for all the facts to come in.

The cheese eating surrender monkeys said so, what more proof do you need?
First Maxim - "There are only two amounts, too few and enough."
First Corollary - "You cannot have too many soldiers, only too few supplies."
Second Maxim - "Be willing to exchange a bad idea for a good one."
Second Corollary - "You can only be wrong or agree with me."

A terrorist which starts a slaughter quoting Locke, Burke and Mill has completely missed the point.
The fact remains that the only person or group to applaud the Norway massacre are random Islamists.

Sheilbh

Read bits of the UN report. Regardless of chemical weapons it's clear both sides are committing war crimes every day. It's pretty awful :(
Let's bomb Russia!

11B4V

Quote from: Viking on June 04, 2013, 07:14:07 PM
Quote from: 11B4V on June 04, 2013, 07:13:05 PM
Obama is waiting for all the facts to come in.

The cheese eating surrender monkeys said so, what more proof do you need?

You answered you're on question.
"there's a long tradition of insulting people we disagree with here, and I'll be damned if I listen to your entreaties otherwise."-OVB

"Obviously not a Berkut-commanded armored column.  They're not all brewing."- CdM

"We've reached one of our phase lines after the firefight and it smells bad—meaning it's a little bit suspicious... Could be an amb—".

Sheilbh

Quote from: Viking on June 04, 2013, 07:12:06 PM
Yeah, what is france going to do about it?
If nothing more the UK and France will start arming the rebels soon, that much is clear, and mad.
Let's bomb Russia!

Razgovory

I've given it serious thought. I must scorn the ways of my family, and seek a Japanese woman to yield me my progeny. He shall live in the lands of the east, and be well tutored in his sacred trust to weave the best traditions of Japan and the Sacred South together, until such time as he (or, indeed his house, which will periodically require infusion of both Southern and Japanese bloodlines of note) can deliver to the South it's independence, either in this world or in space.  -Lettow April of 2011

Raz is right. -MadImmortalMan March of 2017

Viking

Quote from: Sheilbh on June 04, 2013, 07:22:10 PM
Quote from: Viking on June 04, 2013, 07:12:06 PM
Yeah, what is france going to do about it?
If nothing more the UK and France will start arming the rebels soon, that much is clear, and mad.

Is it mad to arm the rebels in general or is it mad to arm the present rebels because the secular liberal rebels have all died in the avant guard of the rebellion.
First Maxim - "There are only two amounts, too few and enough."
First Corollary - "You cannot have too many soldiers, only too few supplies."
Second Maxim - "Be willing to exchange a bad idea for a good one."
Second Corollary - "You can only be wrong or agree with me."

A terrorist which starts a slaughter quoting Locke, Burke and Mill has completely missed the point.
The fact remains that the only person or group to applaud the Norway massacre are random Islamists.

Tonitrus

My armchair-quarterback analysis that it is too late for Syria to go any but one of two ways:

- An even more antagonistic Assad-run, Hezbollah terrorist state.
- A rabid Islamic/Al-Qaeda terrorist state.

Sheilbh

Quote from: Viking on June 04, 2013, 07:26:46 PM
Is it mad to arm the rebels in general or is it mad to arm the present rebels because the secular liberal rebels have all died in the avant guard of the rebellion.
I've never been sold on the 'secular liberal rebels'. Even if there were any they'd all be shouting Salafi slogans because the people with money are the Saudis and Qataris. It's mad to arm the rebels at all.

When there's no good options, there's no good foreseeable outcome it's sometimes best to wait. I think arming the rebels would be an example of 'something-must-be-done!'-ism :bleeding:

In my view sometimes it's best to do nothing. I think this is one of them.

I'd possibly change if there was widespread use of chemical weapons or if neighbouring countries were beginning to be really dragged in, especially Israel.
Let's bomb Russia!

Viking

There aren't any secular liberal rebels, they are all dead or have "converted" for filthy saudi and qatari lucre.

As a general rule, when all options, including doing nothing, are bad. Does one go with the least of the evils available or does one wash ones hands of moral culpability by doing nothing?
First Maxim - "There are only two amounts, too few and enough."
First Corollary - "You cannot have too many soldiers, only too few supplies."
Second Maxim - "Be willing to exchange a bad idea for a good one."
Second Corollary - "You can only be wrong or agree with me."

A terrorist which starts a slaughter quoting Locke, Burke and Mill has completely missed the point.
The fact remains that the only person or group to applaud the Norway massacre are random Islamists.

Sheilbh

Quote from: Viking on June 04, 2013, 07:45:15 PM
As a general rule, when all options, including doing nothing, are bad. Does one go with the least of the evils available or does one wash ones hands of moral culpability by doing nothing?
Sometimes you should be Gladstone, sometimes you should be Salisbury. This is a case of the latter. 'Moral culpability' ( :yucky:) should have a generally small part of decisions like this.
Let's bomb Russia!

Viking

Quote from: Sheilbh on June 04, 2013, 07:50:30 PM
Quote from: Viking on June 04, 2013, 07:45:15 PM
As a general rule, when all options, including doing nothing, are bad. Does one go with the least of the evils available or does one wash ones hands of moral culpability by doing nothing?
Sometimes you should be Gladstone, sometimes you should be Salisbury. This is a case of the latter. 'Moral culpability' ( :yucky:) should have a generally small part of decisions like this.

So, in this case, what is this "something" you want to do then? And why should "it weren't me guv'" be a reason for not acting?
First Maxim - "There are only two amounts, too few and enough."
First Corollary - "You cannot have too many soldiers, only too few supplies."
Second Maxim - "Be willing to exchange a bad idea for a good one."
Second Corollary - "You can only be wrong or agree with me."

A terrorist which starts a slaughter quoting Locke, Burke and Mill has completely missed the point.
The fact remains that the only person or group to applaud the Norway massacre are random Islamists.

Sheilbh

Quote from: Viking on June 04, 2013, 07:56:19 PM
So, in this case, what is this "something" you want to do then? And why should "it weren't me guv'" be a reason for not acting?
We shouldn't do anything, beyond putting pressure on the Russians and keeping a beady eye on Hezbollah. If situations change then acting could be justified.

It's our blood and treasure. I think there should be a compelling reason to act, in my view, there isn't. I thought and still more or less think the same on Libya though I think that was more justified.
Let's bomb Russia!

Viking

Let Iran and Russia destroy Syria fighting through their proxies?
First Maxim - "There are only two amounts, too few and enough."
First Corollary - "You cannot have too many soldiers, only too few supplies."
Second Maxim - "Be willing to exchange a bad idea for a good one."
Second Corollary - "You can only be wrong or agree with me."

A terrorist which starts a slaughter quoting Locke, Burke and Mill has completely missed the point.
The fact remains that the only person or group to applaud the Norway massacre are random Islamists.

Sheilbh

Quote from: Viking on June 04, 2013, 08:02:22 PM
Let Iran and Russia destroy Syria fighting through their proxies?
Not just Iran and Russia: Turkey, Saudi and Qatar are joining in. But, short of a very good reason to intervene, then I think that's the best choice for us.
Let's bomb Russia!