Should the U.S. Take Action Against Syria
Syria is not our country. When my child gets into a fight with the neighbors kid, I send the kid home. I don't go to his house and start a war there. We shouldn't give them weapons, aid, buy their products. Nothing! It's exhausting enough taking care of my own house, why try to clean theirs!?
America needs to stop buying oil from everyone in the middle east! We have the resources for everything we need here. Why do we keep up this dependecy? Ridiculous. No more open borders, it has only created dissention, overcrowding, lack of employment and overall loss of faith in this great country.
More importantly, will Obama read this thread?! He should because this is the word on the street from real citizens. How can we share this with him? GM, you started it, any ideas?
Good evening, Ms. Dittmar. I do not remember ever having the pleasure of exchanging ideas with you in this forum. Please forgive me if I have forgotten. I have been told that at my age memory is the second major faculty to be lost. There is another that goes first but I can never remember which one it is.
I was drawn to the portion of your post that appears above. In it are 3 points that are worthy of comment: We have resources for everything we need here, America needs to stop buying oil from everyone in the middle east, and questioning why America keeps up this dependency. Please permit me to address all three.
“We have the resources for everything we need here.
The proven oil reserves of the USA rank 13th in the world. The 12 nations with more than us have 1,302 billion barrels of reserves compared to our 20.7 billion barrels. {1} However, the USA is the world’s largest oil consumer at 19.2 million barrels per day. Left to our own resources, our total oil reserves would be depleted in less than 3 years. Now let us apply these facts to your third point. {2}
“Why America keeps up this dependency.”
Consuming the oil of the top 12 nations first could carry us for about 186 years according to my rusty abacus. <just kidding> Today, the USA can choose between dependency on foreign oil or using up its crude oil reserves. When the reserves are gone, dependency is no longer a matter of choice.
“America needs to stop buying oil from everyone in the Middle East.”
I hate to be the person that rains on your parade but I must. The USA imports only 20% of its oil from Persian Gulf countries. {3} Sixty-five percent of America’s oil imports come from Canada (28%), Saudi Arabia (13%), Mexico (10%), Venezuela (9%), and Russia (5%). You will find Saudi Arabia with the largest proven oil reserves on the planet in this list and Russia who was formally our cold war adversary. This proves how oil can make for strange bedfellows!
Some will argue that unproven oil reserves have the potential to radically alter all current and future analysis. Perhaps they are right but, for now, I choose to discuss what is known and to leave the speculation for a time when it yields actual facts.
Thank you Ms. Dittmar for stimulating the discussion. Your contribution is greatly appreciated at least by me.
{1} http://www.indexmundi.com/g/r.aspx?c=us&v=97
{2} http://www.indexmundi.com/g/r.aspx?t=0& … 1&l=en
{3} http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=727&t=6Please excuse any typos as I am writing from my iPhone which loves to change and predict without my permission.
proof USA behind chemical attacks in syria,false flag
http://youtu.be/XloUnrVSEug
Hey there, LoneStar.
Once again you have dragged out the weary claim that your arguments originate from “thousands of scientists, engineers and architects who have staked their reputations on these facts and their implications.” It should be obvious even to you that this statement speaks only to their sincerity and says absolutely nothing about the accuracy of their conclusions.
Obviously, this statement totally ignores the fact there are a substantial number of scientists, engineers and architects on the record stating categorically that WTC7 did not collapse due to controlled demolition. I would speculate that your saying they “staked their reputations” is suppose to add some psychological measure of imaginary proof to their speculations.
By all means, let us examine what you call “glaring facts:”
FACT 1) WTC7 collapsed at perfect free fall for 8 floors.
FACT 2) Free fall means zero resistance from all supports (100% of potential energy converted to kinetic energy)
FACT 3) Solid steel never, EVER offers ZERO resistance.”
FACT 1 is absolutely FALSE and FACT 2 and FACTS 3 do nothing to change this.
Here are a few facts you should verify for yourself about WTC7:
FACT: Large perimeter columns from the WTC1 hit WTC7 as the tower collapsed.
FACT: Unlike the other shorter buildings damaged from the WTC1 collapse, only Building 7 had fires raging out of control, had a hole and a gash 20 to 40 floors high on the south face, and a the massive load of 40 stories above them.
(WTC7 center building below)
FACT: NYFD saw the building was beginning to lean to the South and by mid-afternoon ordered all firefighters and rescue teams away from the building.
FACT: WTC7 collapsed under its own weight around 5 p.m. {1}
Eye witnesses reported seeing a 20 to 40 story gash carved out of the south side of WTC7. This picture indicates that the south side of the building fell before the north. Notice the Northern walls (foreground of debris) lying on the top of the rubble. The majority of the building fell to the south-east corner (upper left of the debris pile) based on debris locations. This is consistent with a normal collapse by fire.
"There is no fact-based technical account of the World Trade Center collapses. This is verifiably true beyond doubt. The true collapse modes of the Twin Towers are not accurately determined within any academic, professional or government literature. {2}
.
Therefore, all attempts to explain how and why they collapsed are purely hypothetical. Never the less, your post, without indicating any first hand training or knowledge of controlled demolition, uses uncertain theories to slander government officials. It uses hypothetical conjecture to accuse hundreds of people including the Mayor, NYC firefighters, policemen, journalists, and eyewitnesses, of conspiracy to cover up mass murder. It places you within a group who do not believe such serious charges demand levels of certainty that go above and beyond the norm. “Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof," Sadly, you have none.
{1} http://www.debunking911.com/freefall.htm
{2} http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911/ind … on=548:548 Preface
As if Obama is concerned about his credibility! At least he has no concern with his credibility with the American people!
1) Carried out military interventionism in Libya without Congressional approval
In June 2011, U.S. Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) said that Obama had violated the Constitution when he launched military operations in Libya without Congressional approval.
2) Gave a no-bid contract to Halliburton – just like Bush did
In May 2010, it was reported that the Obama administration had selected KBR, a former subsidiary of Halliburton, for a no-bid contract worth as much as $568 million through 2011, just hours after the Justice Department had said it would pursue a lawsuit accusing the Houston-based company of using kickbacks to get foreign contracts.
3) Has an administration full of lobbyists, after promising he wouldn’t have any
While running for President, Obama had promised that, unlike Bush, he would not have any lobbyists working in his administration. However, by February 2010, he had more than 40 lobbyists working in his administration.
4) Has close ties to Wall St., but pretends to support Occupy Wall St.
Although Obama claims to support the Occupy Wall St. movement, the truth is that he has raised more money from Wall St. than any other candidate during the last 20 years. In early 2012, Obama held a fundraiser where Wall St. investment bankers and hedge fund managers each paid $35,800 to attend. In October 2011, Obama hired Broderick Johnson, a longtime Wall Street lobbyist, to be his new senior campaign adviser. Johnson had worked as a lobbyist for JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America, Fannie Mae, Comcast, Microsoft, and the oil industry.
5) Broke his promise to close Guantanamo Bay
Obama broke his promise to close Guantanamo Bay.
6) Supported the $700 billion TARP corporate-welfare bailout just like Bush
While Senator, Obama voted for the $700 billion TARP bank bailout bill. The bailout rewarded irresponsible and illegal behavior. It redirected resources from more productive uses to less productive uses. It punished the hard working taxpayers who had played by the rules and obeyed the law. It created horrible incentives, and sent the wrong message. The bailout was evil because it rewarded the bad people and punished the good people. No society that does this can expect to remain free or prosperous. Instead of bailing out these corrupt corporations, we should have let them cease to exist, like we did with Enron.
7) Waged the biggest war against medical marijuana of any president, which was the opposite of what he had promised
In May 2008, Obama campaign spokesperson Ben LaBolt said that Obama would end DEA raids on medical marijuana in states where it’s legal. Also in 2008, Obama said that he supported the “basic concept of using medical marijuana for the same purposes and with the same controls as other drugs” and that he was “not going to be using Justice Department resources to try to circumvent state laws.”
However, in February 2010, DEA agents raided a medical marijuana grower in Highlands Ranch in Colorado, a state where medical marijuana is legal. Also in February 2010, DEA agents raided a medical marijuana dispensary in Culver City in California, a state where medical marijuana is legal. In July 2010, the DEA raided at least four medical marijuana growers in San Diego, California. Also in July 2010, the DEA raided a medical marijuana facility in Covelo, California. Then in September 2010, the DEA conducted raids on at least five medical marijuana dispensaries in Las Vegas, Nevada, where medical marijuana is legal. In 2011, the DEA conducted raids on medical marijuana in Seattle, Washington, West Hollywood, California, and Helena, Montana, all places where it is legal. In April 2012, the DEA carried out several raids on medical marijuana in Oakland, California.
In February 2012, Rolling Stone magazine wrote that Obama’s war against medical marijuana went “far beyond anything undertaken by George W. Bush.” In April 2012, Mother Jones magazine wrote: “The president campaigned on the promise that he’d stop federal raids on medical marijuana operations that were in compliance with state laws, a vow that Attorney General Eric Holder repeated after the election. But then the Obama administration raided more than 100 dispensaries in its first three years and is now poised to outpace the Bush administration’s crackdown record.” In May 2012, the Washington Post wrote: “Obama has become more hostile to medical marijuana patients than any president in U.S. history.” In May 2012, U.S. Congressperson Nancy Pelosi (D-California) said she had “strong concerns” about Obama’s forced closure of five medical marijuana facilities in Pelosi’s congressional district. In April 2012, commenting on Obama’s crackdown on medical marijuana, U.S. Congressman Barney Frank (D-Massachusetts) said, “I’m very disappointed… They look more like the Bush administration than the Clinton administration.”
In July 2012, federal prosecutors filed civil forfeiture actions against Harborside Health Center, a medical marijuana dispensary in Oakland, CA, which claims to be the world’s largest, and which claims to serve more than 100,000 medical marijuana patients. In April 2012, federal agents raided Oaksterdam University, an educational institution in Oakland, CA, which teaches people about medical marijuana. In April 2012, federal agents raided a medical marijuana facility which had been serving 1,500 patients near Lake Elsinore, CA. In June 2012, the Obama administration filed asset-forfeiture lawsuits against two landlords who rented their buildings to medical marijuana stores in Santa Fe Springs, CA. The Obama administration also sent warning letters which threatened similar legal action to dozens of other, nearby landlords. During the first seven months of 2012, the DEA shut down40 medical marijuana dispensaries in Colorado, all of which had been operating in compliance with state and local law.
In July 2013, the DEA conducted multiple medical marijuana raids in Washington state, including the cities of Olympia, Tacoma, and Seattle.
In May 2012, ABC News reported that during Obama’s youth, he often smoked large quantities of recreational marijuana. Obama’s marijuana smoking wasn’t even medical – it was recreational. And yet now, he is taking large scale, widespread action to prevent people with AIDS, cancer, multiple sclerosis, glaucoma, and other illnesses, who have prescriptions from their doctors, from using their prescription medicine – how cold hearted can a person be?
8) Nominated a six-time tax cheater to head the government agency that enforces the tax laws
Obama nominated Timothy Geithner, a repeat tax cheater, to head the government agency that enforces the tax laws.
Prior to his nomination, Geithner had:
1) Illegally failed to pay more than $34,000 in social security and Medicare taxes
2) Illegally declared the cost of his children’s summer camp as a form of day care.
3) Illegally failed to pay the early withdrawal penalty when he took money out of his retirement plan
4) Illegally declared non-eligible items as a charitable deduction
5) Illegally declared something which was ineligible as a small business deduction
6) Illegally declared utility expenses which had actually been for his personal use
9) Gave tax dollars to AIG executives, then pretended to be outraged about it
Obama signed a stimulus bill that spent money on bonuses for AIG executives. Prior to signing this bill, Obama had said, “when I’m president, I will go line by line to make sure that we are not spending money unwisely.” However, after reading “line by line” and signing the stimulus bill that protected the AIG bonuses, Obama pretended to be shocked and outraged at the bonuses, and said, “Under these circumstances, it’s hard to understand how derivative traders at A.I.G. warranted any bonuses at all, much less $165 million in extra pay… How do they justify this outrage to the taxpayers who are keeping the company afloat?” and also said that he would “pursue every single legal avenue to block these bonuses.”
10) Expanded Bush’s unconstitutional government faith based programs
Obama expanded the federal government’s faith based programs which had been started by President George W. Bush.
11) Supported Bush’s unconstitutional Patriot Act
In May 2011, Obama signed a renewal of the Patriot Act.
12) Increased the national debt more in one term than Bush did in two
The national debt increased more during Obama’s first three years and two months than it did during all eight years of George W. Bush’s presidency.
13) Agrees with Bush’s support of unconstitutional, indefinite detention of U.S. citizens without filing any charges
In December 2011, ACLU executive director Anthony D. Romero criticized Obama for signing a bill that gave the U.S. government the power toindefinitely detain U.S. citizens without any charges being filed or any trial taking place.
14) Agrees with Bush’s support of unconstitutional, warrantless wiretapping
President Obama has defended warrantless wiretapping.
15) Avoided prosecution of Wall. St criminals
Although Obama had promised to prosecute Wall St. criminals, during his entire first term, his administration did not file any criminal charges against any of the top financial executives.
16) Had four U.S. citizens killed without judicial process
Obama had four U.S. citizens killed without judicial process.
The ACLU accused Obama of violating the U.S. Constitution for doing this.
U.S. Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) said that Obama’s actions might be an impeachable offense.
17) Ordered private company to fire 1,000 employees
In 2011, after Boeing had hired 1,000 new employees to work at its new factory in South Carolina, the Obama administration ordered Boeing to shut down the factory, because the factory was non-union.
18) Stole money from retired teachers and police officers
During the Chrysler bankruptcy, Obama violated the Fifth Amendment and more than 150 years of bankruptcy law by illegally treating secured creditors worse than unsecured creditors. Some of these secured creditors were retired teachers and police officers from Indiana. Richard A. Epstein, a law professor at New York University School of Law, wrote, “Upsetting this fixed hierarchy among creditors is just an illegal taking of property from one group of creditors for the benefit of another, which should be struck down on both statutory and constitutional grounds.” Todd Zywicki, Professor of Law at George Mason University School of Law, wrote that Obama’s treatment of secured creditors was “dangerous to the rule of law.” The Economist wrote that Obama’s actions could “establish a terrible precedent. Bankruptcy exists to sort legal claims on assets. If it becomes a tool of social policy, who will then lend to struggling firms in which the government has a political interest?” Francis Cianfrocca, the CEO of Bayshore Networks, wrote that Obama’s actions were “an astonishingly reckless abrogation of contract law that will introduce a new level of uncertainty into business transactions at all levels, and make wealth generation more difficult going forward… An extraordinary uncertainty has been created when the most powerful man in the world can rewrite contracts and choose winners and losers in private negotiations as he sees fit. Since this is an unquantifiable uncertainty, and not a quantifiable risk, its effect on business and investor confidence will be large and unpredictable. As in the 1930s, a time when government also cavalierly rewrote private contracts, the prudent approach for business will be to invest minimally and wait for another administration.”
19) Supported release of convicted mass murderer
In 2010, Obama supported releasing Lockerbie bomber Abdel Baset al-Megrahi (who had been convicted of murdering 270 people) from prison.
20) Illegally put thousands of guns into hands of criminals
In Operation Fast and Furious, the Obama administration ordered gun storeowners to illegally sell thousands of guns to criminals
http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/08/252-d … z2cQcqrrrw
Besides all that, where is the evidence that Assad had anything to do with this atrocity?
Which Syrian Chemical Attack Account Is More Credible?
By Jim Naureckas
Let's compare a couple of accounts of the mass deaths apparently caused by chemical weapons in the Damascus suburb of Ghouta on August 21. One account comes from the U.S. government (8/30/13), introduced by Secretary of State John Kerry. The other was published by a Minnesota-based news site called Mint Press News (8/29/13).
The government account expresses "high confidence that the Syrian government carried out a chemical weapons attack" on August 21. The Mint report bore the headline "Syrians in Ghouta Claim Saudi-Supplied Rebels Behind Chemical Attack." Which of these two versions should we find more credible?
The U.S. government, of course, has a track record that will incline informed observers to approach its claims with skepticism–particularly when it's making charges about the proscribed weapons of official enemies. Kerry said in his address that "our intelligence community" has been "more than mindful of the Iraq experience"–as should be anyone listening to Kerry's presentation, because the Iraq experience informs us that secretaries of State can express great confidence about matters that they are completely wrong about, and that U.S. intelligence assessments can be based on distortion of evidence and deliberate suppression of contradictory facts.
Comparing Kerry's presentation on Syria and its accompanying document to Colin Powell's speech to the UN on Iraq, though, one is struck by how little specific evidence was included in the case for the Syrian government's use of chemical weapons. It gives the strong impression of being pieced together from drone surveillance and NSA intercepts, supplemented by Twitter messages and YouTube videos, rather than from on-the-ground reporting or human intelligence. Much of what is offered tries to establish that the victims in Ghouta had been exposed to chemical weapons–a question that indeed had been in some doubt, but had already largely been settled by a report by Doctors Without Borders that reported that thousands of people in the Damascus area had been treated for "neurotoxic symptoms."
On the critical question of who might be responsible for such a chemical attack, Kerry's presentation was much more vague and circumstantial. A key point in the government's white paper is "the detection of rocket launches from regime-controlled territory early in the morning, approximately 90 minutes before the first report of a chemical attack appeared in social media." It's unclear why this is supposed to be persuasive. Do rockets take 90 minutes to reach their targets? Does nerve gas escape from rockets 90 minutes after impact, or, once released, take 90 minutes to cause symptoms?
In a conflict as conscious of the importance of communication as the Syrian Civil War, do citizen journalists wait an hour and a half before reporting an enormous development–the point at which, as Kerry put it, "all hell broke loose in the social media"? Unless there's some reason to expect this kind of a delay, it's very unclear why we should think there's any connection at all between the allegedly observed rocket launches and the later reports of mass poisoning.
When the evidence isn't circumstantial, it's strikingly vague: "We intercepted communications involving a senior official intimately familiar with the offensive who confirmed that chemical weapons were used by the regime on August 21 and was concerned with the UN inspectors obtaining evidence," the report asserts. Taken at face value, it's one of the most damning claims in the government's report–a veritable confession. But how was the identity of this official established? And what exactly did they say that "confirmed" chemical weapons use? Recall that Powell played tapes of Iraqi officials supposedly talking about concealing evidence of banned weapons from inspectors–which turned out to show nothing of the kind. But Powell at least played tapes of the intercepted communication, even as he spun and misrepresented their contents–allowing for the possibility of an independent interpretation of these messages. Perhaps "mindful of the Iraq experience," Kerry allows for no such interpretation.
Another key claim is asserted without substantiation: "Syrian chemical weapons personnel were operating in the Damascus suburb of 'Adra from Sunday, August 18 until early in the morning on Wednesday, August 21, near an area that the regime uses to mix chemical weapons, including sarin." How were these personnel identified, and what were the signs of their operations? How was this place identified as an area used to mix sarin? Here again the information provided was far less detailed than what Powell gave to the UN: Powell's presentation included satellite photographs of sites where proscribed weapons were being made, with an explanation of what they revealed to "experts with years and years of experience": "The two arrows indicate the presence of sure signs that the bunkers are storing chemical munitions," he said, pointing to an annotated photograph of bunkers that turned out to be storing no such thing. Powell's presentation graphically demonstrated that US intelligence analysts are fallible, which is part of why presenting bare assertions without any of the raw materials used to derive those conclusions should not be very convincing.
Kerry did offer an explanation for why the report was so cursory: "In order to protect sources and methods, some of what we know will only be released to members of Congress, the representatives of the American people. That means that some things we do know, we can't talk about publicly." It is not clear, however, why intelligence methods that produced visual and audible evidence that could be shared with the public 10 years ago cannot be similarly utilized today. It does point to why the $52 billion the United States spends on surveillance annually, according to NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden (Washington Post, 8/29/13), provides relatively little information that's of value to American democracy: The collection of information is considered so much more valuable than the information collected that it rarely if ever can be used to inform a public debate. Instead, as we discuss the dreadful question of whether to launch a military attack on another country, we are offered an undemocratic "trust us" from the most secretive parts of our government–an offer that history warns us to be extremely wary of.
http://www.fair.org/blog/2013/09/01/whi … -credible/
How many times will the American people fall for the "I got your nose" trick?You must have been quite young when you fled Lebanon, so I'll fill you in on a little history. The 40th anniversary of the Yom Kippur War is two weeks away. On Yom Kippur, 1973, Syria attacked Israel with 1,500 tanks and 1,000 artillery pieces advancing against 60 Israeli tanks on the front line. Syria deployed 50,000 troops against 6,000 Israelis. Egypt simultaneously attacked Israel's southern border with 70,000 troops against 500 Israelis. Egypt sent 1,200 tanks and 1,000 artillery pieces against less than 100 tanks on Israel's front line.
The attackers were assisted by troops from Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, Morocco, Algeria, Iraq, Jordan Kuwait and Lebanon. Pilots and fighter aircraft were sent from Pakistan, North Korea and the Soviet Union. Over 900 enemy aircraft entered Israeli airspace which was defended by 350 jets.
Against insurmountable odds, Israel won. In less than three weeks of fighting. You can read of the humiliating Arab defeat here:
http://hub.me/afqq0
Israel has fought the entire Arab world with its Soviet assistance three times and emerged victorious. And Israel is prepared at every moment to do it again.
On June 7, 1981, Israel flew into Iraq and bombed its nuclear reactor under construction in Osirak. Iraq could not respond.
On September 6, 2007, Israel flew into Syria and bombed its nuclear reactor under construction.
Syria was impotent to even fire a shot in the air.
Syria's existence is by the good graces of Israel, which could obliterate the entire country in less than hour.
And now, Iran's nuclear ambitions will be dealt with.
Hey—the GOP finally voted yes on something . . .
Not all of the GOP are in favor of this action.
The way the congressional factions are lined up is kinda weird. But then, everything about our Congress is weird.
It sickened me to watch John McCain go on Leno to plead his case to the American people.
He went to Syria, dontcha know, and knows who are the "good guys."
This is a slippery, slippery slope. One minute we'll be "saving face" and the next we'll be losing our right arm. It's a frigging TRAP.
The only good thing I can say about Obama's response is that he had the good sense to involve Congress in the decision. Had he struck on his own -- with 60+ percent of Americans against the action -- forgedabout it.
Not that this in any way assures the GOP will cooperate with him on anything. They will just have one less thing to pillory him with...
Related Discussions
- 53
Whats your view on Wikileaks & US action against it so far?
& what do you think about Julian Assange? Do you appreciate what he is doing or is it the opposite? Is he the main man or just another pawn, playing the role of a show man? I did not knw much about him until recently & I personally felt that the rape charges were side effects of his actions...
- 53
Are we (the USA) really going to launch an unprovoked attack upon Syria? Really
Are we (the USA) really going to launch an unprovoked attack upon Syria? Really?Obama said a long time ago if the Syrian regime used chemical weapons in Syria it would cross a line. The last thing Asaad wanted was to have USA involvement. So, it makes no sense...
- 7
How can we make Goverments more aware and take action against world hunger and p
How can we make Goverments more aware and take action against world hunger and povertyWhat is a good way to make the people aware and take a PEACEFULL action so that the Goverments finally decide to really do something about it?
- 61
It's 9/11 and War is Declared against the Islamic State
Obama has declared open war on ISIS/ISIL."We will conduct a systematic campaign of airstrikes against these terrorists," Obama said from the White House. "I will not hesitate to take action against ISIL [Islamic State] in Syria, as well as Iraq. This is a core principle of my...
- 25
What if Assad used small Tactical Nukes Instead of Chemical Weapons?
Let's say Israel hadn't bombed the Syrian nuclear program into oblivion decades ago, or the world lets Iran develop nuclear capability and they ship some suitcase nukes to Assad, or North Korea sneaked some in. In any case, what I am posing is what if Assad had tactical nukes. Now,...
- 53
WikiLeaks... do you think any attempt to restrict the site justified?
WikiLeaks is involved in uncovering many hateful activities of the US government. In this respect would it be justified to restrict their activities by the US government?