Syria Now

[Dajenarit]

The Syrians have been saying for years the truth but who will listen?

https://youtu.be/DCu8mNC1JyE

[Michael]

The Syrians have been saying for years the truth but who will listen?

https://youtu.be/DCu8mNC1JyE

I just watched that, 40 minutes of good info. Jimmy Dore interviews an American journalist who's been in Syria for the past two years and investigated the White Helmets. She says they are sort of the aid workers for Al-Nusra. I have heard the same thing from a 45 minute interview I posted here a couple of years ago with a Canadian nurse who was on the ground in Syria. There is almost zero first-hand reporting on Syria from English speaking mainstream media.

[Michael]

Someone who doesn't hold a position on morality has no business calling anything immoral.

You asked me a really strange question earlier, whether I think it is immoral to do anything about a genocide. I can't imagine why you think this needs to be asked and answered, but the answer is no, it is not immoral to take action against genocide, but that has nothing to do with the points I've made.

I see no moral imperative to bomb Syria based on the unproven allegation that Assad killed a few hundred people with chemical weapons. The accusation is shakey and is contraindicated by logic and OPCW inspections. As a gesture of defiance, it also makes no sense in the context of our past and present military action inside Syria, all of which are illegal acts of war.

[Steve James]

You asked me a really strange question earlier, whether I think it is immoral to do anything about a genocide. I can't imagine why you think this needs to be asked and answered, but the answer is no, it is not immoral to take action against genocide, but that has nothing to do with the points I've made.

The question was put in the context of comments about chemical weapons. I.e., "IF" they were there, would it be morally acceptable for the US to destroy them? I say yes, if those chemicals were being used to murder civilian populations.

That was the reason for the general question about genocide. If you really believe that we "should" do something in cases of genocide, the real issue is that you don't believe that Assad is committing genocide. Fair enough. Fine. However, there are those who do believe that what Assad has been doing is genocide. https://www.ushmm.org/confront-genocide ... tion/syria

There is also a refugee crisis as a result with consequences as far away as Sweden.

So, IF there were chemical weapons plants at the locations Trump had bombed, I don't see anything immoral about it. IF, otoh, he knew there were NO chemical plants, or he just wanted to look tough, then it was as immoral as bombing anywhere. Afa, the chemical weapons plants? What's written on Al Jazeera?

[Michael]

Sorry, you haven't answered any of the points I've brought up and you're all over the place in regards to how moral requirement, moral acceptability and moral option can vary independently. I said I don't see a logical or moral reason for Trump's April 2017 or 2018 bombings for reasons given. There is no inverse. It doesn't mean that I think the general idea of "taking action" is immoral.

This number of 500,000 dead, where does it come from? Why is it published, because that is large enough to throw the g word at Assad? He says the number is impossible to get accurate in the middle of a war, rather he estimates it closer to 80,000. I know that from the interviews he's given since it would never be published in the Western MSM. Who knows if it's true, but Assad seems more credible to me about this war than CNN.

Anyway...so 500,000 makes a genocide according to some web site. Great. Former Secretary of State under Clinton, Madeline Albright says over 500,000 Iraqi children (then factor how many adults in addition to this) died as a result of US sanction against Iraq. She also says it was worth it, it meaning that we got rid of Saddam. Half a million kids *before* the 2003 WMD lies died from lack of medicine, couldn't treat their water, etc., is that genocide?

So it's not the alleged 300 killed with chemicals, it's the 500,000 dead according to some people who have no way of counting bodies. Very shifty goal posts.

EDiT: I guess this was harsh. I happen to be watching the film W. right now, the one by Oliver Stone. They're talking about invading Iraq 2003. Got me stirred up.

[Dajenarit]

The same thing has been said for years and always consistently that we were arming and supporting Alqaeda/Nusra but even nowi you will still be called a conspiracy theorist, when even some elements in the MSM have to occasionally tell the truth for credibilities sake. No matter that the only reporters on the ground in Syria say the same thing but people would rather parrot propaganda press releases. The same way they dont believe Nazis were/are in Ukraine after all these years and consistent report. Shockingly Nazis are more popular than ever in America and West Europe.

But back to your regularly scheduled cold war 2.0

[Michael]

Look, obviously Assad killed half a million of his people. It's obvious. Then, for some reason, there wasn't quite enough blood running in the streets, so he thought,

"Shit, they won't bomb me 2 meters away from the Russians and risk WW3 for 500,000 killed, but I really, really, really want to provoke them in order for them to set up a Libya style no fly zone on my ass, so I know, I'll kill 300 more with some chemicals. Now that will get me Qadaffi'd, and obviously, just as I'm winning the war, this is my true heart's desire. It makes perfect sense. Drop the pellets, boys!"

[Azer]

Na, no nazi's in Ukraine, they just really like celebrating everyone's birthday, even Hitler, you know because he also had a birthday and deserves a cake!!!

https://eadaily.com/en/news/2018/04/20/ ... s-birthday

https://galinfo.com.ua/news/u_tsentri_l ... 85790.html

[Azer]

It's all gone a bit homoerotic now:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-43885027

I forsee lame canard Mcdonald Trump babies and angry Melanomas...

[grzegorz]

True, it is all bunk.

It is funny how we agree more than we actually disagree.

To me the issue is that both Little Putin and Fat Assed Trump are the problem and without them these problems would have worked out themselves.

The fact is military bases, access to the Atlantic and oil is why outsiders are in Syria but no one actually cares about Syria or the Syrians.

That is the way I see it. Agree or disagree the fun of the internet is you can see different perspectives.

[grzegorz]

Na, no nazi's in Ukraine, they just really like celebrating everyone's birthday, even Hitler, you know because he also had a birthday and deserves a cake!!!

https://eadaily.com/en/news/2018/04/20/ ... s-birthday

https://galinfo.com.ua/news/u_tsentri_l ... 85790.html

Interesting. I will have to check it out for myself.

I am actually about to buy some land in the Ukraine. Not too bad for a thick headed delivery driver, eh?

I would actually be more impressed if you posted your photo but somehow I don't see that happening.

[grzegorz]

Oh, fwiw, I don't bother listening to videos by random dudes on Youtube who know as much about what happened as I do. Get him to join the board and post; then, it'll be possible to argue with him.

Btw, I tend to agree with bombing those sites for lots of reasons. I also remember that in 2013 Trump criticized Obama for wanting to get more involved in Syria. When Trump got into office, he then criticized Obama for not doing enough. Now, people will say that getting involved by sending troops and bombing is good leadership; and, that changing his mind shows his flexibility.

Then there's the claim about him having a secret plan. Yep, he's keeping it to himself. So, whatever he does will either be his brilliancy or the fault of someone else. Have you heard him say he's failed in any way? True, it takes character to do that.

I completely agree. We had discussion on another thread where I refused to read every article and or watch every video posted. As if by the click of a mouse I would suddenly believe the Ukrainians downed MH17 which was flying in the opposite direction of the conflict zone.

I gather information and post my opinion. If people don't like it then tough. They have to work out their own anger management issues but I am not going to remain silent simply because someone can't handle a different opinion.

If you one has an opinion then post it in your own words and let us have a discussion. I debate people all the time face to face and I have yet to pull out my phone and play videos and read articles to someone else so why do it here?

Perhaps this is why in person discussions are actually much more productive.

[grzegorz]

I respect the way Iran is handling Trump's threats of revising or changing the nuclear deal.

If Trump breaks the deal then all he is doing is exposing the fact that the US's word is meaningless.

[Steve James]

My son teaches at Morris College on the Anishinaabe, Lakota, rez. The idea of US "treaties" has been a joke for the longest. There's no reason to take an agreement with a liar seriously.

I, too, am skeptical about the motives of all the players in the Syria debacle. The people who suffer are the ones caught in the middle of the shit show.

[Azer]

I am actually about to buy some land in the Ukraine. Not too bad for a thick headed delivery driver, eh?

I would actually be more impressed if you posted your photo but somehow I don't see that happening.

I'm not sure that's such a good idea Greg. Should consider it very carefully. Uunless you are there in on the ground and have a local, trusted legal contact, its highly likely your getting scammed. Furthermore, investment decisions should be guided by sound fundamental and technical market analysis, for Ukraine, all indicators are pretty rotten and will remain so for the foreseeable future. On top of that, given the extremely unstable political climate and astronomical levels of corruption, even if you are looking at a very long investment horizon, your interests as a foreigner, who is not present on the ground will be considered last if at all. Tread very careful, though better not at all. Don't let your bias and optimism outweigh realistic risk appraisals.

As for the picture, wasn't it you that was harping on about online privacy just recently? For someone with such views, I find it odd the amount of personal information you leak on here and generally all over the Web. Its extremely easy to pick up your trail. Also, if you really wanted to see my picture, you could always ask privately for a real name from the dozen or so people with whom I've trained with and whom are present on this forum, though I doubt any of them would give you anything, too much of an opinionated shit stirrer to be given any respect, youve rubbed too many the wrong way already.