Iraq & Syrian Civil Wars - Page 121

On September 06 2013 00:49 forestry wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23966147
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23962304
Some Syrians prefer Assad over the jihadists

On September 05 2013 06:16 dsousa wrote:


Maybe its because the US likes have 2 extra votes all the time.

On September 05 2013 20:21 Rosie wrote:


If the U.S. attack on Syria without UN approval, then Russia will fulfill its part of the contract. The troops of al-Assad was not found sarin in service, so the U.S. does not have the authority to attack Syria.

On September 06 2013 02:08 dsousa wrote:
151 out of 193 countries in the UN have a US military presence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_military_deployments

I'll bet within 3 years, Syria is added to that list.

History will look back on the US as the most war-faring modern state that ever existed and they will marvel at how the population was blind to that fact.

There won't be a world war, the US vs the rest of the world isn't even a fair fight at this point, but the US has become completely corrupted by military power and its time people at least were outraged about it.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely. What we're seeing is as simple as that. The US military has been unopposed since the fall of the USSR, there is no balance of power.

We're going to bomb Syria. We're going to arm the rebels. If the rebels can overthrow Assad, we'll let it happen and put our pieces in place. If not, we will continue to help them until they do or we do.

Then, after a reasonable hiatus, we'll go after Iran.

The US has a been in a significant military conflict every 40 months since WW2. Its not going to end with Syria, especially with the amount of people who go along with whatever our government says. They aren't going to stop while they are still growing histories greatest empire.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures

On September 06 2013 02:08 dsousa wrote:
151 out of 193 countries in the UN have a US military presence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_military_deployments

I'll bet within 3 years, Syria is added to that list.

History will look back on the US as the most war-faring modern state that ever existed and they will marvel at how the population was blind to that fact.

There won't be a world war, the US vs the rest of the world isn't even a fair fight at this point, but the US has become completely corrupted by military power and its time people at least were outraged about it.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely. What we're seeing is as simple as that. The US military has been unopposed since the fall of the USSR, there is no balance of power.

We're going to bomb Syria. We're going to arm the rebels. If the rebels can overthrow Assad, we'll let it happen and put our pieces in place. If not, we will continue to help them until they do or we do.

Then, after a reasonable hiatus, we'll go after Iran.

The US has a been in a significant military conflict every 40 months since WW2. Its not going to end with Syria, especially with the amount of people who go along with whatever our government says. They aren't going to stop while they are still growing histories greatest empire.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures

On September 05 2013 14:37 Ghanburighan wrote:
On other news, does the new Senate Brief open for anyone else?

On September 06 2013 03:37 jeremycafe wrote:


Since when are American's blind to our military involvement in the world? I am pretty sure most Americans are pretty aware of how much involved we are. Its people like you that think if we just leave everyone alone, they will leave us alone. You are blind to the fact that evil people will exist whether or not you ignore them.

The only thing we should be outraged over with our military power is how we selectively ignore poor nations that have no interest to us. Sadly when Clinton tried to change this, shit blew up in our faces.

On September 06 2013 05:45 dsousa wrote:


Defying our allies Russia and China in an effort to bomb their ally is not going to make more people like us.

I agree there is evil and it wants to hurt us, but its for reasons like sending in cruise missiles and war ships. We look unreasonable and aggressive to non involved parties. That doesn't win us many friends.

On September 06 2013 05:55 Derez wrote:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dayton_Agreement

Made you lots of friends and the russians and chinese were against it back then also. Made possible by 3 weeks of airstrikes.

(CNN) -- British military scientists found traces of sarin gas in soil and clothing taken from a patient treated near the site of an alleged chemical weapons attack outside Syria's capital, the prime minister's office said Thursday.

Scientists at the Porton Down military laboratory concluded the samples were unlikely to have been faked, and Britain is sharing its findings with the United Nations, the office said.

The revelation is the most specific statement by British officials regarding the chemical they believe was used in the August 21 attack on a rebel stronghold near Damascus, though the office didn't explicitly say who was responsible. U.S. officials have, blaming Syrian government forces for an attack they say left more than 1,400 people dead, many of them children.

The British statement is not the first allegation that sarin gas -- an extremely volatile nerve agent that can kill -- has been used in Syria's gruesome, two-year civil war.

On September 06 2013 02:48 KwarK wrote:
Each Revolutionary Guard has the strength of seven regular guards, four times the movement speed but only twice the firepower. When calculating the point cost of armies Revolutionary Guard battalions cost five times as much as regular battalions but a maximum of two battalions may be fielded at any one time.

Seriously, what kind of question is this?