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.

 

US readies possible Missile Strike against Syria

page: 6
38
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 23 2013 @ 11:53 PM
link   
reply to post by aoxomoxoa
 


Chuck Hagel giving options to Obama on Syria

www.theguardian.com...




posted on Aug, 23 2013 @ 11:55 PM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 


Umm Assad does have Sarin.
Didn't i just prove that?
Now can you prove Obama is behind it or are you just trolling?



posted on Aug, 23 2013 @ 11:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Thorneblood
 


i believe they are correct,,they would never use them against there own people
as for the rebels? most of the rebels are not even Syrian..they are mercenaries
what do they care about Syrian civilians?



posted on Aug, 23 2013 @ 11:59 PM
link   
reply to post by autopat51
 


Well they care about Syrian's because if they can win against Assad then all of those people will be in Al-Qaeda's pocket. Great source for money, weapons, power and soldiers.

"Look, look we saved your people. Now join us and help us fight against the Devils to the west who just let your people die."

Pretty good sales pitch i would say.
edit on 24-8-2013 by Thorneblood because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 12:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Thorneblood
 

Umm Assad does have Sarin.
Didn't i just prove that?
Now can you prove Obama is behind it or are you just trolling?
Syria has sarin gas but that was not was used the other day that is causing all the hoopla.
That's what the Benghazi cover-up is all about, that the US was shipping missiles from there to the paid mercenaries in Syria posing as rebels.
edit on 24-8-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 12:06 AM
link   
reply to post by victor7
 


That article backs up what I said



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 12:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Thorneblood
 


i would agree with you Thorne..except
everything i have read and studied on says
the Syrians love there country and their leader...Assad.
WE are the outsiders..we are the demon..
so..why do we want this country to fall so bad?



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 12:10 AM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 


Ok.
Now prove it.



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 12:18 AM
link   
reply to post by autopat51
 


I have no doubt the Syrian's love their country, everyone loves their country. Except Americans who love to hate their own country.
But love their leader? I have a hard time believing that....



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 12:22 AM
link   
Because of the CIA, NSA and other intelligence units, the US knows who used the chemical weapons, where launched, etc. Trillions of dollars worth of the intelligence system lets them know.

Fixing blame is different story based on a move in the current game.



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 12:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Thorneblood

And to be fair, i would prefer air strikes to putting boots on the ground as that would lead us to fighting with Al-Qaeda or against both Syria and Al-Qaeda forces....

The CIA have been in bed with "al Qaeda" the whole way through even up to the present day, so they're what might be called up the ying yang by playing both sides against the middle .

That's why many of us refer to the organization as al CIA-duh.



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 12:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Thorneblood
 


im only as good as what i read..and learn
from what i have read..yes..they support Assad.



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 12:54 AM
link   
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 


Mmm i have heard that since i joined ATS, it has always been debunked. Time and time again.
Since no one has actually proven it to me yet....care to try?

Because to be honest, i fail to see why we would drone strike them repeatedly. Put many of their top members on our most wanted list and spend a huge amount of money to build a massive digital spying network to monitor them for planned attacks if we also have them on speed dial.



edit on 24-8-2013 by Thorneblood because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 12:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Thorneblood
 


I can't even say nice try. It is just another page from your play book.

It has never been debunked and can't be because it is the truth.

What is next in the play book.

P



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 01:05 AM
link   
reply to post by pheonix358
 


What playbook?
Are you on some sort of medication?
If that is true, then please prove it to me.
If i am wrong i can admit, can you?



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 01:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Thorneblood
 


Yep, same page. Accuse the opposition of being on drugs.


Update your playbook! The rhetoric is getting real old.

P



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 01:24 AM
link   
All of these discussions invariably lead to a partisan debate where everyone picks the side they view as most innocent and decries the other.

It's sort of the same dynamic that happens when people develop romanticism about the past. "If our forefathers could see us now, they'd be appalled." Probably true, by the standards of their day. But by those standards, they themselves likewise committed atrocities, lied, deceived, double dealt, oppressed and conspired, in pursuit of their own agendas.

Stealth, deception, torture, poisoning, and other "tradecraft" have been utilized since time immemorial by those in power. That they somehow stopped being employed at any point because either we in our early stages or our present day adversaries out of the benevolence of their own fight for "freedom" were ever so virtuous that they simply refused to use them is laughable in my appraisal. Power wields that which is at its disposal, or it loses power, which it finds unacceptable.

I used to believe our country was once honest and just, a paragon of liberty, and that it has since been corrupted. But I now believe that human beings in power over others have always been capable of the things we see today and then some, and that the narrative changes very little over time. All we ever were was - and even this is arguable - the best ATTEMPT at being something more than that. And the byproduct of that, sure, has been an improved quality of life and greater DEGREE of freedom. But true freedom, coupled with true virtue, honesty, integrity, and humanity? I don't see it. I haven't seen it in any nation or movement in history, save for one or two that never even got off the ground by nature.

Likewise, I once, when I was younger, believed that in every conflict there was an antagonist and a protagonist. After all, that's the narrative we're taught from birth on. In every popular story we're ever told or shown or indoctrinated with, there's a hero and villain. Yet somehow as we grow up and learn that this is not always the case, we still fail to make that realization about our world leaders, politicians, and governments.

Thus I choose not to take sides or have an agenda. My "agenda," if it can be called that, is peace, as trite and corny and naïve as that no doubt sounds. America conspires and lies and exercises hegemony. Yes. So does Assad within his own sphere. So do the rebels. So shall they if victorious. So does every nation, government, leader, tyrant, despot, and example of the latter which cloaks itself in civility the world over. Such is the nature of power, it would seem. The only differences are in degrees and blatant-ness. There are no "good guys" in the halls of global power in my opinion. Only the lesser of many savage and sanguine evils.

Forgive my cynicism, and please don't mistake it for a lack of care or compassion. I want people to stop dying and suffering. I want children's lives to stop being cut short every day the world over in its myriad conflicts. But I no longer have any hope that the cessation of those things can come from any state sponsored or sanctioned effort. Even if it is arguably the "lesser" of the aforementioned evils (and whether it even is will of course differ depending upon your vantage point.)

I will not pick a side. I reject all of them, short of humanity as a whole, for whom despite its aforementioned failures and actions, I hold love and compassion for.

Again, forgive my cynicism. Reality left me no choice but to embrace it, try as I might to resist. As always, I advocate and hope only for peace. But that doesn't negate the above feeling/opinion. To each their own view.

Peace.



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 01:24 AM
link   
reply to post by pheonix358
 


So you can't prove it.
You could have just said so.

If anyone is still actually interested in Syria then here is an update
Jpost

Syria's opposition said it would ensure the safety of UN chemical weapons inspectors in areas of Syria it controls and said it was critical that they reached the site of an alleged gas attack near Damascus within 48 hours.

"We will ensure the safety of the UN team ... It is critical that those inspectors get there within 48 hours," Khaled Saleh, spokesman for the opposition Syrian National Coalition, told a news conference in Istanbul.


It is all up to Assad now.



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 01:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by victor7
reply to post by aoxomoxoa
 


Chuck Hagel giving options to Obama on Syria

www.theguardian.com...


It is my understanding that Obama specifically asked Hagel to prepare military options.

news.yahoo.com...


He said Obama asked that the Pentagon to prepare military options for Syria and that some of those options "requires positioning our forces."



posted on Aug, 24 2013 @ 01:31 AM
link   
reply to post by AceWombat04
 

Call me when the US has killed some 100,000 of its own people in war. I know you'll try to spin this to make the US look bad, but you're seriously giving Assad the green light.

Not good to give truly bad people the green light while condemning others of higher character.

Assad has been skating on thin ice far longer than he should have. It's telling that Russia and China won't apply pressure on him. They're, beneath the lies they tell, our enemies.
edit on 24-8-2013 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
38
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join