Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Red Line has been crossed CONFIRMED Sarin has been used in Syria!

page: 2
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 4 2013 @ 03:38 PM
link   
If sarin has been used then how come there are still terrorists? Is Assad really that incompetant or what?

Make no mistake you use whatever weapons you have against your enemy and NATO really has no business telling the syrian government or the rebels what they should do. Why does NATO support the rebels? Something is in it for them. $$$$$$$$

Just like the NON-EXISTANT wmd the bs UN security council lead by uk, usa, france claimed before against iraq. Some folks are itching for war and it aint russia or syria.

SIGH again




posted on Jun, 4 2013 @ 03:51 PM
link   
GO FIGURE ...tHE US, BRITAIN, AND RUSSIA, ARE THE THREE BIGGEST ARMS SUPPLIERS TO THE MIDDLE EAST.
Any conflict they can supply instead of fight in, is a very handsome profit dont you think?



posted on Jun, 4 2013 @ 05:55 PM
link   
One would have to believe that what was created out of the communist Russia in todays democratic society, that Russia could be used as an ally to those who oppose the Western sentiment of world domination.

War is war profiteering. Both sides are guilty.

This conflict has all the potential in setting in motion WW III.

If the balance of power can be maintained and neutralized with any further involvement from the Israel and their allies, then this conflict may be avoided long enough for the fall of the western empire and the collapse of the Obama Administration.

There are too many "cover stories" right now, that peoples heads are spinning. Benghazi, North Korea, Boston Bombing, IRS scandal, Press Wire Taps, Funding Al Qaeda rebels in Syria, the Syrian conflict itself, EU trade embargos lifted in support of the rebels OIL and ARMS, and now US had organised a drill with Jordan of Patriot missile battery and F-16 fighters, while NATO has supplied Turkey with Patriot missile battery as well.

These people want blood, want oil, want power, and are using ever means necessary to get what they want.

We the people are the only thing that is standing in their way for they have to convince us that these steps or measures are necessary and calculated in the highest form of intelligence, not available, but conclusively.



posted on Jun, 4 2013 @ 06:06 PM
link   
France need to take this information to the U.N, backed up by records of all their tests, instead of peddling this blatant propaganda.

Still it appears the U.K and France really want to be rid of Assad, so I don't fancy his chances much.



posted on Jun, 4 2013 @ 06:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Cobaltic1978
 


Actually the US, France, UK sit on the Security Council in the U.N. permanently and are strong supporters of this Syrian conflict and the rebels, so by presenting France's finding to the council itself, is rather important if they collectively decided that necessary measures need to be implemented immediately in order for the with drawl of the Assad regime from Syria and who will be participating?

US,FRANCE,UK,ISREAL,TURKEY,JORDAN,??????
edit on 4-6-2013 by whatzshaken because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 4 2013 @ 10:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaturnFX

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


Couldn't agree with you more, the west does not need to get involved in this


You can't agree with me, because my opinion is shifting by the minute.
I don't want another war

But at the same time, if these reports are accurate, I feel like dogpoop for just standing around when we could help for good

But I felt the same way when dubya was discussing Iraq at the beginning

But etc...I do want to find a stand though based on principles before anything is done. Do I see the west as needing to do what is the right thing, or do I see it as social Darwinism,

I see both points, its a choice of a turd burger or a s--- sandwich


Let me tell you about good in the hands of sociopaths. It's always evil in disguise.



posted on Jun, 4 2013 @ 10:24 PM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 

I agree.

The rest of the countries in this world need to get their *** in gear and stop depending on the US to police things. If everyone contributed then the UN could actually serve its purpose.

So many complain about the US but then do NOTHING to police the outside world.
edit on 4-6-2013 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 10:16 AM
link   
reply to post by jonnywhite
 


The UN is serving its purpose, that's is what many of you do not understand, the UN was not set up to help the whole population of the world, but the elite few.

The US is not the police force of the world but has adopted that foreign policy all on its own, policing the world requires responsibility and funding and weapons manufacturing and development.


The United States' military expenditures today account for about 40 percent of the world total. In 2012, the US spent some $682bn on its military - an amount more than what was spent by the next 13 countries combined.


aljazeera

you gotta spend money to make money and Obama has done nothing but that, far more worse that what Bush has done. the national debt went from 4 Trillion to 16 trillion under the Obama administration. 12 trillion more in only 5 years. Bush did have a surplus when we entered office but the figure do not lie.
edit on 5-6-2013 by whatzshaken because: (no reason given)
edit on 5-6-2013 by whatzshaken because: spelling



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 10:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by stirling
 



If they have real undeniable proof let them bring it to the UN general assembly.

I am pretty sure it says they are going to do just that in one of the links i have provided.

Remember the WMD's from Iraq were transported across the border before the UN inspectors visited Iraq while Saddam was alive and in power?
Even though the global intelligence communities knew about it, they must have decided to keep quiet as part of the future plans leading upto this news
IMO.
edit on 5-6-2013 by hp1229 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 02:54 PM
link   

French President Francois Hollande has said the growing proof of chemical weapons use in Syria "obliges the international community to act".

However, Mr Hollande cautioned: "We can only act within the framework of international law".

He spoke hours after Syrian government forces retook full control of the strategic western town of Qusair, after a siege lasting more than two weeks.


link

Anyone else think France really wants another war?



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 03:04 PM
link   
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 


Seems to me the ruling regime stands to lose infinitely more by using such tactics, and let's face it, they don't need to use gas, they're armed as any well armed conventional army is, aircraft, tanks, artillery pieces, and helicopters among much more.

The terrorists on the other hand have nothing to lose by using gas, and everything to gain, especially if the 'on side MSM' (Western and Israeli mostly) trying to engineer world opinion against Assad and his Government, back them up and blame Assad.

Assad has no need to use Sarin, the Terrorists the West is calling Rebels does.

I remember a report posted on here a few months ago that mentioned the 'rebels' had got their hands on some poison gas or chemical weapons...seems the report was right.



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by MysterX
 


Actually Obama's red-line thread was widely interpreted as applying to either side.

I get what your saying though that the Rebels and inperticuarlly the terrorists have much less to lose if they use Chemical Weapons than Assad does.

I also disagree with claiming that the Syrian rebellion is a terrorist rebellion but that is a debate for another time





new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join