Uh oh! :(

1. 78

   Kathryn L Hillposted 5 years ago

   https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest … r-al-Assad

   replyreport
2. 95

   FatFreddysCatposted 5 years ago

   That article is dated April of 2017.

   replyreport
   1. 58

      The0NatureBoyposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      You are so correct, FFC, they might have believed most people would NOT look at the date so they could get authorization to do something against Russia. Thanks for pointing that out, usually I seek the date but didn't that time.

      replyreport
3. 78

   Kathryn L Hillposted 5 years ago

   whoops. I meant to bring us this incident.
   
   https://www.redstate.com/streiff/2018/0 … -shift-us/
   
   Have we done nothing so far ?

   replyreport
   1. 78

      Kathryn L Hillposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Apparently, the US + UN are still trying to figure out how to react. It was just chlorine, (or was it?) I guess the US will do nothing.
      
      If we do, Russia will step in again.
      Can we risk bad relations with Russia?
      Oh, what to do!

      replyreport
      1. 58

         The0NatureBoyposted 5 years agoin reply to this

         The thing for the U.S. to do is follow our Constitution. There has not been a foreign attack against the US in over a century [see https://www.brasscheck.com/video/the-or … 1-in-1898/ ] therefore our being in some foreign nation fighting is in violation of the constitution.
         
         Let the world go to hell in a basket is primarily what our constitution say the U.S. is supposed to do in these cases, it is not an attack against the U.S. so let the rest of the world solve their own problems.

         replyreport
         1. 78

            Credence2posted 5 years agoin reply to this

            I wholeheartedly agree!!

            replyreport
            1. 90

               GA Andersonposted 5 years agoin reply to this

               Maybe you should make that a half-hearted agreement Cred. Even as I agree with the premise that it isn't our responsibility to solve the problem, (nor in our best interests to even try - alone), I couldn't find any generally accepted Constitutional interpretations that declared, as The0natureboy did, that our foreign "war" efforts are/were a violation of our Constitution.
               
               To the contrary, there is one clause that specifically addresses an instance such as Syria. (just find the one that speaks to The Law of Nations) ,
               
               GA

               replyreport
               1. 78

                  Credence2posted 5 years agoin reply to this

                  True, nothing explicit in the Constitution, but if there was ever a theme associated with its creation and consensus of the "Founders" it was the idea of the U.S. avoiding foreign entanglements. In the modern world this may be difficult but I see no reason not to "ride with the posse" (the UN), avoiding the unilateral American involvement of lives and treasure, which has often proven to be more trouble than it is worth.

                  replyreport
                  1. 90

                     GA Andersonposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                     Well, ahh, umm ... okay, but you're still only ... right.
                     geesh.
                     
                     But wait, what about the "national security" issues?
                     
                     

                     replyreport
               2. 58

                  The0NatureBoyposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                  How do you interpret the Preamble and second amendment, GA? Defense means a threat has to be against our nation instead of the CIA's interpretation of "national security" but to what is actually the United States as a people and its land's  security.

                  replyreport
                  1. 90

                     GA Andersonposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                     The0NatureBoy, since we both know our Constitutional interpretations disagree, I will offer a short answer.
                     
                     I believe threats against our nation are much more involved than just an "enemy at our doors," and I also believe that an interpretation of "national security threats" are completely within the realm of the CIA, and completely valid to the intent of the preamble's "... common defense..."
                     
                     Specifically to the Syrian component of the thread, and specifically to your penchant for quoting the Constitution - look to Article 1, Section 8, Clause 10, to see how the Syrian problem might be an example of our government's Constitutional authority - relative to authority regarding the Law of Nations.
                     
                     GA

                     replyreport
                     1. 58

                        The0NatureBoyposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                        1.8.10: To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;
                        
                        Where do we find the law of nations? How does it read? What specific clause in the speculation that some nation has done something in another which hasn't been proven as yet? If We The People does't have access to that information thenWe The People have e the right, per Amendment 10, to demand to know the details b before any military action by the USA is taken.
                        
                        The practice of doing stupid things like what happened after 9/11 results in unlawful slaughtering people in another nation who has done nothing. Therefore it behooves the US to get clear knowledge by taking the time to find real evidence as to what happened.
                        
                        So, GA, until Congress ask We The People, who have access to all of the information and not media bought reporting of what the War Mongers want us to believe, what the nation should do (since they are our trustees in service to We The People's desires per Article 6) no actions are to be taken.

                        replyreport
                        1. 78

                           Kathryn L Hillposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                           This does make sense.

                           replyreport
                        2. 90

                           GA Andersonposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                           My point wasn't to defend the actions, ( a la Syria), but only to point you in the direction of where the authority to do so came from.
                           
                           As for your "we the people" thought, isn't that who Congress is - the representatives of "we the people?"
                           
                           GA

                           replyreport
         2. 0

            ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            This is probably the most quintessential post  showing the liberal naivete of U.S. foreign policy ever spoken . Like you can sit on one side of the world today and totally ignore what's going on on he other side of the earth  AND NOT eventually suffer the consequences of being politically blind .
            
            No surprises however , you learn that trick from Obama ?

            replyreport
            1. 78

               Credence2posted 5 years agoin reply to this

               Quite frankly, I don't give a rats a$$ about Syria. Is it really a problem to mind our own business? The world is abig place and you rightwingers are stuck like glue to the idea of globocop? Who put us in charge?

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                  Good thing your job wasn't a foreign diplomat , the evils of the world are no longer safely  on "the other side of the  world " these threats  can be next door in a empty  factory  ,on a ship in the harbor , at the airport in a old cargo plane etc.....a bio weapon , a dirty bomb ,nerve gas , some threat like 9- 1- 1 ..........how can the naivete of the left be so blatantly shallow as to think you can ignore the Osama  Bin Laden's of the world ?

                  replyreport
                  1. 90

                     GA Andersonposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                     Somebody mark the calendar. I agree with your points ahorseback.
                     
                     Except as they apply to this Syria issue - relative to Assad. I don't think it is a Bin laden-type comparison.
                     
                     I think Syria is a civil war issue, not a terrorist exportation issue.
                     
                     

                     replyreport
                  2. 58

                     The0NatureBoyposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                     That is why we have such strong missile defense, That is about the only thing that can get to us unless someone internally is a party to assisting other  nations' entering the US. Oceans on both ends The Gulf and U.S. of Mexico to the south and Canada to the north doesn't allow them to come in.  Just like 9/11 was CIA instigated.

                     replyreport
            2. 58

               The0NatureBoyposted 5 years agoin reply to this

               Ahorseback,
               When it is caused by the USA's CIA in the force place, no, we will not be affected by it except if we stop selling them weapons then it becomes financial only.

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                  As with any warfare  cruise missiles  , drones , aircraft ,battleships or aircraft carriers or  high altitude bombers , We  STILL have  to have  "boots on the ground " intelligence analysts  picking and choosing targets and analyzing results . The non-warrior  looks at military interventions too simplistically .

                  replyreport
                  1. 58

                     The0NatureBoyposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                     https://www.brasscheck.com/video/anothe … mhide=true
                     
                     Why "boots on the ground'? Is it because most people in the military are "minorities" who the NWO want to reduce the population of here in the US? That is the only reason I can see for "boots on the ground" but there is no reason for even missiles for nor any other interest in the above war.

                     replyreport
         3. 87

            MizBejabbersposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            Elijah did you forget the 9-11 attack? It may not have been by an officially recognized foreign government, but it was still an attack on our soil that killed more than 3,000 people. And Bush Jr. used it to start a war that we are still involved in.

            replyreport
            1. 58

               The0NatureBoyposted 5 years agoin reply to this

               9/11 could have only be achieved by internal means, the official report is external but for ...
               
               For about a week after 9/11 many national news services replayed video recordings of what appeared as an aluminum aircraft entering tower two of the World Trade Center that left its full imprint in the concrete and steel walls, pulverized the concrete and melted the steel with the nose exiting the building without denting itself to disappear in the air without leaving any trace of aircraft on the streets below. The following are reasons I, an ex-U.S. Air Force ADC aircraft mechanic who never repealed his oath to protect the United States and USC from enemies foreign and domestic, recognize were ignored in the “official ‘cover-up’ report.”
               
               1) Armed fighter aircrafts are always on alert to force or shoot down any airline deviating from its flight plan to the extent required to accomplish 9/11’s destruction governmental intelligence say its had reported would at an unknown time be performed against the USA by foreign entities or entity using aircrafts and president Bush neglected to place all ADC aircrafts to on continued alert until such time the nation was assured the report was false has earns him, as the Commander in Chief, dereliction of duty turned into Treason.
               
               2) There are no scenarios allowing soft aluminum aircrafts to leave its full imprint in steal and concrete, leave no trace of aircraft wings and engines scattered on the ground near the impact area nor exit the building to vanish in the air without being dented as one video indicated.
               
               3) A load of aviation fuel in tanker aircrafts does not burn hot enough to cause concrete to pulverize or steal to melt at the impact point, not to mention the floors above that supposedly caused the implosion preventing the leaning top of building two from falling and damaging other buildings, nor below that caused both towers and building seven to fall extremely rapid when wooden buildings usually take a much longer time to fall and do not fall so completely.
               
               4) Nothing was observed or reported to cause building seven of the Trade Center Complex to explode into flames and implode.
               
               5) The Trade Center’s rubble was never inspected to determine the cause of the implosions but was hurriedly removed by a contractor.
               
               6) The content of the ‘Black Boxes’ was never released, no pieces of aircraft wreckage from any damaged causing crafts were ever revealed and no bodies or luggage from passenger crafts was found.
               
               7) There was a video on YouTube’s public domain available to the general public showing the craft going into the Pentagon I viewed, indicated the craft was a Scud Missile.
               
               8) Observers of the craft hitting the Pentagon said what they saw was not a commercial aircraft and the video confirmed it to me.
               
               9) The craft type supposedly responsible for the Pentagon’s damage have engines hanging from their wings that, even with a Scud’s Terrain Following Technology, would have scraped the ground and sucked objects into their engines exploding them flying at impact level of approximately six feet above ground.
               
               10) There were no wing parts, engines, people, luggage or Black Boxes left at the Pentagon to substantiate it as an aircraft.
               
               11) The hole in the Pentagon was far to small to hide wings and engines allowing only the piece of aluminum found which was not of a type known to be on any commercial airliner.
               
               12) The Pentagon’s walls are six feet of steel reinforced concrete and would have prohibited the engines, fuselage and wings from penetrating it and disappearing completely.
               
               13) There was no evidence of people, luggage or anything else from the damage causing crafts found in any area to suggest they carried people making the evidence to suggest the training exercise was governmentally implemented to eliminate the passenger crafts – except the one which left debris over a ten square mile area in Pennsylvania – so no traces could be found and, more than likely, they were destroyed over the Atlantic Ocean for that reason.
               
               ... to happen it would have to have been internally done.

               replyreport
               1. 87

                  MizBejabbersposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                  The0, I know that conspiracy theorists say that Bush instigated the affair so he could start a war in the Middle East to punish, oh heck, I've forgotten already, some alleged attack or insult on his Daddy. And the fact that he was visiting a kindergarten class in another state, which he'd never done before, was suspicious. Also the lack of surprise on his face when told of the attack was very damning. I agree that the visit and lack of emotional expression was suspicious. However, I don't think the event or events were arranged by our own people. If this was an inside job, I think the "inside" involvement was knowledge of, and failure to prevent, the attack.

                  replyreport
                  1. 58

                     The0NatureBoyposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                     MizBejabber, The repost said Bush had been informed of the possibility of that air craft action happening and as an Ex Air Defense Command aircraft mechanic I served on alert where hot loaded aircrafts sat to shoot down any airliner off their flight plan by only a few degrees would have been shot down if they didn't return to flight plan I launched many a craft for that purpose. Bush's responsibility was to put all Air Defense Command's crafts on HOT alert until such time the evidence proved to either be true or false. By not doing that it became Dereliction of Duty and after it happened it became TREASON on his part.
                     
                     What fire of any kind that happens in this nation you know isn't first allowed to be investigated as to what happened? [The latest California fires are 2 others that were not investigated as to the causes.] The steal beams were left were immediately carried to China and never inspected to know what happened.
                     
                     You must really have an unwarranted trust in the government not to see 9/11 was an United States planned and executed event.

                     replyreport
            2. 78

               Kathryn L Hillposted 5 years agoin reply to this

               inside job

               replyreport
4. 87

   MizBejabbersposted 5 years ago

   As I've stated publicly before, I am not a Trump supporter. One of the reasons is because Trump is a Putin puppet. However, I don't believe the fate of Syria is in the hands of the United States, Donald Trump, or any American. These people have been at war since Biblical times and they are not going to stop until there is complete genocide and one side is completely wiped out. The only thing different today is that the combatants have bigger and more dangerous toys to use on each other, and vestiges of those weapons like gas can seep into the territories of non-combatants.
   
   I just hope that this gas attack doesn't get the United States in a war escalation in the Middle East. I think that we need to hold our actions and let them duke it out unless we have the FULL support of the United Nations. We do not need to stay there and hold the hands of any of these parties trying to wipe out each other.
   
   You ask if we can risk bad relations with Russia? I ask if this is a Russian setup, and we're damned if we do and damned if we don't.  I believe that may be why the US+UN are still trying to figure out how to react.

   replyreport
   1. 90

      GA Andersonposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Hey there MizBjabbers, Although I don't agree with your thought that Pres. Trump is Putin's puppet, I do agree with the rest of your comment.
      
      I am more than willing for the U.S. to be part of a solution, but I agree with you that we are not, nor should we try to be the solution.
      
      
      

      replyreport
   2. 58

      The0NatureBoyposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I also agree with GA, MizBjabbers

      replyreport
5. 78

   Kathryn L Hillposted 5 years ago

   But what about Russia?

   replyreport
6. 78

   Kathryn L Hillposted 5 years ago

   … And perhaps the chemical attack was staged.

   replyreport
7. 78

   Kathryn L Hillposted 5 years ago

   I do not think Trump should take any action. It will only lead to misery for everyone.
   No matter what he plans to do, how could it help?
   If we find out how much Russia hates us, what good will that do?
   Its not worth it to take action.
   Let It Be.

   replyreport
   1. 87

      MizBejabbersposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I don't think Trump should involve us there either.

      replyreport
8. 78

   Kathryn L Hillposted 5 years ago

   Trump: " If you guys use chemical weapons, I will not be able to help you. Its on you, this time. My hands are tied, partly by Russia's threats,
   and partly by my aim to maintain world peace.

   replyreport
9. 0

   ahorsebackposted 5 years ago

   IMO  If it were left up to the today's American left , If tomorrow Hitler was on the march  opening new rounds of concentration camps , if he began his march across Europe TODAY  instead of in the 1930's ,  if his troops were gassing , groping , raping and killing  grinding their way across north Africa, Italy , France and Poland on into Russia , .......Those of you on the left would be crying  "No no , no ....let's not get involved , it's none of our business , it's up to the invaded to fight them off , why should we spend our blood and treasure "!
   
   It was said then and it's the same today ......"......No one spoke up until all there was left was me ....."

   replyreport
   1. 78

      Kathryn L Hillposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      How does this compare?
      its ants to cockroaches

      replyreport
      1. 0

         ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

         The left's resistance  to standing against the Holocaust---comparably  to Nerve or poison gas in Syria ?
         What's the difference - They are both atrocities against humanity apparently stoppable by ONLY America . Do we ignore this - wait until a few thousand more kids suffocate to death ?
         
         If we can waste millions -billions  on Planned Parenthood abortions ,can we spend a couple on cruise missiles ?

         replyreport
         1. 78

            Kathryn L Hillposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            okay, you LIKE war? as in WWIII?

            replyreport
         2. 78

            Credence2posted 5 years agoin reply to this

            So, every time an American leader uses a little discretion and decides not to stir a hornets nests among varied banana republics, the rightwinger wants to equate that with Hitler and the "Winds of War"?
            
            Don't you guys ever get enough?

            replyreport
   2. 58

      The0NatureBoyposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Ahorseback,
      The United States of America already have concentration camps and Hitler's governing manual in the form of The Patriot Act in place, the thing preventing this nation from implementing it is the adult weapons We The People have would cause the entire world to see the U.S. is attempting another "Holocaust" right here. That is the reasons for all of the School shootings, they want to get the children involved [like Hitler had children telling on their parents] in aiding them get rid of the adult rifles but that will not happen until the "Son of Man" in in control of the government and proves he intend for World Peace to happen. Therefore, it is neither left or right but both together.
      
      I also disagree with "They are both atrocities against humanity apparently stoppable by ONLY America." It isn't the US per se, it is the CIA types of all the major nations who are working together to make the entire world like 1930s Germany and reduce the about 10 Billion population to only 500 million.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

         Your post is far too delusional to respond to , where you conspiracy theorist's get your dreamscapes is sometimes beyond understanding and always beyond reality .

         replyreport
         1. 58

            The0NatureBoyposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            By being a nomad and not listening to mainstream news all the time allows me to comprehend what I saw during those nomad days. When I see something that matches what I do see in the news I lie to connect the dots and see what image come up. It always pops up as a "conspiracy theory" to those who c=don't do that.

            replyreport
10. 78

    Kathryn L Hillposted 5 years ago

    I believe we need to protect our borders, and save all our war goods for the invasion which has already been unleashed on our soil. We are gonna have a war all right, to let you know, and its gonna be here. We don't have to commute.

    replyreport
    1. 58

       The0NatureBoyposted 5 years agoin reply to this

       That, Kathryn, is the reading of the Constitution so I agree.

       replyreport
11. 78

    Kathryn L Hillposted 5 years ago

    In other words, why go to the middle east to upset an ant hole when cockroaches, locusts and scorpions are wringing their grubby little hands from within and without, all around us?
    
    Save the bug spray for our own house, I say.

    replyreport
12. 78

    Kathryn L Hillposted 5 years ago

    "The U.S. officials said Friday’s airstrikes were twice the size of the U.S. assault last year, which targeted a single airbase."Clearly the Assad regime did not get the message last year," Mattis said. "This time our allies and we have struck harder." Mattis said the U.S. intelligence has determined that the Syrian government used chlorine gas in last Saturday's poison attack.
    
    
    The attacks stirred up angry responses from Syria’s allies and ignited a debate over whether the attacks were justified. Russian President Vladimir Putin called the strikes an “act of aggression” that had the “destructive influence on the entire system of international relations and will exacerbate humanitarian catastrophe in Syria.” “Russia condemns in the strongest possible terms the attack against Syria, where Russian military personnel are assisting the legitimate government in its counterterrorism efforts,” he said in a statement."
    
    FROM
    http://www.foxnews.com/world/2018/04/14 … ttack.html
    
    At least he did it with allies.

    replyreport
13. 78

    Kathryn L Hillposted 5 years ago

    "The United States, Britain and France launched precision military strikes in Syria to punish the Assad regime for an apparent chemical weapons attack against civilians. President Donald Trump called the assault a “combined operation” with two European allies; as Defense Secretary James Mattis said, they targeted three locations in what he described as a heavy but carefully limited assault.
    Fox News confirmed that warships and U.S. Air Force B-1 bombers, which flew out of Qatar, were used in Friday’s campaign.
    
    Mattis said no follow-up attacks are planned and that the Pentagon was careful to ensure the safety of Russian troops and Syrian civilians in the area.
    Pentagon officials said the attacks targeted the heart of Assad's programs to develop and produce chemical weapons. The strikes did not cause any casualties and the facilities targeted only had minor damages."
    FROM
    http://www.foxnews.com/world/2018/04/14 … ttack.html
    
    
    Why would Russia not approve of our action?

    replyreport
    1. 0

       ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

       Kathryn , the Trump objectivists , much like the Trump obstructionists will never get it until the cannot breath from a gas attack in L.A. , Seattle , NYC or Boston .   It's just the game of self delusion , Hate the man even though his Syria  policy  mirrored obama's . The difference ;a strong response instead of a weak one .

       replyreport
       1. 78

          Kathryn L Hillposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          I guess we can't let Russia bully us, and the rest of the world.
          Sigh.
          Why can't they just cooperate? with what is good and right.
          Some would say we, (the US,) are not so "good and right".
          The Russians, Iraqis and Iranians …(the Chinese?) for instance.
          
          How come?

          replyreport
          1. 0

             ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

             Russia , China , Iranians ........leaders all posturing just as much for their own people's impressions of them as leaders ,as they do against us . In other words Putin has to condemn the US act to show his own people how tough he really {isn't ] is .

             replyreport
             1. 78

                Kathryn L Hillposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                I don't think its that simple, ahorseback.

                replyreport
14. 78

    Kathryn L Hillposted 5 years ago

    … are some nomads what others call "homeless," in your observation?

    replyreport
15. 78

    Kathryn L Hillposted 5 years ago

    I met a man in the grocery store originally from Mesopotamia. He said the US has caused war in the Middle East destroying the historically most fertile and prosperous area in the world. He was commenting on my scrawny head of Romain lettuce. He said he remembers the huge Romain lettuce heads and beautiful crops grown there before the US came along and ruined everything.

    replyreport
    1. 0

       ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

       Let me guess  global warming from America ?   Too bad so many in the world blame us for their failures and their success' as well ,yet don't mind cashing those foreign aid checks .  I'm tired of getting our U.S. fingers bitten feeding the dogs of all the  neighbors in the world.

       replyreport
       1. 78

          Kathryn L Hillposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Why did we involve ourselves with the regime of Hussein? Why are we involved in the Middle east?
          There is a Global agenda. It has to do with Oil, Money, Power.

          replyreport
          1. 0

             ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

             Perhap's Reagan should have bombed one of his father's  castles just as a message when he sent the jets in to correct the errant Syrian leader in the eighties ? We're too weak on warning them with Russia posturing over their shoulders .

             replyreport
             1. 78

                Kathryn L Hillposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                but why? bomb one of the castles? What was his father doing?
                I am completely ignorant at this point in discussion.

                replyreport
                1. 0

                   ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                   Syria's always been a Russian puppet for strategic importance , sea ports for Russian ships , bases for jets etc.....AND not very nice to the rest of the middle eastern nations at all , check out their violence to others . 
                   
                   But the infighting tribal leaders within Syria are now gassing women and children - That cannot happen , by world treaty for one.

                   replyreport
                   1. 78

                      Kathryn L Hillposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                      well, Trump took good action which was backed by our allies. People should be thankful. If he determined that he had to do something, he had to do something. Some are thinking he had to get approval, but he needed to act swiftly or not at all.

                      replyreport
                      1. 0

                         ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                         Exactly , and  to the nay- sayers of any chemical attack ;  You cannot bury that evidence , it's impossible to get rid of gas particle evidence  . it must have happened or we wouldn't have bombed them .

                         replyreport
16. 78

    Kathryn L Hillposted 5 years ago

    We are there for the OIL, remember.

    replyreport
17. 78

    Kathryn L Hillposted 5 years ago

    Go away, all you Trump seducers / banshees of his past.
    Thats what I say. Let us get down to the real problems, which are monumental.

    replyreport