War with Syria

fanaskin

fanaskin

Well known agitator
<Silver Donator>
55,854
137,953
Eomer_sl said:
Other than Vietnam, Korea and the two Iraqs, which of the dozens of conflicts the US has been involved in has the general US populace "felt" in the past 60 years? I'm genuinely curious how you think that it's any different today than it was 20 or 40 years ago. Because I just don't see it.
Click to expand...
none, Vietnam was the last major "we felt it" war because of the draft, and that's exactly why Nixon got rid of the draft, and also why the Powell doctrine was used in desert storm, the Powell doctrine specifically says that the military had to take control of the news reporting at home because it undermined them in Vietnam, the alternative media is semi undermining the censorship efforts and is having somewhat the same effect as Vietnam era news reporting today.
 
fanaskin

fanaskin

Well known agitator
<Silver Donator>
55,854
137,953
More on the 100 page report
The key points of the report have been given as follows:

. the shell used in the incident "does not belong to the standard ammunition of the Syrian army and was crudely according to type and parameters of the rocket-propelled unguided missiles manufactured in the north of Syria by the so-called Bashair al-Nasr brigade";

. RDX, which is also known as hexogen or cyclonite, was used as the bursting charge for the shell, and it is "not used in standard chemical munitions";

. soil and shell samples contain "the non-industrially synthesized nerve agent sarin and diisopropylfluorophosphate," which was "used by Western states for producing chemical weapons during World War II."

Richard Guthrie, formerly project leader of the Chemical and Biological Warfare Project of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, who said he had not seen the original report, said the Russian statement on the makeup of the sarin found outside Aleppo, which the Russians said indicated it was not military grade, might reflect only that "there are a lot of different ways to make sarin."

He added: "The messy mix described by the Russians might also be the result of an old sarin stock being used. Sarin degrades (the molecules break up) over time and this would explain a dirty mix."

But he also said that there could be doubts about the Russian conclusion that the rockets that delivered the sarin in the March 19 incident were not likely to have come from Syrian military stocks because of the use of RDX, an explosive that is also known as hexogen and T4.

"Militaries don't tend to use it because it's too expensive," Guthrie said. He added in a later email, however, that it's not inconceivable that the Syrian military would use RDX "iff the government side was developing a semi-improvised short-range rocket" and "if there happened to be a stock available."

"While I would agree that it would be unlikely for a traditional, well-planned short-range rocket development programme to use RDX in that role, it is not beyond the realms of possibility that, as the Syrian government did not seem to have an earlier short-range rocket programme, it may have been developing rockets with some haste and so using materials that are at hand," he said.
Click to expand...
~
Another expert, Jean Pascal Zanders, raised a note of caution, questioning a Russian assertion that the sarin mix appeared to be a western World War II vintage.

"The Western Allies were not aware of the nerve agents until after the occupation of Germany," he wrote in an email. "The USA, for example, struggled with the sarin (despite having some of the German scientists) until the 1950s, when the CW program expanded considerably."
Click to expand...
~
The Russian Foreign Ministry posted the statement shortly after Russian President Vladimir Putin had asked a Russian interviewer what the American reaction would be if evidence showed that Syrian rebels, not the Assad regime, had been behind a chemical weapons attack.

The report dealt with an incident that occurred March 19 in Khan al Asal, a town outside the city of Aleppo, in which 26 people died and 86 were injured. It was that incident that the U.N. team was originally in Syria to investigate when the Aug. 21 attack took place.
Click to expand...
The statement's summary of the report said that neither the munitions nor the poison gas in the Khan al Asal attack appeared to fit what is possessed by the Syrian government. The statement said Russian investigators studied the site, sent the materials they found to study to OPCW sanctioned laboratories in Europe, and followed agreed upon United Nations investigation standards.

According to the statement, the report saidthe shell "was not regular Syrian army ammunition but was an artisan-type similar to unguided rocket projectiles produced in the north of Syria by the so-called gang 'Bashair An-Nasr.'"
Click to expand...
~
In addition, Russian investigators determined that the burst charge was RDX, which is "not used in military chemical munitions."

The Russian analysis found soil and shell samples contained a sarin gas "not synthesized in an industrial environment," the statement said. The report said the chemical mix did not appear to be a modern version of the deadly agent but was closer to those "used by Western states for producing chemical weapons during World War II."
Click to expand...
 
Chukzombi

Chukzombi

Millie's Staff Member
71,717
213,030
At this point either we go all gung ho in there anyway or barry has to say he was duped and chuck one of his staff under the bus. Most likely kerry.
 
M

Merlin_sl

shitlord
2,329
1
fanaskin_sl said:
More on the 100 page report
The key points of the report have been given as follows:

? the shell used in the incident ?does not belong to the standard ammunition of the Syrian army and was crudely according to type and parameters of the rocket-propelled unguided missiles manufactured in the north of Syria by the so-called Bashair al-Nasr brigade?;

? RDX, which is also known as hexogen or cyclonite, was used as the bursting charge for the shell, and it is ?not used in standard chemical munitions?;

? soil and shell samples contain ?the non-industrially synthesized nerve agent sarin and diisopropylfluorophosphate,? which was ?used by Western states for producing chemical weapons during World War II.?

~


~



~
Click to expand...
While I disagree with any war in Syria, the Russians have their own agenda. I don't believe a fucking word they say.
 
W

W4RH34D_sl

shitlord
661
3
Maybe some James Bond calibur madman did this to make it look like it was the syrians. Maybe it was even us. Didnt someone say it was clearly a false flag move?
 
fanaskin

fanaskin

Well known agitator
<Silver Donator>
55,854
137,953
Ron Paul Squares Off Against MSNBC's Alex Wagner in Explosive Interview
 
Araysar

Loser Araysar

Chief Russia Correspondent / Stock Pals CEO
<Gold Donor>
75,476
149,762
America reminds me of that South Park "Russel Crowe Fighting Around The World" skit.

Drunk on power, dumb as shit and trying to find anyone in the world to fight with - as long as they can't kick America's ass.
 
Adebisi

Adebisi

Clump of Cells
<Silver Donator>
27,675
32,717
Has this been posted? The thread moves fast!
rrr_img_42609.png
 
fanaskin

fanaskin

Well known agitator
<Silver Donator>
55,854
137,953
Neocon and PNAC member Richard Perle wrote "A Clean Break" in 1996, explaining how the US could invade Syria by creating proxy warfare and highlighting their possession of dangerous weapons.

"Securing the Northern Border"
"Syria challenges Israel on Lebanese soil. An effective approach, and one with which American can sympathize, would be if Israel seized the strategic initiative along its northern borders by engaging Hizballah, Syria, and Iran, as the principal agents of aggression in Lebanon, including by: ---striking Syria's drug-money and counterfeiting infrastructure in Lebanon, all of which focuses on Razi Qanan. ---paralleling Syria's behavior by establishing the precedent that Syrian territory is not immune to attacks emanating from Lebanon by Israeli proxy forces.... "[1]
"Israel also can take this opportunity to remind the world of the nature of the Syrian regime. Syria repeatedly breaks its word. It violated numerous agreements with the Turks, and has betrayed the United States by continuing to occupy Lebanon in violation of the Taef agreement in 1989. Instead, Syria staged a sham election, installed a quisling regime, and forced Lebanon to sign a "Brotherhood Agreement" in 1991, that terminated Lebanese sovereignty. And Syria has begun colonizing Lebanon with hundreds of thousands of Syrians, while killing tens of thousands of its own citizens at a time, as it did in only three days in 1983 in Hama....Given the nature of the regime in Damascus, it is both natural and moral that Israel abandon the slogan comprehensive peace and move to contain Syria, drawing attention to its weapons of mass destruction programs, and rejecting land for peace deals on the Golan Heights.

An October 2003 editorial in The Nation criticized the Syria Accountability Act and connected it to the Clean Break report and authors:
"To properly understand the Syria Accountability Act, one has to go back to a 1996 document, 'A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm,' drafted by a team of advisers to Benjamin Netanyahu in his run for prime minister of Israel. The authors included current Bush advisers Richard Perle and Douglas Feith. 'Syria challenges Israel on Lebanese soil,' they wrote, calling for 'striking Syrian military targets in Lebanon, and should that prove insufficient, striking at select targets in Syria proper.' No wonder Perle was delighted by the Israeli strike. 'It will help the peace process,' he told the Washington Post, adding later that the United States itself might have to attack Syria. But what Perle means by 'helping the peace process' is not resolving the conflict by bringing about a viable, sovereign Palestinian state but rather - as underscored in 'A Clean Break' - 'transcending the Arab-Israeli conflict' altogether by forcing the Arabs to accept most, if not all, of Israel's territorial conquests and its nuclear hegemony in the region."
 
chthonic-anemos

chthonic-anemos

bitchute.com/video/EvyOjOORbg5l/
8,606
27,257
fanaskin_sl said:
Neocon and PNAC member Richard Perle wrote "A Clean Break" in 1996, explaining how the US could invade Syria by creating proxy warfare and highlighting their possession of dangerous weapons.

"Securing the Northern Border"
"Syria challenges Israel on Lebanese soil. An effective approach, and one with which American can sympathize, would be if Israel seized the strategic initiative along its northern borders by engaging Hizballah, Syria, and Iran, as the principal agents of aggression in Lebanon, including by: ---striking Syria?s drug-money and counterfeiting infrastructure in Lebanon, all of which focuses on Razi Qanan. ---paralleling Syria?s behavior by establishing the precedent that Syrian territory is not immune to attacks emanating from Lebanon by Israeli proxy forces.... "[1]
"Israel also can take this opportunity to remind the world of the nature of the Syrian regime. Syria repeatedly breaks its word. It violated numerous agreements with the Turks, and has betrayed the United States by continuing to occupy Lebanon in violation of the Taef agreement in 1989. Instead, Syria staged a sham election, installed a quisling regime, and forced Lebanon to sign a "Brotherhood Agreement" in 1991, that terminated Lebanese sovereignty. And Syria has begun colonizing Lebanon with hundreds of thousands of Syrians, while killing tens of thousands of its own citizens at a time, as it did in only three days in 1983 in Hama....Given the nature of the regime in Damascus, it is both natural and moral that Israel abandon the slogan comprehensive peace and move to contain Syria, drawing attention to its weapons of mass destruction programs, and rejecting land for peace deals on the Golan Heights.

An October 2003 editorial in The Nation criticized the Syria Accountability Act and connected it to the Clean Break report and authors:
"To properly understand the Syria Accountability Act, one has to go back to a 1996 document, 'A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm,' drafted by a team of advisers to Benjamin Netanyahu in his run for prime minister of Israel. The authors included current Bush advisers Richard Perle and Douglas Feith. 'Syria challenges Israel on Lebanese soil,' they wrote, calling for 'striking Syrian military targets in Lebanon, and should that prove insufficient, striking at select targets in Syria proper.' No wonder Perle was delighted by the Israeli strike. 'It will help the peace process,' he told the Washington Post, adding later that the United States itself might have to attack Syria. But what Perle means by 'helping the peace process' is not resolving the conflict by bringing about a viable, sovereign Palestinian state but rather - as underscored in 'A Clean Break' - 'transcending the Arab-Israeli conflict' altogether by forcing the Arabs to accept most, if not all, of Israel's territorial conquests and its nuclear hegemony in the region."
Click to expand...
for Benjamin Netanyahu, the then Prime Minister of Israel
rrr_img_42612.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.