Syrian War: Trump says missiles are coming

[Keiser]

Lol no way the US could ever exaggerate!!

So you call out the mainstream news as being something nobody should believe, and then you post a screenshot from the mainstream news to try and make some weird point not even related to our discussion? This isn't even what we are debating. You asked me WHY Assad would do this, and I gave you intellectual reasons 1-4 above and then you post some dumb shit about how they didn't get "all" of the Chlorine gas and may have exaggerated.

[Keiser]

You would have bought the WMD line to invade Iraq hook line and sinker.

We are losing you Trumper.

We aren't invading Syria. This is a horrible analogy. Let me guess, 911 was staged, Bigfoot is real, the govt is going to knock on your door & take your guns away and we never landed on the moon. Yeah I got it. We know who you are Mr Conspiracy theory.

[Bouncer]

We aren't invading Syria. This is a horrible analogy. Let me guess, 911 was staged, Bigfoot is real, the govt is going to knock on your door & take your guns away and we never landed on the moon. Yeah I got it. We know who you are Mr Conspiracy theory.

You missed the point you fucken idiot. It's about trusting what the gov tells you without any proof besides thier word.

[Scrumhalf]

I'm with Bouncer on this one. Assad has really no reason to use chemical weapons at this stage. He's essentially won the war. The rebels on the other hand would love to see some Western bombs dropping on Assad's forces. They have every incentive to do this. Remember - both Assad and the rebels have used chemical weapons before. The rebels are no angels - they are basically ISIS/Al Qaeda and their ilk.

The UN inspectors were on their way to the site to do their data collection and analysis when the missiles were fired. Not sure what the big hurry was - could have given the inspectors a day or two to collect their data to see if we can figure out what type of chemicals were used and who really did it. Unless we didn't really want to find out.

The government lies all the time about stuff like this. Not saying Assad couldnt' have done it, or that he is a great guy or anything, but just because the US or France says he did it doesn't mean he did. I have a lot more faith in indpendent inspectors than the word of the Pentagon or the White House or the CIA or whatever. These same chuckleheads also believed there were WMDs in the Iraq and we went into a war for no reason that has taken half a million lives.

[Keiser]

You missed the point you fucken idiot. It's about trusting what the gov tells you without any proof besides thier word.

Oh OK, so you're a hypocrite. You have no proof that the govt wants to come take your guns, but you're sure of it.

[Keiser]

Assad has really no reason to use chemical weapons at this stage. He's essentially won the war.

This isn't a true statement.

The rebels on the other hand would love to see some Western bombs dropping on Assad's forces. They have every incentive to do this.

No bombs were dropped on Assad's forces. They were dropped on factories producing chemical weapons.

[Scrumhalf]

Assad presented NO threat to the United States. So, circumventing the War Powers Act and using an AUMF from 2001 to attack is as unconstitutional as it can get. It's too bad that Ryan and McConnell are such spineless weasels and the centrist Democrats are garbage as well that they are allowing this to happen.

Again, we have NO business attacking Assad. It is an unconstitutional use of US armed forces, and technically illegal under international law to attack a sovereign state that is not posing a threat to us. This does not mean that Assad is not a monster, but we can't be running around dropping bombs on whoever we choose.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[Scrumhalf]

By the way, the AUMF from 2001 was to go against Al Qaeda after 9/11. The height of perversity is using that AUMF to attack Assad, because it only STRENGTHENS Al Qaeda and ISIS, the type of entities the AUMF was drawn to fight against.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[Keiser]

Scrum I will agree with you on one thing here. I do not approve them bombing anything even if they do have 100% proof Assad used chemical weapons. It's not our business. However, that does not mean I don't believe Assad used chemical weapons, which is a different argument all together.

Stay the fuck out of the middle east.

[Keiser]

The UN inspectors were on their way to the site to do their data collection and analysis when the missiles were fired. Not sure what the big hurry was - could have given the inspectors a day or two to collect their data to see if we can figure out what type of chemicals were used and who really did it. Unless we didn't really want to find out.

Interesting new development here, hmmm:

Russia accused of tampering with the site of alleged Syrian chemical attack

BEIRUT — Chemical weapons inspectors in Syria said Monday that they are being denied access to the site of an alleged chemical attack that was used to justify U.S.-led airstrikes over the weekend, amid growing suspicions that evidence of the incident may have been tampered with.

Pro-government media broadcast interviews with doctors from the area saying that no such attack had occurred and that the victims they treated were suffering from asthma.

A team with the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons arrived in Damascus on Saturday at the invitation of the government to investigate the alleged chemical attack, which prompted the strikes against three Syrian chemical weapons facilities early Saturday local time.

Two days later, the fact-finding team said it has still not been granted permission by Syrian authorities to visit Douma, the town in the Eastern Ghouta suburbs of Damascus where residents and monitoring groups said the attack took place.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...=.0d3a357d27a3

[Keiser]

You guys willing to admit you most likely were wrong on this one? You think they were just going to let the UN inspectors waltz in there?

[Bouncer]

Here's my question. Why not give the chemical inspectors time to go to the site BEFORE we launch missiles.

If the Russians had blocked them before we launched the missiles I'd say you might be on to something and the Russians may have something to hide.

But now that we've already launched the Russians may just be doing this out of spite or to send a big middle finger to Washington.

[Keiser]

Here's my question. Why not give the chemical inspectors time to go to the site BEFORE we launch missiles.

If the Russians had blocked them before we launched the missiles I'd say you might be on to something and the Russians may have something to hide.

But now that we've already launched the Russians may just be doing this out of spite or to send a big middle finger to Washington.

Fair point.

Here is a counter: Our intelligence notified us that Russia was on the ground working on the cover up, and we went ahead and took action.

[Keiser]

Keep in mind that the article says the inspectors were first denied on Saturday. The launch was also on early Saturday morning so Russians were apparently already on the ground there where the chemical attack happened.

[Bouncer]

i have a feeling history will tell us all something we don't know about this situation at the moment. i think we can agree that some shady shit is going down in general.