A Public Thank You To Obama

reply to post by Blue_Jay33

Wesley Clark in the Balkans ordered American troops to fire on an area where Russian troops were.
Luckily the lower ranking officer didn't follow Clarke's orders and in fact called him mad, and trying to start
a third world war...
Clark has a axe to grind.... but even so, he seems to be telling the truth here.

I disagree on bush being somehow better as compared to obama,
they are both fools, they both cant seem to get anything done,
they both scream and cry about being held back by this entity
or the other while at the same time are seemingly able to get
a heck of allot done in the opposite direction......

Nah the party system is still just one puppeteer with two hands
distracting most folks from ever making any real headway
into repairing our government and its policies.......

Just look at the joke of a healthcare reform, that is modern
day partisan politics at its best..... the bill does not accomplish
what it should, does not make healthcare affordable but it does
force low paid workers to be fined for not being able to afford
healthcare....... yeah one buffoon does not make another
buffoon look any better, just a different level of baffoonery

Originally posted by Ahabstar
But many in both the conspiracy theory community as well as political pundits (and some politicians) stated very firmly that there were satellite images of military convoys of material leaving Iraq and heading into Syria and Jordan in the weeks prior to the Shock and Awe campaign that began the Iraq War.

So with this declaration, Obama and the Obama Administration is confirming that either Bush was right and there were WMD in Iraq or is admitting that US Intelligence, DHS, NSA spying and the Patriot Act under Obama's tenure has been so incompetent and misguided that Syria was able to develop and deploy military grade Chemical Weapons without our knowledge until after the fact.

So these satellite images of which you speak, are they any more compelling than the satellite images Colin Powell showed at the UN, and claimed were mobile bio-weapons labs, but turned out to be milk trucks?

Are you also seriously claiming that Syria didn't have a chemical weapons program before the Iraq War? Are you also aware that Syria was in the coalition against Iraq in the first Iraq war, and has long been an ally of Iran, Iraq's enemy? Why on earth would Saddam Hussein send his chemical weapons to an enemy? In addition, given Israel's proclivity to attack/intercept weapons shipments to its enemies and its -- by all counts -- good intelligence service, wouldn't It have attacked any such convoys of chemical weapons being moved into Syria?

There's plenty to fault Obama for in this current crisis with Syria, but to claim it somehow vindicates the Bush II regime's WMD claims regarding Iraq is risible.

It would seem that some folk will use anything to vindicate George W. Bush and his gang of war criminal clowns -- even if it means accepting a claim by Obama reminiscent of the lies the Bush regime fed us. To me this just suggests that there is a segment of society who will accept any US government's lame reasons why we should illegally attack a country that is in no way threatening us.

Well, this should pretty much do it for "pre-emptive" Nobel Peace Prizes, dont you think? It hasn't done anything to influence Obama.

That said, the guy seems criminally unable to make a decision regardless of the situation anyway. "Decison" from the latin "to cut". To make a decision is to take in all the facts, evaluate them and pick ONE of the paths put before you. There will be other decisions to make down that path, but once chosen you are committed. Obama seems to be totally muddled and conflicted. Let's just hope he is getting good advice because he doesn't seem to trust his own.

Love him or hate him, Putin knows how to make a decision.

(this is NOT a pro-russia anti-America comment, so just don't..lol)

Originally posted by Flatfish
reply to post by Ahabstar

 

What proof do you have that Syria had no chemical weapons prior to the Iraq War invasion? Where do you people get this stupid stuff?

Actually, I guess the most discouraging part of this thread is how quickly the ignorant minions line up to offer thanks for providing them with the "truth."

I guess Forrest Gump's mom was right when she said, "stupid is, as stupid does." Sometimes, I think the entire anti-Obama crowd here on ATS has been infected with a disease, or maybe chemicals, that is eating away at their brains.

FYI, Syria had chemical weapons and the ability to deliver them long before Bush 43 lied us into the Iraq War.

www.reuters.com...

(Reuters) - Syria, defeated by Israel in three wars and afraid its arch enemy had gained a nuclear arsenal, began in earnest to build a covert chemical weapons program three decades ago, aided by its neighbors, allies and European chemical wholesalers.

www.usatoday.com...

WASHINGTON — Syria's chemical weapons program stretches back decades, allowing the country to amass a supply of nerve and blister agents capable of being mounted on long-range missiles that could reach neighboring countries, according to government and independent analysts.

Its program stretches back to the 1970s or '80s — experts disagree on the precise time — as a means of developing a deterrent against Israel's presumed nuclear capabilities, according to analysts and a Congressional Research Service report.

en.wikipedia.org...

Western non-governmental organizations have stated they believe Syria has an active chemical weapons program.[9][10][11][12] The U.S. has stated that the Syria "has had a chemical warfare program since the mid-1980s", In 1988, a U.S. analyst described Syria's CW capability as more advanced than that of Iraq, however, Israel stated in 1989 that Syria had the "potential for chemical warfare, but not more than that".

www.nti.org...

Syria began developing an indigenous chemical production capability in 1971 at the Centre D'Etudes et de Recherches Scientifiques (CERS) – a facility in Damascus that today administers Syria's CW program while also contributing directly to research and development efforts. [14] According to Gordon Burck and Charles Flowerree, however, most reports indicate that Syria's CW production capability came online sometime in the mid-1980's. [15] In 1989, CIA Director William Webster testified that Syria had begun producing CW agents in the early 1980's. [16] In 1983, a U.S. Special National Intelligence Estimate first identified a Syrian CW production facility. By 1986, Seth Carus wrote that in just five years, Syria had obtained CW production technology from Western Europe and had focused its attention on producing nerve agents. [17] Reportedly, unidentified U.S. officials also indicated that Syria could produce sarin, a charge repeated by Shimon Peres. [18] By the end of 1986, Prime Minister Yitzhaq Shamir, Foreign Minister Shimon Peres, and Defense Minister Yitzhak Rabin had all openly stated that Syria was producing nerve agents and delivery systems. [19] By 1990, both media and statements by U.S. officials indicated that Syria had converted several agrochemical factories into sarin production facilities. [20] Reports then appeared alleging that Syria had begun researching the more toxic V-series nerve agents. Throughout the 1990s, reports pointed to continuing work on V-agents but also suggested a lack of success. [21] While the CIA never publicly committed to the view that Syria possessed VX, 721 reports in the 1990s claimed either that Syria "may be trying to develop more potent nerve agents," or that it "apparently tried to develop more toxic and persistent nerve agents."

The spread of ignorance at this magnitude along with the overwhelming F&S replies from the right-wing base of ATS posters, (33 flags and 40 stars in less than two pages) is both laughable and sickening. And to think that this spread of ignorance is originating from a Mod is just pathetic.

This ATS phenomena of awarding ignorance is exactly what was being discussed in another thread here; www.abovetopsecret.com...

edit on 30-8-2013 by Flatfish because: (no reason given)

Thank you. That is exactly what I was thinking as I read the OP. Secondly, I was thinking, why is this in the "political madness" forum and not where it belongs, in the "Rant" forum?

Oh, ATS, the toilet bowl of intelligence.

Originally posted by Ahabstar
reply to post by Flatfish

 

At least my words have not caused a 40-50 cent price jump on a gallon of gasoline. I can't say the same for Obama. But I guess you think it is better to place people that oppose this regime into FEMA camps than to have their opinions heard and discussed in the open?

edit on 30-8-2013 by Ahabstar because: (no reason given)

And this is your response? No evidence to back up your wild rant? He/she gave ample evidence that your theory, at least on this level, is bunk. And you don't address any of that?

Part of the reason I left ATS before was:

1) The star seeking sensationalist's who say just about anything to get a pat on the back

and

2) The tendency for fiction to be passed off as fact concerning important subjects, essentially discrediting the real issues at hand.

I agree, Obama and Bush are very alike and there are some cynical conspiracy's going on "behind the curtain", but rants filled with inaccuracies do more damage than good in exposing this issue.

Deny ignorance much?

Originally posted by LifeIsEnergy

Oh, ATS, the toilet bowl of intelligence.

I'd say, "You got that right, Ace", but I've checked out the comments at a few conservative sites from time to time. There are worse places. But conservatives really do have the tendency to be 'ditto heads' on many issues.

But the fanciful illogic of the premise of this thread, and all the supporters of the notion chiming in is quite gobsmacking.

Originally posted by Xcouncil=wisdom
Welcome Everyone To Opperation Save Face

Yupp this whole event is just staged for Obama to say...."I was almost ready to do something, but then....well....uh.....ya know.....circumstances and stuff...The "Red Line" was just a metaphore really"

Not POTUS just PUTZ

Funny, I thought initially, just from your post's headline, that the saving face had to do with vindicating Bush II, which is the topic of this thread.

But let me be clear: I think you're absolutely right that Obamination is trying to come up with an Operation Saving Face for this self-created debacle of his. So criticize away, usual Obama-detractor suspects; this time you got one right, and it's a very big deal. This administration is becoming nearly the same perfidious clown show that the last administration was, the only difference being this one tries to minimizes the amount of potential harm its decisions can cause -- which I guess is something to be said for it, sort of (i.e. a very backhanded compliment).

However, trying to twist it around to somehow vindicating or absolving Bush II for getting the US and a number other countries into an illegal and disastrous war with Iraq is ridiculous.

Originally posted by Flatfish
reply to post by tadaman

 

Better yet, why don't you provide a single shred of proof that Syria just got those weapons via Iraq in 2003?

It's mentality like that demonstrated in the OP that makes me somewhat hopeful that Alex Jones is right when he says that we're building FEMA camps on an unprecedented level because sooner or later, we're going to need a place to lock up and house this new breed of idiots where they can pose no harm to the rest of humanity.

Indeed. Better yet, turn those FEMA camps into Soylent Red plants.

reply to post by MrInquisitive


Exactly, it is like they're allergic to research and reason. Obama hate was never a big concern to me, as I saw it as partially constructive in awakening more people to our political condition in this nation. But what really concerns me is the partisanship of these people, how they can excuse the Neo-Cons in an attempt to attack Obama and his Liberal henchmen. Everything for these people is Right/Left issues, and they miss the deeper problems at hand. The Liberals aren't excused of this behavior either, though it seems far more prevalent amongst the baggers and neo-cons. They hop on the bandwagon of wild conspiracy theories of idiots like Glenn Beck and Donald Trump, and then wonder why more moderate people call them crazy and inbred lunatics.

Facts and evidence people... that is all you need. And conjecture is not either, fyi.

Originally posted by MikeNice81
reply to post by Ahabstar

 

Syria's Chemical and Biological Weapons


It appears they began long before the Iraq war.

In 1973, Syria reportedly obtained chemical artillery shells from Egypt prior to the October War against Is- rael, but did not use them. 3 The purpose of this transfer may have been to establish a deterrent in-kind in case Israel resorted to chemical warfare or Syria’s defenses collapsed completely, although neither of these scenarios materialized. Since then, Syria appears to have acquired an indigenous chemical weapons (CW) capability, al- though it is difficult to assess its size and sophistication

Hey, that's crazy talk you're peddling there, friend. You're just trying to confuse us with historical facts -- with a high-fallutin' academic paper with fancy-dancy references no less. Shame on you.

Originally posted by LifeIsEnergy
Part of the reason I left ATS before was:

1) The star seeking sensationalist's who say just about anything to get a pat on the back

and

2) The tendency for fiction to be passed off as fact concerning important subjects, essentially discrediting the real issues at hand.

I agree, Obama and Bush are very alike and there are some cynical conspiracy's going on "behind the curtain", but rants filled with inaccuracies do more damage than good in exposing this issue.

Deny ignorance much?

I think a lot of ATS'ers misunderstand the site's motto/slogan: They think it means "Deny (one's own) Ignorance."

Love how this thread already has garnered 68 flags, and that this number will no doubt grow. Given this, I'm not so depressed by the YouTube UFO threads that get 100+ flags... Frankly there is a rather high anti-correlation between flag count and informational content.

Originally posted by Common Good
reply to post by Thorneblood

 

Does this not sound exactly like what happened in IRaq?

dIDNT THEY DO THE SAME THING? mOVE THEIR MISSLES OUT OF THE COUNTRY before we came in?

Maybe thats why the president is not "Putting boots on the ground"...cause they probably wont find anything.

Uh no. They (the Iraqis) didn't move their 'missles[sic]' out of the country. They didn't have a whole lot of missiles left after the first Gulf War, and the arms and general material embargo against Iraq, which also resulted in more child deaths than the Nazi holocaust, kept Iraq from rebuilding its military, including its missile ordinance, as well. Not to mention that the UN WMD inspection teams did a fairly comprehensive job of destroying Iraq's WMD arsenal --- such that it was in the first place.

And pray tell, how would Syria move its missiles and other ordinance out of country without it being observed by US satellites and/or Israeli drones?

The reason Obama doesn't want to put boots on the ground is because he doesn't want another disaster like Reagan's putting marines into Lebanon or Bush's Iraq war.

In no way am I defending Obama's posturing and BS'ing in this Syrian affair, but let's stick to facts, ok?

Originally posted by maddog99
If Syria has chems...so what? If Iran has nukes...so what? Russia had thousands of them pointed right at us during the cold war and we survived it.

This Blitzkrieg across the Mid-East is about nothing more than money and power...neither of which any of us will ever see. We live in an Oligarchy / Totalitarian Police State run by the Corporate Military Complex and the Federal Reserve Bank.

Obama is just an actor, picked by these puppet masters to put half of you back to sleep and the other half screaming at his socialist programs.

This crap in Syria is going to get out of hand. I wasn't scared during the Cold War. Now I am. The blowback from this will be way worse than anything we've ever seen.

You are so right!

I am having trouble even convincing my family this means WWIII if Obama goes ahead

I had the same trouble convincing people war was coming after 9/11

The WMDs in Iraq? The Bush administration no longer contends that those weapons existed? Colin Powell et al. admitted that the intelligence was faulty. Namely that intelligence originated with a single/source defector from the Iraqi government who told a "story" and it was not verified.

Your close to it. The Iraq defector was an officer who acquired the nickname 'curveball' from the CIA. He was also a drunk, a gambler, a congenital liar and had a thing for teenage girls. The intelligence gaff that led to the CIA's George Tenet's 'slam dunk' assertion to Congress that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction was taken from one of the sixteen lintel assets used by the CIA. This element produced the infamous 'Aluminum tubes' that this particular asset said were centrifuges for Iraq's uranium enrichment program- in reality they were drainage pipes.

Curveball proclaimed that Hussein had mobile Bioweapons labs and this report was listed as 'dodgy' by the agency and should have never progressed pass the confirmation process but it did-eventually making it all the way to the Daily PDB given by the CIA to President Bush each day. The CIA concluded that the failed intelligence that convinced the President, The Congress and even the 30 nations who joined the coalition to remove them was not a deliberate act-it was mostly caused by unquantified CIA employees, a childish turf war mentality between Washington( The NSA) and the upper echelons of the CIA. You continue to stir the soup with the addition of a blood thirsty media needing some death to report on to be relative again and the White House staff that didn't want to be the one who told the president all this was a bunch of bull$hit.

As it turns out they were right and no one person or agency pushed this intelligence as much as they looked the other way.

reply to post by Ahabstar


Ahabstar, the entire premise for going to war in Iraq, was based on fabrication and embelishment of the facts. A convoy, military or otherwise, proves nothing, and we should not have been going to war without iron clad proof of a serious situation to deal with. There was never any to be had, and so the fact is that there can BE no validation of Bush's choice to invade. The man is a blithering moron, barely capable of tying his own shoelaces, and the fact is that enough Americans were out right, drooling from the mouth DUMB enough to vote him in, not once, but twice.

The same is true of Syria. If Assads forces are provably responsible for the chemical attacks in Syria, then obviously that particular butt, and all those who agreed to follow his orders in that regard, needs kicking. However, we have as of yet, no idea who is responsible. If it is the rebels (as allegedly admitted by some AQ chap, which is about as far from being confirmed as the existence of ET), then they need to be taking thier innards home in a hat.

However, acting until we are sure is irresponsible, and unjustifiable, bearing in mind the history that has been before.

reply to post by Ahabstar


Hates gonna hate Brother

You nailed it no matter what the haters say

Good call

reply to post by Ahabstar


Aint this something?

I was talking about this the other day that they always said the WMDs went to Syria,

bump to read the post

Update:

If the source for this thread Rebels Admit Responsibility for Chemical Weapons Attack is confirmed to be true, then maybe my thank you was misplaced.

But I, like everyone else, can only interpret the snippets of what is out there. The best we can do is look at the little stories that slip through the cracks and are not talked about without being dismissed wholecloth. But it is just as important not to fall on the sanitized version of events brought to you by history revisionists. Think the internet is protected from revisionist history? Prior to Hilary Clinton's campaign for president, you could find many color pictures of her at the Nixon Impeachment proceedings dressed like a hippy. Not so easy to find them anymore.

Many people in this thread have argued that these convoys did not exist or there was no proof. GeisterFahrer has found a nice article on them sourced by a man whose job in the intelligence community was to study satellite images. Many people have argued from the point of the political soundbite line of "Bush lied. People died." as a claim that there were no WMD in Iraq period. Again that is revisionist hype as Iraq did have chemical weapons, just their nuclear ambitions were found to be propaganda.

George W. Bush was indeed a poor president with his policies. But the point of my making this thread was that Obama had inadvertently vindicated Bush's original assertion that Iraq had WMD which was the reason for Bush's so called "illegal war" which had the backing of Congress and the UN. While Obama was embracing "cowboy diplomacy" in his threats to launch a strike without bothering to consult Congress. Obama has since waffled on that hard stance (I guess he listened to some aides and advisors).

The US economically stands on precipice. Our leadership's time and efforts have been wasted on idealistic legislation that has dumped trillions of our tax dollars into bottomless rat holes that will produce little to no jobs for a fairly idle workforce nor a growing economy that force companies to hire in order to fill demand for products. Foreign policies that leave the US as the butt of many jokes and raise the ire of the International Community. Yet our media cheerleads the man as he bumbles his way from one extravagantly expensive vacation to the next.

During our own Civil War, Lincoln told the nations of the world to butt out or they were next. Obama has tried to insert the US in far too many domestic squabbles around the world. And for what, his legacy? My only hope for Obama is that he takes a page out of Jimmy Carter's book once he leaves the White House and involves himself with a worthy cause akin to Habitat For Humanity. Given that during Carter's term he made speeches telling the American people to put on a sweater to keep warm while they struggled under high cost of heating and paying double digit interest rates on their mortgages, Habitat For Humanity is fitting.

Perhaps Obama will do a Gobs Of Jobs type of project, because if he keeps this pace going the only shovel ready jobs there will be is burying the dead. And sadly it looks like he is about to create a bunch of those in Syria.

Originally posted by MrInquisitive

Originally posted by Flatfish
reply to post by tadaman

 

Better yet, why don't you provide a single shred of proof that Syria just got those weapons via Iraq in 2003?

It's mentality like that demonstrated in the OP that makes me somewhat hopeful that Alex Jones is right when he says that we're building FEMA camps on an unprecedented level because sooner or later, we're going to need a place to lock up and house this new breed of idiots where they can pose no harm to the rest of humanity.

Indeed. Better yet, turn those FEMA camps into Soylent Red plants.

Being the old fart that I am, I really wasn't that familiar with Soylent Red or their music but I took a moment to read some of their lyrics and I have to say, "that's not a bad idea you got there."