| Author | Message | ||
     Hootowl |
One step ahead of you buddy. | ||
| Two_seasons |
Breaking News...WH Just Released Declassified U.S. Intel Report on Syrian Chem Attack How convienient...Friday evening and the markets are now closed. And, the American public is planning their bar-be-que or meeting up with friends, or the HD 110 here in MKE. It's all about keeping those hands clean now isn't it. Right...off to the beer I go...  or maybe have some friends over  Or perhaps  go on a ride and check out those HD dealer events for the 110 HD anniversary. | ||
| Aesquire |
Airbozo, a couple of points. 1. I am not a conspiracy theorist, but I would not rule out the CIA's involvement in this event. Past history and all... I tend to agree. I've never been sure if the tales of CIA incompetence was disinformation. ( makes sense to lure the enemy into false confidence ) And never really bought them being hyper competent. Especially after the huge human intel cuts during the Clinton admin. Anyhoo.... it was allegedly a CIA "annex" in Benghazi that was allegedly shipping arms to the rebels in Syria when it was attacked and the alleged President told his staff to handle it and went to rest up for a fundraiser. The "survivors" ( CIA and others? ) have been kept from testifying, and allegedly have been suffering an intimidation campaign complete with monthly polygraph harassment. ( getting a polygraph from a hostile operator is psych torture. ) So, yeah, I wouldn't put anything past this regime to order the CIA to do, including supplying wmd's to bad guys. However. There's NO reason to supply wmd's to the Syrian Regime, they already have plenty. And they don't have a good motive to use them, unless you figure Assad's Brother has gone off the deep end. The Rebels also by this time have access to poison gas, since they've captured quite a few supply depots, and have an awesome motive to gas locals and blame it on Assad. Just as in Iraq, many of the "rebels" now are imported jihadi. What do they care about the Syrian People??? Not their tribes. We don't seem to have proof one way or another, and since Obama & minions keep talking and talking about how we are going to act decisively, but not for long, or for real, I just don't know anything for sure except this administration seems incompetent. ( they could of course just pretend to be idiots and are actually evil geniuses with a master plan for world domination. Actually I suspect THEY think they are. ) 2.Where do you think Saddam got his chemical weapons to use on the Iranians (and then his own people)? I've heard that propaganda/rumor for years. Do you have any references? Or is it just propaganda? I know we did support Saddam against Iran, probably illegally, but supplying poison gas would be a pretty major screw up. Violation of laws, treaties, and a foolish thing to get caught at. So...... any references OTHER than propaganda? If I was placing bets, I'd blame the Germans and the French, but NOT the governments openly, but rather "private" firms. It's well known that the Germans make a lot of bunkers in the area. Good ones too. Also Chemical plants. Both French and German. For "peaceful purposes", of course. ( if you can make pesticide, you can make Sarin. VX is a little scarier to make. ) Here's a couple of links to someone who knows this stuff far better than I do. ( although even I know not to open a barrel of something marked Chlorine Flouride or ask you to toss me something with a dozen nitrogen atoms in the molecule ) http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2012/12/05/ch emical_warfare_in_syria.php http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2002/09/12/ch emical_warfare_part_one_introduction.php Not calling you a liar, just thinking you were misled. 3.And why do you think we knew exactly what to look for when we invaded that country? Uh, because we had not the invoice, ( see #2 ) but the UN weapons inspectors reports on the over 10 thousand tons of poison gas Saddam had in stock, verified, and seals placed on bunkers. By the UN, not the CIA. And we LOOKED where the UN inspectors had verified stockpiles of shells and bombs. Almost all was missing. Yes, we did find a relative handful ( 500 or so shells per US Congress ) and there were several cases of nerve gas shells used by mistake as IED's since Saddam had dispersed his poison gas shells in multiple locations mixed in with the conventional ones. ( also by UN report ) Also the reported, and verified independently convoys of poison gas and precursor chemicals moved to Syria. ( In fact Jordan's King accused Syria of providing some precursor chemicals to jihadi in Jordan when they detonated a truckload near the capitol. Casualties were light, since the chemicals, while poisonous, are not as nasty as the nerve gas they can be used to produce. Or insecticide if you're not an evil dictator. ) The question No one asks, and no one want to answer, is where did the Rest of those 10 thousand tons go? Some were destroyed, but there is no documentation, and some went to Syria, but how much? and some is even now being destroyed, in Iraq, by the British. ( a fact not widely reported in the US ) There's still a mystery here, and I despair we will ever know. Or perhaps they were used last week? Get back to us on the documentation on the US supplying poison gas to Saddam, please. I'm quite curious. Also your handle? Must be a good story. Like to hear it. Aviator? | ||
| Blake |
Thanks Patrick. Though I abhor the type of blame America/UK... first garbage some seem so eager to embrace, I think attacking Assad is foolish. But Obama has painted his red line and left himself no options but to be warmonger or liar. | ||
| Aesquire |
I think that only Party Loyalists can now believe that Obama is always truthful. ( I tried to phrase that better than the emotional rant I prefer ) Certainly Putin has no illusions about how trustworthy Obama is, or how an ego that self involved could react to opposition. Our allies have had plenty of chance to see how uneven this administration's reactions can be, or it's loyalty to long term friends. I'm not, at this time, prepared to view everything Obama does or says in a paranoid manner.... not too paranoid, anyway. However, a nice little war has long been a ploy to distract the peasants and keep the media from talking about scandals & crimes. The question becomes, "how insane/evil is the President of the United States?" It's clear he has no problems killing people. Clear that the full and honest truth is not a priority. Assuming F&F was, as has long been thought, an attack on the 2nd amendment, by "making true" the lie that the Mexican Cartels got the bulk of their guns from US gun stores, somebody with half a brain would have known that the cartels would use the guns "sent" by F&F would kill people. If the assumption is true, ( and there is zero evidence that it is NOT ) then murdered people was the desired result. That does not speak well about the morals of the people involved, and the orders must have come from the top, since Executive Privilege was invoked to stop the impeachment of Holder. Obama's own ghostwritten biographies are full of "adjustments" to the truth to make him seem "better", and his publisher didn't correct his bio on the publishers web site to "born in Hawaii" from the presumably more exotic and profitable "born in Kenya", for IIRC 21 years, until Obama went to run for President. I can't believe someone with such an ego never checked his own publisher's web site for his Public relations listing. Asked to decide which one I believe more, Obama or Assad? I leave that to you. Asked to believe Assad or the Jihadi? I'd bet against the zealots, but it's not a clear cut thing when you are trying to guess which evil &^%$)_^%&%$ to believe. Besides, how can the winner of Nobel Peace Prize be a Warmonger? Let's look at the list of fine winners from the past.......... um. well. I don't KNOW who used gas. It makes more sense to me that it's the Jihadi, but "more sense" and "Jihadi" aren't a normal sentence construction. The constant talking......George Will's article above posted by Reindog seems right. ( repost link http://patriotpost.us/opinion/19731 ) The toon posted by Reindog on August 29, 2013 - 11:11 am: on the "President O" thread applies. WTF is wrong with these people? Can it be "mirroring"? | ||
| Aesquire |
To be clear. I'm cautious and skeptical on if ANY action we take against Syria with missiles and bombs will do good. I tend to think people who are dictators have no trouble lying to me. ( something the State Dept. seems to have an issue with ) I KNOW that people of certain ideology/religions lie as a matter of normal SOP. ( theoretically, some only lie to infidels, ( Islam ) but that slope is steep and Teflon. The Marxist cults lie because they HAVE to. It's how that system of oppression works. ) But assume for a second that these poison gas attacks on civilians in Syria this LAST YEAR are deliberate actions on the part of Assad. If we bomb a barracks and crater a runway and declare our "message sent" history shows we get laughed at ( If it was someone else, you sure would laugh ) and would encourage attacks on us as weak fools. If we do actual damage to Assad's war fighting ability, that would be aiding Jihadi, and would increase the chances that Assad panics and uses widespread wmd's, both in his own country against his own people, ( and the imported jihadi ) and against Israel, Europe, and us, to spread the pain around and alter public reaction. Also ( we're still assuming Assad is to blame ) semi effective strikes by the US would encourage Russia, China, etc. to mess with us in retaliation. If a US Destroyer is torpedoed, or struck with missiles with no witnesses, this crap can escalate into wider war & even Armageddon. Iran would welcome Armageddon. Really effective strikes, killing Assad & his family, his Generals, and crippling his army would leave a power void that the "rebels" would try and fill, and promote a panic reaction by Russia, and Iran, and War to follow. If anyone can think of a good plan here, I'd love to hear it. A year ago, I might have supported limited retaliatory strikes, but still been worried......... today, that seems to have no upside. | ||
| Aesquire |
Just to refresh your memory. Not for the squeamish. Seriously. Descriptions of death by poison gas are not happy making. http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2002/03/25/020325 fa_FACT1 | ||
| Sifo |
My understanding of the whole US selling WMDs to Iraq is that it's based on half truths. We did sell them the precursor chemicals that were used to make WMDs. Those were sold to them as a humanitarian effort though for other purposes. It may have been to manufacture pesticides, as was mentioned earlier, I'm not really sure. Shocking that a despot dictator would do some thing so dishonest. Shocking I say! | ||
| Sifo |
As far as the question of bombing the WMD storage areas, here's an opinion that seems to make a lot of sense to me... http://apnews.myway.com/article/20130830/DA8G7HS00 .html
I really think BO has painted the US into a corner with no good way out. You really have to make sure that you have a workable plan available before you shoot your mouth off making ultimatums to world leaders. He is playing chess when he is barely able to play a game of checkers. This is not good at all. | ||
| Aesquire |
http://www.politico.com/politico44/2013/08/white-h ouse-peeved-at-pentagon-leaks-171520.html http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/31/world/after-brit ish-vote-unusual-isolation-for-us-on-syria.html?_r =0 http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/30/us-syria -crisis-britain-idUSBRE97R1BD20130830 http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/30/us-syria -crisis-barracks-idUSBRE97T0N820130830 http://www.politico.com/politico44/2013/08/obama-s yria-a-challenge-to-the-world-171508.html Actually a well crafted combination of fact, opinion, and cop out. At least Obama didn't blame Syria on Bush or the fatcat bankers. http://www.nbcnews.com/id/17920536/ns/world_news-m ideast_n_africa/t/pelosi-shrugs-bushs-criticism-me ets-assad/#.UiDPJzaceHQ Assad's a great guy! http://www.politico.com/story/2013/08/nancy-pelosi -barack-obama-syria-96065.html Who needs to go. http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/08/29/facebo ok-post-said-to-be-by-assads-son-dares-americans-t o-attack/ The 11 year old makes more sense than our Sec State. Burn! | ||
| Reepicheep |
Here is a GREAT analysis. Guess who the author is?
| ||
| Reepicheep |
So the Obama adminstration leaks freely whenever it suits their agenda, but are somehow surprised that others then leak freely when it suits *their* agenda? Geesh. http://www.politico.com/politico44/2013/08/white-h ouse-peeved-at-pentagon-leaks-171520.html | ||
| Sifo |
 | ||
| Doz |
No shit!, That's a brilliant way to put it. | ||
| Reindog |
President "Bomb Em Now" has backtracked to "Bomb Em after I get back from Sweden and Congress gets back from vacation." America looks absolutely stupid, powerless, and leaderless. Syria is already claiming victory as they kick sand into this 90 lb weakling President. It is now smooth sailing for the Ayatollahs to proceed with their nuclear weapons. The incompetence of this President is leading us into a World War. Hello, 1914. This disgrace of a President should have kept his big mouth shut in the first place about his Red Line. But what else would you expect from this jerk who blumbled about the Trayvon Martin case which was not the business of the Federal government? If bombing Syria is so important, then the current Occupant in our White House, should call an emergency session of Congress right now. It is much better for America when this Idiot plays golf. He sucks at that too. BTW, the title of this thread is spelled therapeutic. | ||
| Reindog |
MSNBC has just announced that President Obama is playing golf this afternoon. The MSNBC screen says "BREAKING NEWS: President Obama is Playing Golf Right Now." You can't make this stuff up.  This is so twisted that perhaps the United States has thrown Syria off guard with his vacation message and is already launching a strike, but that is doubtful. Politically, President Wonderful will blame this on the Republicans after a Congressional No vote occurs in mid September which is an eternity from now in political time. (Message edited by reindog on August 31, 2013) | ||
| Slaughter |
Maybe His Holiness has decided to re-read at least one part of the Constitution...
| ||
| Aesquire |
Reindog, thanks. Moderator, please correct my bad spellin' on the thread title. My bad. http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/08/30 /us_had_intel_on_chemical_strike_before_it_was_lau nched Now, Since this depends on statements made by the Obama Administration, I have no idea how true it is. But, if true, Obama, his minions like the National Security Adviser and Sec Def, suck for not either warning Assad off, or warning the jihadi, or for that matter the Syrian people. It may be that revealing the information would have burned a source, and endangered humans actually helping us, in which case my condemnation, and the press's is wrong. I'm even going to say that is highly probable. ( not that I'm wrong, that happens all the time, but that "leaking" the info would endanger the source ) It may be that the information presented in the link above was BS and the Obama minions lied. That's also highly probable. It's been the pattern for Obama's minions to BS the press in an effort to look good, more important, more informed. Ego trips by these folk have cost countless lives as they "leak" lie and preen. If THAT'S the case then this stupid ego driven lie to make Obama's administration look better was badly thought out and has backfired. I'd cheer the backfire, but it reflects on us all that we let such morons be in power. http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/3 19787-obama-to-make-rose-garden-statement-on-syria Looks like the "blame the Republicans" scenario Reindog proposes is the most likely. In many ways, that's a good thing, if it prevents WW4. I believe the R's are so messed up they won't respond effectively to the propaganda ploy, and thus deserve what they get. Pity it will just make life for real Americans worse as that reduces the chances of reversing the tide of neo-Marxism in America. ( arguably we've had 3 rounds in the century long war between Freedom and State Worship. Fascism, Socialism, Communism, all the versions of authoritarian dictatorship excused/propped up by mystic "social Justice" & "economic" rationalizations that always fail, and conceal the most evil faith on Earth. ) IMHO it's probably better to delay, and back down in this case than to confront and expand. ( this is in contrast to my usual attitude, which is to quote the Abbot of Citeaux Arnaud Amalric http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacre_at_B%C3%A9zi ers ) Under different circumstances, I'd be more in favor of strikes, but almost never will I be in favor of killing people to "send a message". I had quite enough of that crap back with LBJ and his insane ROE's, McNamara's bean counter "body counts" and the refusal to try to win a war, but instead bomb to "get them to the table". Insanity, murder, and immorality. | ||
| Slaughter |
I've just written both my Congresscritters and my representative. Not sure when it'll come to a vote but I'll also pick up a pen and get them analog messages. http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/ senators_cfm.cfm http://www.house.gov/representatives/ Takes less time than writing a bitchy post on Badweb (not that that's a BAD thing) You WILL need your full zip code (zip+4) | ||
| Reindog |
Thanks, Steve. I have contacted my Peeps in Washington. (Message edited by reindog on August 31, 2013) | ||
| Aesquire |
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/357287/accid ental-war-mark-steyn opinion. Snarky opinion, but it seems valid to me. http://www.nationalreview.com/article/357277/benef its-outweigh-costs-syria-john-yoo Also some good points, but I'll have to repeat....... stupid ineffective war is criminal. I'm totally against "sending messages" with guns, unless the message is "The King is dead and we won." The follow up also must be far smarter than Bush in Iraq or Obama in Afghanistan/Libya/Egypt/America. If it's going to be as stupid, don't freaking do it. | ||
| Cityxslicker |
just send in 250/1000 'advisors' and when one of them , or the boat that brought them / supports them, is fired upon - you can now launch and 'attack' DAMHIK | ||
| Oldog |
Thanks Steve I also did the same as you suggest, short respectful but to the point. I asked for replies to all so it will be of some interest. | ||
| Aesquire |
http://dailycaller.com/2013/08/28/coulter-obama-to -strike-syria-so-that-he-wouldnt-look-like-an-idio t-for-something-he-said Ann Coulter seems to have the Obama motive nailed. | ||
| Aesquire |
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/syria-said-be-hidin g-weapons-moving-troops What do you expect when the President twitters his intentions? ( formerly know as "telegraphing" ) Is there any provision in US law to politely ask a President to retire early because he's an idiot? Judging from history, apparently not. We should work on that. http://freebeacon.com/syrian-ambassador-quotes-oba mas-yes-we-can-slogan-while-defending-assad/ Even though I know this is the PR guy for an evil dude, he makes more sense than our Sec State. And I don't think he lies as much. ( Still lies like a rug. brilliant bit about blaming Israel for poison gas attacks. ) | ||
| Sifo |
Turned on the TV this morning to see BO babbling about how "I didn't set a red line, the world set a red line". Pelosi floated this line yesterday. Pathetic! BO won't take responsibility for anything he does unless it turns out well. So far, he won't take responsibility for anything. | ||
| Sifo |
 | ||
| Airbozo |
Aesquire: I have no proof of my comments, just observations from the time Bush SR was the director of the CIA in the late 70's and the weapons we sold to Saddam back then (not necessarily TO Saddam, but he was in charge of the procurement of weapons and other tech before he officially took power of Iraq). This is also why I feel that the first invasion of Iraq was somewhat personally motivated (and part of the reason for the second invasion, although not a huge factor). After coming to power, Saddam thumbed his nose at the US and it really pissed off a lot of people. It was considered at the time, yet another blunder by the CIA's promotion of democracy program. When I was in the Navy (the origin of my nic), We had lots of briefings concerning Iran and Iraq and chemical weapons constantly came up. It was well known they had similar chemicals as the US and at the time, is was commonly believed that they were supplied by the US to help fight the Iranians. Something no one questioned. I was privy to a lot of information and security reports back then, due to my MOS (Electronic Warfare) and without revealing anything for the NSA (which was another program we worked on) there was enough information to know the rumors were probably true, but again, no solid evidence. I honestly do not believe we supplied Syria with chemical weapons, but that is not to say the CIA still did not have a hand in the recent events. I also am not convinced the rebels are free from guilt on this one, as they would have the most to gain and Assad has the most to lose. He's not a dumb person. Again, my thoughts on this are based on the past history the CIA has with attempted regime changes throughout the world. I know most of you are not fans of PBS but Frontline has done some great shows and investigations on Rumsfeld, Cheney, Bush SR and a few others, dating back to the Nixon administration, http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/pent agon/ and a good series on the post 9/11 events focused on the administrations actions, called; "The Dark Side". http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/darkside/v iew/ Disclaimer: I choose to gather my information from all sources, including PBS, BBC, Foxnews and all the other news sources available to me and then use that information to develop my own views. Some are conservative in nature and some are liberal. It depends on the subject. While I am not a fan of the Bush family, I am also not a Bush basher (OK that sounds funny). I consider myself a politician basher, since I feel ALL career politicians work not for we the people, rather we the corporations, including all Democrats and Republicans. I specifically hold disdain for the likes of Rumsfeld, and Cheney (the real power behind the Bush jr administration). Origins of my nic: When I was in the Navy, I was an Electronics Warfare Technician stationed on a Spruance Class Destroyer. We worked closely with Sonar and the ASW helicopter detachment and routinely went up in the Helo's to cross train on the gear. The pilots insisted that everyone on board had some stick experience in the event one or more of the pilots were incapacitated. When it was my turn, I grabbed the controls and actively tried to fly it by physically moving the stick around, instead of letting it fly itself and correcting as necessary (which I eventually learned). The pilots started calling me the "Clown of the Skies" and eventually Airbozo stuck and I used that call sign the rest of the time I was in the Navy. | ||
| Kenm123t |
Air It all ends up with the fact OIL has to Flow! every war since ww1 has had a major contribution from who controls the flow of oil. It will continue until The oil flow out of the middle east ceases to be economically viable. With out oil who cares what the desert dwellers do! They have no other source of income or technology. What they have the buy with oil profits. The Locals do not work I have family getting rich flying helos to take the royal goat herders falcon hunting out in the desert. | ||
| Aesquire |
Airbozo, thank you. Helicopters are something you don't "fly", you herd. I'm pretty much with you on disdain for politicians as a class. Although Cheney, you have to admit, gets a special commendation for shooting a lawyer in the face, and getting the lawyer to apologize.  It's not a surprise that Iraqi chemical weapons are "similar" to ours. Mustard gas is mustard gas. Sarin is sarin. I understand the Russians have a variant of VX that I assume is either cheaper to produce or use in binary shells, but the effects and mechanism is the same. Unlike nuclear weapons where the precise mix of isotopes can tell you which reactor the fuel came from, or biological, where the DNA can be recorded, and compared to other samples, if it takes 3 parts x acid and 5 parts y base to get Sarin, you get Sarin. Samples from dirt or victims may give you an idea how pure the initial chemicals were before it hit the ground, but it won't tell you, ( usually ) who made it, just if it come from the finest Chem plant in Germany or an "abandoned" warehouse in Riyadh. With that caveat, the weapons described by the New Yorker article ( link on my post Friday, August 30, 2013 - 10:53 pm: ) were probably pretty crude, and domestic Iraqi built. The later poison gas attacks against the Kurds were a bit more sophisticated, but still not up to European standards for efficiency and purity. Absolutely not US supplied artillery shells. Still managed to kill people though. There's a perhaps unavoidable arrogance about "high tech" weapons. The 25mm smart grenade that can be laser ranged programed to detonate just inside a room, is a very useful and effective weapon. A WW2 designed RPG, surplus from the 1950's, will kill you just as dead. It's not as sophisticated, and has more chance of collateral damage ( assuming you don't miss ) but it works. I have little doubt that the current mess in Syria is at least partly a CIA program. The "Benghazi" scandal seems to be all about an illegal gun running op with Turkey. Since Turkey is trending Jihadi, ( which is going to be a major war soon ) and the "rebels" are also trending Jihadi, ( mostly because the imported jihadi have murdered the college students and semi sane people ) and the alleged President illegally went to Pakistan for (speculative) jihadi training, ( when he was much younger with his alleged Pakistani lover ) it all makes sense. IF, mind you, you assume that past performance equals future results, re: honesty. http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/will090413.p hp3#.Uid_w53D-os Obama’s sanctimony about his moral superiority to a Congress he considers insignificant has matched his hypocrisy regarding his diametrically opposed senatorial and presidential understandings of the proper modalities regarding uses of military force. Now he asks from the Congress he disdains an authorization he considers superfluous. By asking, however reluctantly, he begins the urgent task of lancing the boil of executive presumption. Surely he understands the perils of being denied an authorization he has sought, and then treating the denial as irrelevant. Sure seems like a "blame them" agenda. Does anyone NOT a proven lying sack of crap like Kerry have a good reason to have us attack Syria? An attack, per Presidential mandate, that will not do any good? A "shot across the bow" is used to stop someone. If they don't stop then the next shot has to be in the bridge to, again, STOP them. If we do "something to prove we have the national will" that isn't useful or effective, WHEN we are not obeyed, will the mission suddenly change? Also I fear the kind of action I would in other cases support, regime decapitation, would actually give us a worse outcome than nothing at all, since the Jihadi would then take over and THEY would then have the stockpiles of Chemical Weapons that we've tried to ignore for decades. Am I missing a good result from any of the proposed actions? |
