It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Syria! Syria! Syria!!

page: 1
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 05:17 PM
link   
Obama: Not enough evidence on chemical weapons use in Syria for US to act


WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama again vowed that the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian regime would be viewed as a “game changer” for international involvement in that civil war, but said officials still don’t have enough details to take action.



On Tuesday, Obama told reporters that too much uncertainty exists to change course in U.S. policy toward the conflict.

“What we have is evidence that chemical weapons have been used inside Syria, but we don’t know how they were used, when they were used, who used them,” he said. “We don’t have a chain of custody that establishes exactly what has happened.”


So we're not going, yet, but we are going to continue to be involved, like sending hundreds of millions of dollars or smuggling weapons to the "rebels". Rebels you say? More like terrorists.

Hezbollah taking part in Syria fighting: Nasrallah


Hezbollah fighters are aiding troops in Syria to combat the rebellion against President Bashar al-Assad, the head of the powerful Lebanese Shiite movement confirmed on Tuesday.

"A large number of (rebels) were preparing to capture villages inhabited by Lebanese," so it was "normal to offer every possible and necessary aid to help the Syrian army, popular committees (pro-government militia) and the Lebanese," Hassan Nasrallah said in a televised speech.

Nasrallah, a close ally of Assad, said the fighting in the central Qusayr region close to the Lebanese border was "not over".


Looks like all the terrorists are flocking to Syria to join in the fight. Syria needs real solutions real fast because those poor civilians are the ones who are suffering. Libyan rebels were supported via NATO bombing campaigns because Gaddafi was accused of killing some protesters but Syria is left untouched. I'm not looking to invade to Syria but it's funny how politics and BS rule this world. In any case, the violence in Syria is only getting worse and worse, especially with the influx of so many terrorist factions, so something needs to be done but I don't know what the answer is, but I'm sure I know how our "leaders" will handle this... more war.

Syria blast kills 13 as Russia bans civilian flights


A bombing in the heart of Damascus killed at least 13 people Tuesday, as Russia banned its civilian planes from Syrian airspace after the crew of one reported coming under threat over the war-hit country.



The bomb attack in the Damascus district of Marjeh came a day after Syrian Prime Minister Wael al-Haqi survived a car bombing in an upscale neighbourhood of the capital. "The number of casualties in the cowardly terrorist blast targeting the commercial and historic centre of Damascus in the Marjeh district rose to 13 martyrs and more than 70 injured," state television said, citing the interior ministry. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights reported "14 dead, including nine civilians and five members of the security forces, in a car bomb attack near the old interior ministry headquarters."


Cowardly terrorist attacks indeed.


edit on 30-4-2013 by Swills because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 05:20 PM
link   
There is hope for humanity yet. This is proof that someone somewhere still has at least one functioning brain cell. If not, we'd be bombing another country of brown people based of a pack of lies. Hoorah.



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 05:24 PM
link   
I'm baffled by the selective isolation of 'chemical weapons', when we all know that death is death. It's like the proverbial question of "what snake is the deadliest?", and of course the answer is "the one that kills you".

If our federal government is forced to retreat from the false flag wars in Afghanistan and Iraq because the duration is wearing on the patience of the public, it just becomes obvious that they are itching for another conflict to keep the military strength in the hands of the federal government by starting another conflict. It's either Libya, Syria, Iran, you name it. And they try to bolster this philosophy that we are somehow morally obligated to intervene.

It's utter nonsense. US intervention has NEVER, EVER, EVER panned out. It has always resulted in keeping 3rd world countries in the 3rd world, propped up ruthless dictators, and otherwise screwed up the natural selection process of governance.

It would be a travesty if the US became involved in any way, shape, or fashion in the affairs of Syria. It's Syria's battle. Let them handle it. They don't need the US to come in and screw it up.



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 05:32 PM
link   
Syria is the door to Iran...........When Syria is reduced to a hundred warring factios all killing each other, Iran will suddenly become the next bad boy.
It make sense to cancel out Syria before gobbling up Iran, in a strategic way.....
Fighting Iran with hostile syria at our backs is not in the cards.
First Syria....then the big boy IRAN>>>>>>>>>>



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 07:42 PM
link   
If the US, UN or anyone else involves themselves in Syria, they would be up against the Syrian army and then they would have to remove all of the terrorist/ jihadi types. It would turn into another Iraq situation very quickly.

If nobody does anything to help the people of Syria then the country will eventually fall to the rebels.
And then the world will have another Jihadi terror state to deal with.
Either way it's a terrible mess and I feel so sorry for the good people of Syria.



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 11:35 PM
link   
reply to post by threewisemonkeys
 


Yeah maybe but you may be giving them too much credit... or playing into their game. By now it's well known terrorist factions have long infected the rebel cause in Syria but even knowing this that doesn't stop DC from sending hundreds of millions of dollar to them and god knows what their smuggling in as well. Syria is complicated because of her allies, unlike Libya where the west came together via NATO to defeat her, who had no allies. But either Syria or Iran is gonna get it one of these days because these war hawks are far from done.
edit on 1-5-2013 by Swills because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 11:39 PM
link   
reply to post by lynxpilot
 


The US has been involved with the Syrian civil war since day one. The US and the west are accused of instigating the war and later funneling the terrorists in to create more division and chaos. The homegrown rebels long ago feared their cause was overrun by terrorists and nothing's changed, in fact its only getting worse but that won't stop DC from sending these "rebels" million upon millions of dollars and not to mention the things we don't know that is all classified, aka the CIA.



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 11:42 PM
link   
reply to post by stirling
 


Fighting Iran or Syria could mean Russia and or China may or may not get involved which makes warring with either outright impossible but a "civil war" is just what the doctor ordered.



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 11:43 PM
link   
reply to post by LeLeu
 


They're damned if they do and damned if they don't. I don't know what the solution is but I fear the wrong answer will be coming soon from the US & the west.
edit on 30-4-2013 by Swills because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 11:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Swills

Cowardly terrorist attacks indeed.


Oh come on Swills.

All the fighting is because of America and its Zionist puppet master Israel, hellbent on controlling the Middle East !



You didn't get the ATS memo?

S&F



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 11:56 PM
link   
reply to post by sonnny1
 


My email was down, and then it was hacked, but I called Blizzard and got an authenticator now so I just got the memo today.

But I'm catching up



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 12:00 AM
link   
here is a thought and just a thought , lets say we the US go in, after it has been determined that there was Chem weapon's used , and the ground force start actions , now that they are on the ground the rebels turn on US and so does the Syrian army, as well as the rest of the mid east. Do we stay or do we get the heck out? and at what cost.

Syria is a trap no matter what, the US should give them aid as they are doing now but as far as ground troops, it is their fight let them fight it. Obama is wise not to send in the troops.



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 12:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by lynxpilot
It's Syria's battle. Let them handle it.


Says Iran, Russia, China...........................




posted on May, 1 2013 @ 04:13 AM
link   
Hezbollah might enter the fight on the side of Assad.

India Times



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 04:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by threewisemonkeys
There is hope for humanity yet. This is proof that someone somewhere still has at least one functioning brain cell. If not, we'd be bombing another country of brown people based of a pack of lies. Hoorah.




The apologists and appeasers are just as looney as the war mongers in my book. Same nutty coin just a flip side.


When you stray to a fringe and only see that side you might as well not even look for the truth anymore. The Truth takes a back seat to being right.



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 04:46 AM
link   
Good move by Obama, on many fronts.

There never was anything concrete about weapons being used. We all remember when those vague reports came out with the photos of the suffering soldier in the hospital.. it was weeks/month or so ago?.. why did this only get planted in the media long after all evidence was removed and actors in the news clip killed in combat?

Going in under the guise 'chemical weapons' would be very stupid.

Now, if either side use them on a significant scale, then absolutely send in a force to secure the weapons and use limited air strikes to hit the salvo's and ammo dumps.

The real issue here, is to understand who the son of a bitch driving this rebellion is.

Is it Israeli commando's in the backend?
Is it US and UK forces on the ground directing?
Is it western funded Muslim fanatics being released like a plague of wasps?
or is it really a bitter Syrian militia wanting a better country?

When we find out who's orchestrating this, we need to arrest them and hang them in Nuremberg.



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 05:00 AM
link   
Chemical weapons?

USA just needs some excuse to irradiate Syria with DU & EU



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 10:37 AM
link   
If you were the rebels ( terrorist's) wouldn't you use chemical weapons you captured from Assad? I think they would since Obama said his red line was their use so shy not use them to draw the USA into helping more.? All smells like a big ok fat stinky lie like Iraq.



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 12:05 PM
link   
reply to post by timewarpedbrain7
 
yes they are set on suicide are they not? If your gonna use Chem weapons that does not have a kill your foe only mode , but kills all you would need protecting and know how to use the protection, they do not know how to use a simple rocket tube launcher or how to load one and there gonna use a WMD?? No I think it this was Assad's forces, but then read my opening line, it could be suicide rebels after all, just to get the US in, and it did not work.


edit on 1-5-2013 by bekod because: line edit



posted on May, 1 2013 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by bekod
reply to post by timewarpedbrain7
 
No I think it this was Assad's forces, but then read my opening line, it could be suicide rebels after all, just to get the US in, and it did not work.


edit on 1-5-2013 by bekod because: line edit


whats in bold in your quote was the point i was trying to get across, but you have to remember that these aren't necessarily weapons of WMD, they were chemical weapons that killed a few people though. WMD to me are weapons that cause mass destruction like the abomb look what it did in japan, look what these weapons used reportedly did. Obama's red line was chemical weapon use why would they (the rebels) not use them to try and get the USA to help them on the ground or give them weapon support which is being discussed.

Just remember there has been a lot of defections from the Assad regime over the course of this war, who is to say one of those people was the one with some knowledge to work those. The rebels have also taken over some military compounds so who is to say they didn't acquire the weapons and the instructions on how to work them either??

just thoughts i'm throwing out there that I've had since this all broke.




top topics



 
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join