U.S. Air Strikes in Syria

[odeon]

So I take it you're OK with a leader using chemical weapons against his people?

 

Talking about believing fairy tales.  Yes, the US/Israel/UK were foaming at the mouth about going into Syria, begging for an excuse, then while the chemical weapons inspectors were in town, Assad thought it'd be a great idea to attack people with some chemical weapons!

You realize it wasn't proven that it definitely was Assad?  Most likely cause it wasn't.  Funny news channels manipulate people.  They will believe anything they see on TV, and won't believe anything, until it's been confirmed for them on TV.

Let's say Assad did use them.  Then still, why not be consistent and still fund him?  Israel poured white phosphorus over schools and hospitals in Gaza, and the US still gives them $7 million a day.

The UN report did not definitely pinpoint the origins of the chemical weapons, no, but the investigators were able to confirm the trajectories of some of the missiles--they came from government-controlled areas. There have also been accusations of the rebels using sarin gas, namely by one of the UN investigators.

These are not fairy tales. Horror stories, maybe, but not fairy tales.

But you do with your tinfoil hat what you will. It's obvious even to the most casual observer that you won't let facts get in the way.

If there are facts you were unaware of, they come under the tinfoil hat/conspiracy section.  So really, you cannot lose. 

Again, are you stupid enough to believe that Assad would bomb people while the inspectors were in town and Israeli lobbyists, Cameron and Obomber were foaming at the mouth about fighting Assad?  You will believe anything you see on TV, without question.  You realize if it wasn't the government, whoever did it would find a way of firing from a government controlled area?  Weren't some of your kind of "facts" in the past, ones like Saddam having nukes and was ready to blow us up in 45 minutes?

I think it's hilarious that you resort to name-calling and unfounded assumptions every time you reply to my posts. You really aren't very good at this, are you?

Cause you're above all of that?  You, who counter people with condescending memes and hint that people are mentally ill if they share stuff that you were unaware of.  I don't think it was over the top to ask if you were stupid enough to believe such nonsense.

You might want to reread the thread and remind yourself of the discussion so far. In particular, read your own posts.

You really suck at this, don't you?

[odeon]

There's always other reasons for wars.

 “Germany’s unforgivable crime before the second world war was her attempt to extricate her economic power from the world’s trading system and to create her own exchange mechanism which would deny world finance its opportunity to profit.”    Winston Churchill

There are many reasons for wars. I believe Winston Churchill repeatedly urged Britain not to ignore the threat from Germany long before they started their expansion. Mr Chamberlain managed to ignore most of them and Churchill remained ousted throughout most of the 30s, IIRC.

Yeah, that ancient alien slug was certainly beating the drum about Germany.  If we went to war because Germany invaded Poland, then why didn't we declare war on the Soviets, rather than fighting with them?  Maybe it was acceptable to attack Poland from the East, but not the West?  Hitler says he admired our Empire and say us as natural allies, where as Roosevelt said his greatest ambition was "to see the destruction of the British Empire", yet we made an alliance with the US and the Soviets?   

I fail to see your point here, but the reasons to WW2 and the alliances made are quite well researched by now. You might want to read up on them, cos I can't be arsed to link to the Wikipedia articles (hint: plenty of sources listed there).

[odeon]

The "false premises" were the Polish attack on a German radio station on the frontier. Vicious and uncalled for, leaving several German civilians killed.

Explain to me how this means WW2 was triggered on false premises.

I'm saying that at the time, that would have been the Wikipedia-explanation for the outbreak of WW2: Polish aggression. The article would explain the place and time for the aggression. It would document the victims identities, because there were real victims (killed by German commandos)

So, in the reality of 1939, if we were there, we were Germans, and we knew what was real, we would know that the war started because of Poland, not Germany. We would be saying that this war is about stopping Poland from terrorizing the German frontier with unprovoked attacks on civilians (as well as Czech mistreatment of Germans). Some would be saying that no, this war is carefully planned, and Germany intends to expands its borders to invlude Scandinavia, all of Eastern Europe - far into Asia, and it would sound absolutely insane.

I'm not saying we're "repeating history", I'm just showing you the possibility of such a scenario unfolding. You seem to think it unlikely. I see it as a human default. War for the sake of war, the money generated through war, both in terms of arms sales and rebuilding infrastructure afterwards. War must happen, and it is orchestrated to go on continously, even if civilians are proven again and again, to be perfectly capable of living in normal harmony - untill they are aggitated by manipulative politicians - who have something to gain from a war.

Sorry, Zegh, there's just too many what ifs in your scenario, too many instances of ignoring what was well known back then. The German invasion of Poland was the last straw, one that even Chamberlain could not ignore, but there were numerous other triggers.

Adam should come back. He knows more about this than the rest of us.

[odeon]

Sorry, man, but he's right. A post saying, here go watch some youtube and learn some Wikipedia, deserves the response it got. 

Nonsense.  Everyone here has used both sources.  They are irrelevant.  I posted links that people were obviously unaware of.  I'm only interested in the truth, not protecting government interests or being brainwashed enough to do so, or just believing the opposite of everything seen on TV for the sake of it.  Please go ahead and explain about the dancing Israelis, the news reports etc, i'm very interested.  If not, then shut the fuck up.

There you go again. "Brainwashed".

I love your methods, but only for the entertainment value.

[benjimanbreeg]

Sorry, man, but he's right. A post saying, here go watch some youtube and learn some Wikipedia, deserves the response it got. 

Nonsense.  Everyone here has used both sources.  They are irrelevant.  I posted links that people were obviously unaware of.  I'm only interested in the truth, not protecting government interests or being brainwashed enough to do so, or just believing the opposite of everything seen on TV for the sake of it.  Please go ahead and explain about the dancing Israelis, the news reports etc, i'm very interested.  If not, then shut the fuck up.

Fine then, I'll give you the videos, but I mocked rage's links and I'll mock yours too. Go read part's links.   Posting wiki links with no commentary is condescending, and I think it's assumed no one is going to click or read them. 

Would you like me to tuck you up in bed and read them for you?   

Fair enough, in future I will, but they are pretty relevant and self explanatory. 

[benjimanbreeg]

28 minutes is too long to watch will read some later perhaps.  I did hear the WCBS helicopter mentioned  in what I did watch though

Ok

[benjimanbreeg]

So I take it you're OK with a leader using chemical weapons against his people?

 

Talking about believing fairy tales.  Yes, the US/Israel/UK were foaming at the mouth about going into Syria, begging for an excuse, then while the chemical weapons inspectors were in town, Assad thought it'd be a great idea to attack people with some chemical weapons!

You realize it wasn't proven that it definitely was Assad?  Most likely cause it wasn't.  Funny news channels manipulate people.  They will believe anything they see on TV, and won't believe anything, until it's been confirmed for them on TV.

Let's say Assad did use them.  Then still, why not be consistent and still fund him?  Israel poured white phosphorus over schools and hospitals in Gaza, and the US still gives them $7 million a day.

The UN report did not definitely pinpoint the origins of the chemical weapons, no, but the investigators were able to confirm the trajectories of some of the missiles--they came from government-controlled areas. There have also been accusations of the rebels using sarin gas, namely by one of the UN investigators.

These are not fairy tales. Horror stories, maybe, but not fairy tales.

But you do with your tinfoil hat what you will. It's obvious even to the most casual observer that you won't let facts get in the way.

If there are facts you were unaware of, they come under the tinfoil hat/conspiracy section.  So really, you cannot lose. 

Again, are you stupid enough to believe that Assad would bomb people while the inspectors were in town and Israeli lobbyists, Cameron and Obomber were foaming at the mouth about fighting Assad?  You will believe anything you see on TV, without question.  You realize if it wasn't the government, whoever did it would find a way of firing from a government controlled area?  Weren't some of your kind of "facts" in the past, ones like Saddam having nukes and was ready to blow us up in 45 minutes?

I think it's hilarious that you resort to name-calling and unfounded assumptions every time you reply to my posts. You really aren't very good at this, are you?

Cause you're above all of that?  You, who counter people with condescending memes and hint that people are mentally ill if they share stuff that you were unaware of.  I don't think it was over the top to ask if you were stupid enough to believe such nonsense.

You might want to reread the thread and remind yourself of the discussion so far. In particular, read your own posts.

You really suck at this, don't you?

Pot calling the kettle black sonny jim. 

You mean you disagree with me?  So fine, if I suck, it shouldn't be a problem for you to counter my points or explain the information, but you're not capable, so you'd rather talk about me? 

[benjimanbreeg]

There's always other reasons for wars.

 “Germany’s unforgivable crime before the second world war was her attempt to extricate her economic power from the world’s trading system and to create her own exchange mechanism which would deny world finance its opportunity to profit.”    Winston Churchill

There are many reasons for wars. I believe Winston Churchill repeatedly urged Britain not to ignore the threat from Germany long before they started their expansion. Mr Chamberlain managed to ignore most of them and Churchill remained ousted throughout most of the 30s, IIRC.

Yeah, that ancient alien slug was certainly beating the drum about Germany.  If we went to war because Germany invaded Poland, then why didn't we declare war on the Soviets, rather than fighting with them?  Maybe it was acceptable to attack Poland from the East, but not the West?  Hitler says he admired our Empire and say us as natural allies, where as Roosevelt said his greatest ambition was "to see the destruction of the British Empire", yet we made an alliance with the US and the Soviets?   

I fail to see your point here, but the reasons to WW2 and the alliances made are quite well researched by now. You might want to read up on them, cos I can't be arsed to link to the Wikipedia articles (hint: plenty of sources listed there).

"I fail to see your point here"  I think that's the main problem, and it's yours.  Like I don't know that?  Lol.  We've been told repeatedly why we went to war, but there's plenty of information you were oblivious to that says otherwise. 

[benjimanbreeg]

Sorry, man, but he's right. A post saying, here go watch some youtube and learn some Wikipedia, deserves the response it got. 

Nonsense.  Everyone here has used both sources.  They are irrelevant.  I posted links that people were obviously unaware of.  I'm only interested in the truth, not protecting government interests or being brainwashed enough to do so, or just believing the opposite of everything seen on TV for the sake of it.  Please go ahead and explain about the dancing Israelis, the news reports etc, i'm very interested.  If not, then shut the fuck up.

There you go again. "Brainwashed".

I love your methods, but only for the entertainment value.

Sorry, are you assuming only religious people can be brainwashed by those in power?  You may want to read "Media Control" by Noam Chomsky, or just be a little more open minded.

Unfortunately your naivety isn't so entertaining. 

[ZEGH8578]

The "false premises" were the Polish attack on a German radio station on the frontier. Vicious and uncalled for, leaving several German civilians killed.

Explain to me how this means WW2 was triggered on false premises.

I'm saying that at the time, that would have been the Wikipedia-explanation for the outbreak of WW2: Polish aggression. The article would explain the place and time for the aggression. It would document the victims identities, because there were real victims (killed by German commandos)

So, in the reality of 1939, if we were there, we were Germans, and we knew what was real, we would know that the war started because of Poland, not Germany. We would be saying that this war is about stopping Poland from terrorizing the German frontier with unprovoked attacks on civilians (as well as Czech mistreatment of Germans). Some would be saying that no, this war is carefully planned, and Germany intends to expands its borders to invlude Scandinavia, all of Eastern Europe - far into Asia, and it would sound absolutely insane.

I'm not saying we're "repeating history", I'm just showing you the possibility of such a scenario unfolding. You seem to think it unlikely. I see it as a human default. War for the sake of war, the money generated through war, both in terms of arms sales and rebuilding infrastructure afterwards. War must happen, and it is orchestrated to go on continously, even if civilians are proven again and again, to be perfectly capable of living in normal harmony - untill they are aggitated by manipulative politicians - who have something to gain from a war.

Sorry, Zegh, there's just too many what ifs in your scenario, too many instances of ignoring what was well known back then. The German invasion of Poland was the last straw, one that even Chamberlain could not ignore, but there were numerous other triggers.

Adam should come back. He knows more about this than the rest of us.

You misunderstand me
I'm describing the official reason given by Germany, as to why Poland should be invaded.
The real "secret" reason was: We want to expand deep - and I mean DEEP - into Eastern Europe, fuck it, deep into Asia. You heard me: Asia.
The official reason was: We need to stop Poland from killing radio-men.

I give this only as an example of the difference between what "everyone knows" and what is real. 90% of the world knows the bible is true.
Don't conform to consensus JUST because it is consensus.

Hell, you may be right about ISIS, and I may be wrong, but YOU are telling me - from your own mouth - that you confirm your knowledge of ISIS using Wikipedia. The absolute pinnacle of official consensus.
That's all I'm saying. And hey, I read about ISIS on Wikipedia too, aaand I agreed about it! I'm just saying there's more to it

[Yuri Bezmenov]

... and there you have it folks. Zegh has gone so far down the rabbit hole of PoMo nonsense that he can't tell the difference between contrived state propaganda and news reported by independent sources.

Epic 

(not to mention the invoking of Godwin's Law)

[ZEGH8578]

What did I tell you about trying to grasp politics?
And you're still not managing to turn me into some "forum pariah", maybe if you try even harder

[benjimanbreeg]

A lot of what we "know" now could be propaganda.  If Germany had won the war, the historians would be writing a different story.  "History is written by the victors".

[Yuri Bezmenov]

And you're still not managing to turn me into some "forum pariah", maybe if you try even harder

The only one trying to turn you into a "forum pariah" is you. 

[Gopher Gary]

Would you like me to tuck you up in bed and read them for you?   

Read them in the voice of Yosemite Sam.