chemical weapons attack in Syria

[Obs]

I’m already questioning it. Got old. Can’t stay injury free more than a week. Go get em. I’ve been following some of your post. I’ll have to say you have the desire to get there.

I salute you.
You pointed me where I started this plan. TNE &slin
You aint that old. You got another comp coming up.
Make them lose.

[Beetlegeuse]

I dont like ww1 and ww2 being compared on any scale to any time past vietnam...

...200,000 deaths over decades is skirmishes.

10 Bloodiest Battles of World War II

Estimates 50-80 million deaths from ww2....

First let me point out it wasn't originally my idea but it is one I agree with. This was something I was taught in the military even before the Berlin Wall came down (but only the WWIII part, because 9/11 hadn't yet happened). And this many years on, with all the information that's become available through the Internet, I'm more firmly convinced of it now than then.

There's even a page mentioning it at Rational Wiki dot org:

...There are some schools of thought that say that World War III isn't hypothetical but is very, very real. Some speculate that the Cold War was in fact WWIII, while others describe the War on Terror as WWIII - as both are essentially global, although feature less attrition than the previous two world wars. In cases where people think both count, that makes the War on Terror actually World War IV. Defining what would constitute a "World War" is actually difficult, as the term was only in use from the Second World War onwards - the "First" World War was often referred to even as late as the 1930s as "The European War" or "The Great War," a phrasing that can still be found on many war memorials....

No one knows exact numbers because whenever the communists took over, they destroyed all the capitalist infrastructure (including records) and a lot of the countries involved had infrastructures too primitive or too feeble to deal with even keeping count of such large numbers of casualties.

The nine-year Soviet occupation of Afghanistan killed at least half a million civilians, maybe two million. Plus 90-100,000 combatants from both sides. Pol Pot murdered somewhere between 1.5 and 3 million in Cambodia's "killing fields."

And that's just two of the dozens of small post-WWII "puppet wars" fought to halt communist expansionism which took place in more than 40 countries (from Afghanistan to Zaire), involved all six inhabited continents and all five oceans.

There were at least 11 million combatants killed and possibly as many as 25 million. Plus Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot (and a bunch of the other tin pot dictators) killed tens of millions of their own people in "ethnic cleansings" and "politicides" to enforce the communists' totalitarian ideal.

Regarding the GWOT, the US Special Operations Command publicly admits it has put boots on the ground in at least 134 different countries during its prosecution of the Dubya's Global War on Terror. The UN only has 193 member states, so that's ~70% of all the countries on earth. Possibly as many as four million Mulsims have been killed, probably fewer than 10,000 western military killed (there were more civilian contractors killed in Iraq than military, and vast majority of them were noncombatants) and fewer than 100,000 wounded. Which doesn't include the tens of thousands of civilians killed by Islamo-Fascist acts of terrorism. But there is no end to this in sight, and from what's happening in Europe right now, I can confidently predict that the killing in earnest hasn't yet begun.

As with the Cold War, the significance of the GWOT is less how many are killed than it is what's at risk if it's lost. Despite the resistance, communism still managed to gain control of about a fourth of the planet's population, but that easily could have risen to 50% if the they hadn't been beaten back. And if we don't beat back the current wave of Islamist expansionism, we'll all be living under Sharia law.

The 30 Years War killed about 8 million but that was in the early 17th Century, when the world population was less than 1/3rd what it was in WWI. A larger percentage of the world's population died in it than died in WWI, but it all took place on the European continent and it involved nobody but Europeans and Ottoman Turks. Despite killing on a scale at least equal to WWI (and probably greater), nobody makes the case for the 30 Years War being named a "world war" because it wasn't world-wide.

By the same token, WWI deserved the title "The Great War" because of the 40 millions dead, but it deserved the title World War I because it was fought on three continents by combatants who had come from six, not because of how many it killed.

So that's why I can't not consider those two conflicts "world wars."

[cousinmuscles]

What a nice read Beetleguese, thanks

[Euroholic]

Its well known on here I would suck trump off if given the chance. But i really think this was a staged event by the USA. It just makes no sense. The battle was won by the syrian army. The rebels were leaving the area so why on earth would assad use gas? Knowing full well trump would bomb him? Its well known that the rebals had known stockpiles of chemical weapons.(chlorine)

Something fishy is going on here. Either the event did not even happen or was done by the rebals with backing of the CIA. But it just does not make sense logically. Assad is a cunt but he is not stupid.

[Beetlegeuse]

A lot doesn't make sense. Why deploy mustard gas together with Sarin? That's like shooting and stabbing somebody at the same time. The rebels had no chemical defenses so it made little difference to how effective the attack would have been. Almost immediately after it happened there was speculation that the mustard gas was meant to conceal the use of Sarin but that makes no sense because the two produce easily distinguishable symptoms. If somebody's bleeding out of their eyes, you know it ain't from mustard gas.

The fact that the Brits and the French also participated in the attacks argues against it being a US set-up because it would have been very risky for them to go along with it only later to be found to be predicated on a US-staged False Flag operation. They have to believe that the Syrians were behind it. Particularly the Brits, because UK politics are especially turbulent right now, and there was bound to be blowback from participating in this without first getting consent from Parliament. And it's also significant that it was the French who analyzed the evidence and determined it was mustard gas and Sarin in the first place.

The fact that the attacks were so small in scale also argues that it was what it was billed as. Why go to the trouble to stage such an elaborate ruse but not go after some big ticket items, like Assad's fighter jets or his best tanks? Trump initially wanted to do something more widespread but SecDef Mad Dog talked him in to dialing it back. If he staged this it seems unlikely he wouldn't have taken fullest advantage of it.

The biggest reason I'm reluctant to believe that Trump was behind the gas attack is that he'd have had to know he was condemning some people he really doesn't have anything against to a horrific death. Not that he would be beyond being so callous if he knew there was an extreme need, but not this. This was small potatoes. Is Trump capable of sentencing 70(-ish) people who'd never done the US any harm to die jerking and twitching and shitting on themselves in exchange for an excuse to bomb a handful of buildings. I can't quite swallow that.

[RaginCajun]

Its well known on here I would suck trump off if given the chance. But i really think this was a staged event by the USA. It just makes no sense. The battle was won by the syrian army. The rebels were leaving the area so why on earth would assad use gas? Knowing full well trump would bomb him? Its well known that the rebals had known stockpiles of chemical weapons.(chlorine)

Something fishy is going on here. Either the event did not even happen or was done by the rebals with backing of the CIA. But it just does not make sense logically. Assad is a cunt but he is not stupid.

You killed me that first line Euro, haha!

Why do you think it was the US? I don’t think even Trump would do that, no matter what comes out his mouth. If those kids were actors, then bravo they need an Emmy or Oscar, whatever they are. I’m not sure what happened, but I think it was Iran backed somehow. Seems they are the ones wanting to pick a fight.

Who knows, the truth will eventually show itself.

[Couchlockd]

still was a waste of 105 $1.4 million dollar missiles.

you cannot justify that, I don't care how deep or long you take trumps dick in your mouth. but something good will come (haha, cum) from that, you'll be paid at least $130k to shut the fuck up and swallow.

[Euroholic]

You killed me that first line Euro, haha!

Why do you think it was the US? I don’t think even Trump would do that, no matter what comes out his mouth. If those kids were actors, then bravo they need an Emmy or Oscar, whatever they are. I’m not sure what happened, but I think it was Iran backed somehow. Seems they are the ones wanting to pick a fight.

Who knows, the truth will eventually show itself.

Thats the thing mate. It could of happened how the media says it did. It could be iran, russia or some sort of globalist element within the US government. Some people are saying Trump is doing it to bolster support before elections? Its very hard to no what is real and what is fictional. But none the less muslims died so I support the attack by trump he showed balls. Not like obama and his line in the sand speech that amounted to fuck all.

[Couchlockd]

Thats the thing mate. It could of happened how the media says it did. It could be iran, russia or some sort of globalist element within the US government. Some people are saying Trump is doing it to bolster support before elections? Its very hard to no what is real and what is fictional. But none the less muslims died so I support the attack by trump he showed balls. Not like obama and his line in the sand speech that amounted to fuck all.

no deaths were reported other than from gassing attacks.

[GearHeaded]

wow. super interesting thread. I Never really knew any of this shit was going on in the world (sure I voted for trump but thats cause I heard he was a fan of red meat and whole milk). if I watch the news its only to find out if Costco is having a sale on NY strip steak and ground buffalo .

intersting thread fellas . think its better off a 50+ gun owning 10,000+ round owning crazy once super conservative republican turned 3rd party conservative, turned all out libertarian , tuned Anarchist , I prob shouldn't comment .
alll I know is I don't care to much for the current system , theres people I hate their mind set and are a crutch to humanity and I don't like them either, but I'll evolve to any system around me and survive and thus always be free.

"give me freedom or give me death"--- omg so inspiring. whatever pussies, once we all got freedom we went after and seeked death or enslavement anyhow. most humans feel comfortable being enslaved (either by self induced problems, drugs, or other people) thats the story of the Bible or any religion preached on earth. we are all at one time enslaved and become FREE. every religion or social economical systems goal at the end is to be free (apart form communism and all that bullshit)..

anyhow, sure I've had a couple shots of whiskey, a whole lot of tren (case I'm ramping shit up right now), and I'm giving a social political relegious opinion right now.. which I don't often do, because fact is I'm a steroid user GENIUS and thats what I specialize in.. the fact I'm even, after a few shots, commenting on this thread, is essentially bonus info .
but as you guys are figuring out who did what without the bombs that didn't kill anyone.. I'm trying to figure out how much tren, how much androgen effect, how much estrogen, how much carbs, how much insulin , etc etc... is needed to get guys jacked

[Obs]

First let me point out it wasn't originally my idea but it is one I agree with. This was something I was taught in the military even before the Berlin Wall came down (but only the WWIII part, because 9/11 hadn't yet happened). And this many years on, with all the information that's become available through the Internet, I'm more firmly convinced of it now than then.

There's even a page mentioning it at Rational Wiki dot org:


No one knows exact numbers because whenever the communists took over, they destroyed all the capitalist infrastructure (including records) and a lot of the countries involved had infrastructures too primitive or too feeble to deal with even keeping count of such large numbers of casualties.

The nine-year Soviet occupation of Afghanistan killed at least half a million civilians, maybe two million. Plus 90-100,000 combatants from both sides. Pol Pot murdered somewhere between 1.5 and 3 million in Cambodia's "killing fields."

And that's just two of the dozens of small post-WWII "puppet wars" fought to halt communist expansionism which took place in more than 40 countries (from Afghanistan to Zaire), involved all six inhabited continents and all five oceans.

There were at least 11 million combatants killed and possibly as many as 25 million. Plus Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot (and a bunch of the other tin pot dictators) killed tens of millions of their own people in "ethnic cleansings" and "politicides" to enforce the communists' totalitarian ideal.

Regarding the GWOT, the US Special Operations Command publicly admits it has put boots on the ground in at least 134 different countries during its prosecution of the Dubya's Global War on Terror. The UN only has 193 member states, so that's ~70% of all the countries on earth. Possibly as many as four million Mulsims have been killed, probably fewer than 10,000 western military killed (there were more civilian contractors killed in Iraq than military, and vast majority of them were noncombatants) and fewer than 100,000 wounded. Which doesn't include the tens of thousands of civilians killed by Islamo-Fascist acts of terrorism. But there is no end to this in sight, and from what's happening in Europe right now, I can confidently predict that the killing in earnest hasn't yet begun.

As with the Cold War, the significance of the GWOT is less how many are killed than it is what's at risk if it's lost. Despite the resistance, communism still managed to gain control of about a fourth of the planet's population, but that easily could have risen to 50% if the they hadn't been beaten back. And if we don't beat back the current wave of Islamist expansionism, we'll all be living under Sharia law.

The 30 Years War killed about 8 million but that was in the early 17th Century, when the world population was less than 1/3rd what it was in WWI. A larger percentage of the world's population died in it than died in WWI, but it all took place on the European continent and it involved nobody but Europeans and Ottoman Turks. Despite killing on a scale at least equal to WWI (and probably greater), nobody makes the case for the 30 Years War being named a "world war" because it wasn't world-wide.

By the same token, WWI deserved the title "The Great War" because of the 40 millions dead, but it deserved the title World War I because it was fought on three continents by combatants who had come from six, not because of how many it killed.

So that's why I can't not consider those two conflicts "world wars."

Its nowhere near the same buddy in my opinion.
Never at any point has the nations of the world been divided up into two sides and fought on the same battlefield like a world war.

Its apples to oranges.
The soviets had their issues and it was bad but even that was not a world war by any means.
Since 9/11 (lotta years) the combined deaths all tge years arent close.

Yes every major country sent a few soldiers to battle guerillas and primitives over different engagements but there is no collective single enemy. It is battle and skirmishes.

When world war three happens you will be informed. There wont be any denying it from day one.
Such as the shot heard around the world, there is an explosing followed by hell on earth.

That being said good read.
Not arguing just giving my opinion.

When a million people die in a day or two, that will be the mark of a world war in todays day and age.
This shit today is nothing more than political manuvering with colateral damage.

[Obs]

wow. super interesting thread. I Never really knew any of this shit was going on in the world (sure I voted for trump but thats cause I heard he was a fan of red meat and whole milk). if I watch the news its only to find out if Costco is having a sale on NY strip steak and ground buffalo .

intersting thread fellas . think its better off a 50+ gun owning 10,000+ round owning crazy once super conservative republican turned 3rd party conservative, turned all out libertarian , tuned Anarchist , I prob shouldn't comment .
alll I know is I don't care to much for the current system , theres people I hate their mind set and are a crutch to humanity and I don't like them either, but I'll evolve to any system around me and survive and thus always be free.

"give me freedom or give me death"--- omg so inspiring. whatever pussies, once we all got freedom we went after and seeked death or enslavement anyhow. most humans feel comfortable being enslaved (either by self induced problems, drugs, or other people) thats the story of the Bible or any religion preached on earth. we are all at one time enslaved and become FREE. every religion or social economical systems goal at the end is to be free (apart form communism and all that bullshit)..

anyhow, sure I've had a couple shots of whiskey, a whole lot of tren (case I'm ramping shit up right now), and I'm giving a social political relegious opinion right now.. which I don't often do, because fact is I'm a steroid user GENIUS and thats what I specialize in.. the fact I'm even, after a few shots, commenting on this thread, is essentially bonus info .
but as you guys are figuring out who did what without the bombs that didn't kill anyone.. I'm trying to figure out how much tren, how much androgen effect, how much estrogen, how much carbs, how much insulin , etc etc... is needed to get guys jacked

Gh drunk everyone!
Hes even smart all fucked up!

Abearican madass!©

[GearHeaded]

[QUOTE=Obs;7374724]When world war three happens you will be informed. There wont be any denying it from day one. /QUOTE]

your a student of history Obs!!!! . you know your shit and wlll therefore know your future . when shit hits the fan I'd hope me and you are friends and work together. but you being a student of history , you know through world history shit always hits the fan. its always happened.. I don't own 50+ guns cause I can shoot them all at once lol.

[Obs]

[QUOTE=GearHeaded;7374727]

When world war three happens you will be informed. There wont be any denying it from day one. /QUOTE]

your a student of history Obs!!!! . you know your shit and wlll therefore know your future . when shit hits the fan I'd hope me and you are friends and work together. but you being a student of history , you know through world history shit always hits the fan. its always happened.. I don't own 50+ guns cause I can shoot them all at once lol.

I agree! If there is a nuke I hope it lands on my house though. I hope its on a day off with all my kids around me, I have just got done telling them how much I love them while we are enjoying ourselves, unaware anything happened. The suffering in the next world war will be beyond comprehension.

I recommend everyone watch the movie "The Road" or else read the novel. I believe in being prepared but the lack of morality today is what scares me the most. The thought of the things that happened in the battle of berlin and similar battles is beyond comprehension. The winners don't get to feel like winners. There is no honor or dignity in wholesale slaughter like that.

I hope I never see it.

[Beetlegeuse]

Its nowhere near the same buddy in my opinion.
Never at any point has the nations of the world been divided up into two sides and fought on the same battlefield like a world war...

...Not arguing just giving my opinion....

Hey, reasonable men can reasonably disagree. Besides, "argue" is one of those words that's fallen victim to the pussification of the English language. There's nothing wrong with arguing. You can't debate without arguing. But you can be civil about it. Arguing without being argumentative. Or vindictive. Liberals just don't like the word because they can't win an argument if there's actual facts involved, so they want the word eradicated.*

I'm not disputing your assessment of the impacts of the two world wars, Obs, I just have a different idea of why the term exists, and of how it should be applied.


* The Soviet Union did a lot of that, eradicating words. One of the words they deleted was "defector." So if you left Mother Russia to live elsewhere, you could only be either an emigre or a traitor, and you only got to be an emigre if the government approved of your leaving. Which made defecting synonymous with treachery. When the atomic reactor at Chernobyl blew up, they erased the city from the maps, too. Plenty of American politicians (on both side of the aisle would kill (literally) for that kind of power.

[Obs]

Hey, reasonable men can reasonably disagree. Besides, "argue" is one of those words that's fallen victim to the pussification of the English language. There's nothing wrong with arguing. You can't debate without arguing. But you can be civil about it. Arguing without being argumentative. Or vindictive. Liberals just don't like the word because they can't win an argument if there's actual facts involved, so they want the word eradicated.*

I'm not disputing your assessment of the impacts of the two world wars, Obs, I just have a different idea of why the term exists, and of how it should be applied.


* The Soviet Union did a lot of that, eradicating words. One of the words they deleted was "defector." So if you left Mother Russia to live elsewhere, you could only be either an emigre or a traitor, and you only got to be an emigre if the government approved of your leaving. Which made defecting synonymous with treachery. When the atomic reactor at Chernobyl blew up, they erased the city from the maps, too. Plenty of American politicians (on both side of the aisle would kill (literally) for that kind of power.

I like all of your perspectivesyou are an interesting guy! Obviously well educated on your own accord rather than by indoctrination of a college.

[MuscleScience]

Its well known on here I would suck trump off if given the chance. But i really think this was a staged event by the USA. It just makes no sense. The battle was won by the syrian army. The rebels were leaving the area so why on earth would assad use gas? Knowing full well trump would bomb him? Its well known that the rebals had known stockpiles of chemical weapons.(chlorine)

Something fishy is going on here. Either the event did not even happen or was done by the rebals with backing of the CIA. But it just does not make sense logically. Assad is a cunt but he is not stupid.

A lot doesn't make sense. Why deploy mustard gas together with Sarin? That's like shooting and stabbing somebody at the same time. The rebels had no chemical defenses so it made little difference to how effective the attack would have been. Almost immediately after it happened there was speculation that the mustard gas was meant to conceal the use of Sarin but that makes no sense because the two produce easily distinguishable symptoms. If somebody's bleeding out of their eyes, you know it ain't from mustard gas.

The fact that the Brits and the French also participated in the attacks argues against it being a US set-up because it would have been very risky for them to go along with it only later to be found to be predicated on a US-staged False Flag operation. They have to believe that the Syrians were behind it. Particularly the Brits, because UK politics are especially turbulent right now, and there was bound to be blowback from participating in this without first getting consent from Parliament. And it's also significant that it was the French who analyzed the evidence and determined it was mustard gas and Sarin in the first place.

The fact that the attacks were so small in scale also argues that it was what it was billed as. Why go to the trouble to stage such an elaborate ruse but not go after some big ticket items, like Assad's fighter jets or his best tanks? Trump initially wanted to do something more widespread but SecDef Mad Dog talked him in to dialing it back. If he staged this it seems unlikely he wouldn't have taken fullest advantage of it.

The biggest reason I'm reluctant to believe that Trump was behind the gas attack is that he'd have had to know he was condemning some people he really doesn't have anything against to a horrific death. Not that he would be beyond being so callous if he knew there was an extreme need, but not this. This was small potatoes. Is Trump capable of sentencing 70(-ish) people who'd never done the US any harm to die jerking and twitching and shitting on themselves in exchange for an excuse to bomb a handful of buildings. I can't quite swallow that.

I’m telling you, if you step back and really look at it. Only one regime stands to benefit from the attack and that’s the Iranians. They know nobody would ever attack Iran other than Israel and they would welcome that because if they did. All of the Muslim world would unit under the Iranian banner (including the Iraqis) and the whole region would completely be distablized. Nobody else standed to gain anything from the attacks other than Iran.