Beautiful Babies Barbarically Murdered

a reply to: oddnutz

We only act how the media wants us to act, silly.

These dead babies are the legacy of Obama's inaction. Standing on the sidelines giving lofty speeches while people are getting gassed by sarin is not the moral high-ground.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Yeah. Too bad Congress didn't see it that way.

a reply to: FissionSurplus

In the case of sudden hypoxia, you are more likely to turn blue.

Depending on the level of exposure, slow death by nerve agent is not "sudden hypoxia".

originally posted by: khnum
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.

Indeed. Forcing the bear into a corner and prodding it with sticks, isn't going to end well. It will need a long prayer.

a reply to: Phage

Yeah. Too bad Congress didn't see it that way.

How'd they see it?

originally posted by: FissionSurplus

About spraying down victims with hoses, even the tiniest droplet of a nerve agent like sarin can be lethal on contact with the skin. About white skinned babies? The body is deprived of oxygen, as you gasp for breath you turn white as a sheet.

a reply to: intrptr

In the case of sudden hypoxia, you are more likely to turn blue.

Does it also make their hair blonde or red?

Replying twice, sorry yes I agree the attack was a false flag... but sarin was probably really used. It has to stand up to investigation which is beginning, other attacks before now have been carried with sarin too, by the Insurgency.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Phage

Yeah. Too bad Congress didn't see it that way.

How'd they see it?

Not at all... conveniently there is no proof (as usual) the 'Syrians did it', nor is there a declaration of war.

Besides which an attack with sixty cruise missiles has to be panned further in advance than twenty four hours. Twas a desperation move on the uS part to stop that airbase from attacking the insurgency, all that was needed was an excuse...

cart before the horse.

originally posted by: PolyCottonBlend

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.

Lol, US just keeps pulling them rabbits from the hat and we the audience go oooh, ahhh...

btw, welcome to ATS.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

They didn't want to take action.
www.washingtonpost.com...

a reply to: Justso

First off, I loved Trump, not hated. A breath of fresh air. So you're wrong when you assume I hate him.

Second, many who voted for him, as shown on here and it is purely anecdotal of course... But many who voted him in did believe he would not create needless deaths in promotion of the pipeline/Petro dollar... Like other potus have done.

I am resided to the fact that we (genuine democracy) is dead. How much do 50 missiles cost including labour and admin? Spend on MAGA or spend on missiles to enable installation of a puppet regime and control of energy in dollars to EU and surrounding countries?

I want it spent on MAGA.

And I'm a bloody Brit!

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

They didn't want to take action.
www.washingtonpost.com...

So that stopped Obama?

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Yes, the fact that Congress would not support the military action he wanted to take against another country, "stopped" him.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

They didn't want to take action.
www.washingtonpost.com...

Really those war monger Republicans didn't want to take action?

Since they hold the majorities.

a reply to: neo96

Really those war monger Republicans didn't want to take action?

Apparently not.

a reply to: Phage

Yes, the fact that Congress would not support the military action he wanted to take against another country, "stopped" him.

That's not quite true. He made a deal with your boy Putin.

For two weeks, the administration made its case on Capitol Hill, but it soon became clear that most Republicans and Democrats in Congress were against authorizing action—leaving Obama the option of going forward anyway (which he said he would do) or backing down altogether. Then, an unexpected opportunity emerged: During a September 9 news conference in London, Secretary of State John Kerry was asked whether there was anything Assad could do to avoid an attack. Sure, Kerry said in exasperation, the Syrian leader could admit that he had chemical weapons (something he still refused to do) and give them all up peacefully, but “he isn’t about to do it and it can’t be done.” Like Obama’s original red line a year earlier, this offhand remark wasn’t intended to be a policy pronouncement. But soon after Kerry walked off the stage he received a call from his Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov, who was then meeting with a delegation of Syrian diplomats in Moscow and wanted to talk with the secretary of state about his “initiative.”

www.politico.com...

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

They didn't want to take action.
www.washingtonpost.com...

Really those war monger Republicans didn't want to take action?

Since they hold the majorities.

Looks like someone might be changing teams, and took one for the team or got played.

I find it very hard to believe aswell that those warmongers aren't salivating at the mouth on this.

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

They didn't want to take action.
www.washingtonpost.com...

Really those war monger Republicans didn't want to take action?

Since they hold the majorities.

All the bickering between Democrats and Republicans is going to make it very easy for them to get away with their war/conflict.

Trump, Hillary, Obama, Congress, the IC...they've all played big roles in setting the stage with regard to Syria and Russia. I don't know how anyone can be blind to the collusion.

I think that the story stinks. None of the above care about children dying unless it can lead to plundering the spoils of war.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

He made the deal with Putin because he wasn't getting approval by congress to attack. At the time people were tired of military actions and war.

Making the deal was the result of not getting support to launch an attack.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

That's not quite true. He made a deal with your boy Putin.

Not my boy.

But you're right, not only was Congress not going to give him authorization, a deal was presented which avoided military intervention.

Obama (and Congress) wasn't as easily triggered, apparently, as Trump is.