Your Vote ATS'ers: Attack or Not To Attack Syria for Alleged Chemical Attacks on its Own Citizens?

reply to post by ItDepends


Excellent info. Thanks for that.

We at unwinding for the night getting ready for bed. They were all treated ato a brief history course on chemical weapons courstsey - YOU. It brought up some interesting dialogue.

I really wouldn't have thought to look that up. Puts. A different perspective on it. As my 15 year old points out. The simple fact of using the gas itself, regardless of who, was a war crime against the WORLD.

Scary days, these cold, grey days of September....

Cirque

reply to post by ItDepends


No offense but I will do my own research...

and so should everyone else

Hell No, If we do, congrats, were are more than screwed. People turn the tv off for your news.

Do yourself a favor and READ, online, books what ever, alternative media, seek the truth, get out of your bubble, put yourself in an uncomfortable place, Get Out Of Your Comfort Zone, and open your mind.

Read the ATS motto again!

For the paid Dis info trolls here,(You Know Who You Are, and We Know Who You Are!) (You Don't Fool Any One That Is Anyone!)
Look at yourself in the mirror. Since you tricked yourself into thinking you like what you see, You are fools and are helping no one, not even yourself. Money won't buy love or happiness, honest work will buy you the world.

Nope

Originally posted by WHYFIGHT
reply to post by ItDepends

 

No offense but I will do my own research...

and so should everyone else

No worries my friend. It is important to do your own research. I was just providing some information that some may find helpful.

Do you have an opinion on the subject?

Thank you!!

No, chemical weapons or not. No.

Did the rest of the world jump all over the US for it's use of chemical weapons in Vietnam?

What about the use of white phosphorous in fallujha?

kind of have to expect the same for yourself before you can go after another.

Banned weapons get used all the times.

reply to post by PRS395


Thanks for your reply! Although I am not sure who your response was directed to, or if anyone in particular? I have purposely not posted anything that supports or doesn't support the questions in the OP. As I indicated, as the author of this thread, I have sparingly included some information/resources of what I believed were helpful links to information. Really just in an effort to make the thread interesting and fill in some gaps.

Thank you!

reply to post by ItDepends


NOPE.

It's "merely"

a horrific cog, mile post on the way to full blown depopulating WW3 that the oligarchy has been setting up for years and years.

Delay THAT horror as long as possible . . . regardless the excuses they also set up to manipulate the planet's populace.

Originally posted by WHYFIGHT
Really,???

Alleged?

Commit to killing thousands of people over allegations?

Do we need to entertain this?

Yes, I wanted to be very careful and NOT state something that is still being debated not only in the Int'l Community, but in the U.S. itself. Alleged seems to be, at this moment, the fairest way to describe it.

However, if you have more information, specifics that would move this classification from alleged to certainty, then please feel free to post your facts. It would be helpful for all of us to gain additional knowledge.

Thank you!

2. NO, the U.S. should not strike Syria.

Originally posted by ItDepends
Thanks Everyone for responding thusfar:
Tally from Page 1:
Attack:
NO: 19
Yes: 0
From Page 2:
NO: 16
YES: 2
Non-committal: 2
Current Tally after 2 Pages: 39 Responses
Attack:
NO: 35
YES: 2
No Comm: 2
Thank you all for taking the time to provide your input!!

Great comments and some very thoughtful considerations being contributed, Thank You!

Total Count of Polling after 3 Pages:
Attack:
NO: 52
YES: 2
Non-Comm: 2

Note: Some comments are just that, which is ok, There have been just 2 that I have considered 'non-committed' and they were on Page 2! (non-scientific polling, but it's your vote!!

Total Count of Polling after 4 Pages:
ATTACK:

NO: 64

YES: 3

Non-Comm: 2

Total Count of Polling on Page 5:
ATTACK:

NO: 15

YES: 1

Non-Comm: 0

Total Count of Polling after 5 Pages:
ATTACK:

NO: 79

YES: 4

Non-Comm: 2

Thank you everyone who is participating. Your votes and opinions are making this a great thread!!

reply to post by ItDepends


no

Not attack

the US should MYOB

reply to post by ItDepends


2. NO, the U.S. should not strike Syria.

It's not our fight though I think we should try to contain it. How we could go about though, I have no idea without getting invovled.

So, long story short...No!

No. :\

reply to post by ItDepends


No, the US should not strike Syria

Originally posted by SLAYER69
Hell no AND I'm still no fan of Assad either!

I think Hell no is 3 Slayer.
Ditto line.

After looking at all of this and history the answer is no. It is a civil war and we should not get involved in any civil war. NO.

No. The USA should invade the USA and win the hearts and minds of the population by building roads, bridges and putting locals to work. Just sayin.

I vote NO.

and if they do attack then the chances of world war three have gone way up......at the very least a war this large in the middle east is going to cause gas prices to rise dramatically and tank the global economy.