Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
US preparing to launch cruise missile attack on Syria
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="BIG_MIKE2005" data-source="post: 2279562" data-attributes="member: 3309"><p>Sounds alot like WMD with Bush huh, didn't he supposedly have solid "intelligence" they had those & once we were there on the ground they were no where to be found.</p><p></p><p>Here is what we do know. The rebels were caught smuggling chemical weapons across the Turkey border already. Which means we should have already known a possible chemical attack was going to happen eventually. We know the rebels are mainly controlled by insurgent groups even though Washington wants us to believe those insurgents are contained in the north away from the rebels. We know insurgent forces in the past have attacked villages & then posted videos claiming other forces against them killed innocents & they were victims. So why is it so hard for Obama and company to believe it could have been the rebels who attacked knowing it would draw in international assistance to achieve their goals. they have been begging us to get involved for about 2yrs now & they know the only way the US will act is if chemical/nuclear weapons get involved. Assad as bad a guy as he is had absolutely nothing to gain from using those weapons, he knows as well it would draw in unwanted attention to the situation. So one has to ask themselves after all the recent scandals, can you even trust what Washington presents as "solid evidence" anymore?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="BIG_MIKE2005, post: 2279562, member: 3309"] Sounds alot like WMD with Bush huh, didn't he supposedly have solid "intelligence" they had those & once we were there on the ground they were no where to be found. Here is what we do know. The rebels were caught smuggling chemical weapons across the Turkey border already. Which means we should have already known a possible chemical attack was going to happen eventually. We know the rebels are mainly controlled by insurgent groups even though Washington wants us to believe those insurgents are contained in the north away from the rebels. We know insurgent forces in the past have attacked villages & then posted videos claiming other forces against them killed innocents & they were victims. So why is it so hard for Obama and company to believe it could have been the rebels who attacked knowing it would draw in international assistance to achieve their goals. they have been begging us to get involved for about 2yrs now & they know the only way the US will act is if chemical/nuclear weapons get involved. Assad as bad a guy as he is had absolutely nothing to gain from using those weapons, he knows as well it would draw in unwanted attention to the situation. So one has to ask themselves after all the recent scandals, can you even trust what Washington presents as "solid evidence" anymore? [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
US preparing to launch cruise missile attack on Syria
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom