Beautiful Babies Barbarically Murdered

a reply to: Black_Fox
I remember this soooo well....pure fabrication, using babies as the 'moral high-ground excuse' for an attack.

It seems to work every time though, so this appears to be the ace in their sleeves.

a reply to: intrptr

Yeah it was (i agree with you after i googled and spoke to peers,i had no idea about this) the populace do not see the pattern as they/we are distracted. Good reference.

originally posted by: intrptr

originally posted by: and14263

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: and14263

Babies ARE beautiful.
Murdered babies are victims of evil.

Can you not grasp the idea that Trump may actually believe the above?

He's using dead babies - the most effective emotive logo - to deceive us. If the attack was 'just' and not pipeline based we wouldn't need to see dead babies which mentally scar us.

As I recall the push to invade Kuwait was promoted along with "baby incubators being unplugged".

yyyup! fortunately if you ignore the mistake, you don't have to learn a lesson from it.

originally posted by: olaru12
In a surreal almost diabolical way, Trump is brilliant at manipulating the narrative. And if you question his motivation it's almost biblical heresy here at the New ATS. No questions allowed!

When I listened to the "beautiful babies" speech the NLP was so blatant and transparent. People are so stupid.

You're last paragraph leads me to believe you are above 30 years old?

Forgive me for drawing on assumptions but the generations earlier do not see the blatancy.

originally posted by: and14263

originally posted by: olaru12
In a surreal almost diabolical way, Trump is brilliant at manipulating the narrative. And if you question his motivation it's almost biblical heresy here at the New ATS. No questions allowed!

When I listened to the "beautiful babies" speech the NLP was so blatant and transparent. People are so stupid.

You're last paragraph leads me to believe you are above 30 years old?

Forgive me for drawing on assumptions but the generations earlier do not see the blatancy.

He was obviously born in 1912, what else do numbers mean at the end of names?

And I was obviously born in 0986.

ETA: lol, and I just noticed your name...

originally posted by: and14263

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: BlueAjah

Because he cares about babies?

Only the ones killed in gas attacks? Those are the only ones killed by the Syrian military?

I'd like to know how many babies the US has killed in it's shock and awe wars on the axis of evil.

Yes but US thought the deaths of 500,000 children in Iraq was worth it because it will result in the freedom of Iraq with a MacDonalds shop on every street corner.

a reply to: glend

Now theres a charmer saved by the Serbs in ww2 she rewards them by bombing them 50 years later starting the road to where Europe is now,I might say a prayer to your avatar greed and ignorance have reached critical mass it seems.

Trump killed babies in Yemen and called it a successful mission. Airstrikes have killed countless thousands of kids in the Middle East in the past 15 years.

People are using the deaths of these poor kids as the justification for military action - just as Muslims justify attacks on us because of the deaths of their children.

Funny, as I recall, President Obama's speech from 2013 stated he was deeply disturbed and outraged with Syria's use of chemical weapons. If he had the "balls" to use force like Trump did, would he have been criticized by members on this site? I'm no big fan of Trump, but I do give him credit for making a quick and decisive decision. Obama talked the talk back in 2013, but did nothing. Trump makes a move and every pundit throws him under the bus. He's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't smh.

The situation profoundly changed, though, on August 21st, when Assad’s government gassed to death over a thousand people, including hundreds of children. The images from this massacre are sickening: Men, women, children lying in rows, killed by poison gas. Others foaming at the mouth, gasping for breath. A father clutching his dead children, imploring them to get up and walk. On that terrible night, the world saw in gruesome detail the terrible nature of chemical weapons, and why the overwhelming majority of humanity has declared them off-limits -- a crime against humanity, and a violation of the laws of war.

When dictators commit atrocities, they depend upon the world to look the other way until those horrifying pictures fade from memory. But these things happened. The facts cannot be denied. The question now is what the United States of America, and the international community, is prepared to do about it. Because what happened to those people -- to those children -- is not only a violation of international law, it’s also a danger to our security.

This is not a world we should accept. This is what’s at stake. And that is why, after careful deliberation, I determined that it is in the national security interests of the United States to respond to the Assad regime’s use of chemical weapons through a targeted military strike. The purpose of this strike would be to deter Assad from using chemical weapons, to degrade his regime’s ability to use them, and to make clear to the world that we will not tolerate their use.

obamawhitehouse.archives.gov...

originally posted by: BlueAjah
a reply to: and14263

ummm.
Because he cares about babies?

No but he knows that those are words that will resonate with his support base.

He didn't stay around ANY of his children when they were growing up (that is apparently a "wife's job") and he demonstrably finds crying babies annoying and doesn't know how to quiet them. He is responding to the image of the Syrian father weeping over his two dead baby sons.

Not any other child. Not the people. Not the victims of any other atrocity. The picture got his attention and got him moving. Notice that he never mentions or even responded to or cared about Bana al-Abed - the little Syrian girl with a Twitter account.

So if there's a photo somewhere that will "resonate" with him on some level or that he thinks will resonate with his base and make others admire and love him, he's going to take action on that.

a reply to: BlueAjah

How many babies died under the so called Free Syrian Army which turns out to have Pro Jihadi elements?

a reply to: and14263

The effort is needed because that's his job. That's why we hired hinm-that's what the people want to hear.

Reality check-we don't know anything-so what's the big deal about Trump's language? He's speaking the obvious.

There are NO answers to this Syrian mess-you nor I know-at some point we have to have SOME trust in our leader's decisions. This is absolute horror.

Do you really think the president enjoyed giving the orders to bomb people? No way.

Is he just a figure head for the real dark/military controlled government-just doing the dirty deeds? We don't know.

So, making these accusations just proves your emotional response to someone you hate-neither you nor I know what's really going on except-this is a horror any way you look at it.

originally posted by: Byrd

originally posted by: BlueAjah
a reply to: and14263

ummm.
Because he cares about babies?

No but he knows that those are words that will resonate with his support base.

His support base seems to be a bit fractured on this event.

Its not "Pro America". It's spending money on another foreign war.

a reply to: and14263

If we're going to act militarily every time beautiful babies are murdered, then the US is going to be very busy all over the world.

originally posted by: PistolPete
Trump killed babies in Yemen and called it a successful mission. Airstrikes have killed countless thousands of kids in the Middle East in the past 15 years.

People are using the deaths of these poor kids as the justification for military action - just as Muslims justify attacks on us because of the deaths of their children.

He killed babies in Yemen?

was there more then this?
The strikes killed five al Qaeda operatives

originally posted by: starwarsisreal
a reply to: BlueAjah

How many babies died under the so called Free Syrian Army which turns out to have Pro Jihadi elements?

up to 500,000 people have died in Syrian since 2011.

a reply to: and14263

He cares about the beautiful babies only enough to bomb a country after they've died but won't allow them into the US as refugees.

Go to Hell Trump, but I'm sure you've had your one way trip booked for quite sometime anyway.

a reply to: Stormdancer777

but politically, this takes it to another level. another state was targeted and they have friends.

U.S. military probing more possible civilian deaths in Yemen raid

... which the Pentagon said also killed 14 militants. However, medics at the scene said about 30 people, including 10 women and children, were killed.

U.S. Central Command said in a statement that an investigating team had "concluded regrettably that civilian non-combatants were likely killed" during Sunday's raid. It said children may have been among the casualties.

www.reuters.com...

If we removed Assad and the terrorist groups take over Syria, I wonder if we will see images of the dead children of the 10s of thousands of Syrians loyal to Assad who will be slaughtered on our evening news?