Still hot smoking gun. Robert Cray Band.

Countries ignored hitler till he finally invaded france... because 'that was enough'

when will it be enough and are we ready to face our history that we have done nothing...

Think about it for a minute- who would gain by setting off a single chemical weapon? If the rebels shot it off they'd get the government going into full scale attacks against them, and we know the government has chemical weapons. If the government set one off then they'd get the international community's support for the rebels. Doesn't make much sense, does it?

I think it could have been done as a way to get both sides to go harder against each other, push to escalate the war. Could have been terrorism too. Either way I'd say that it's someone that wants to turn up the heat.

More horsesh!t propaganda to get us suckered into yet ANOTHER asinine, pathetic Middle Eastern conflict. And the beat goes on.......

JoeNY does have a point. It would be stupid of Assad to use chems on his own people, but not so stupid for the rebels to do so. I doubt it was either, but rather someone who wants to ratchet up the conflict, probably an outside agent who wants to see the fall of the current regime and institute their own in the aftermath.

U.S. President Barack Obama, who has resisted overt military intervention in Syria's civil war, has previously warned Syria's President Bashar Assad that any use of chemical weapons would be a "red line".

Was that line drawn in permanent marker or erasable colored pencil?

Sarcasm:

This is sunni terrorism ... but because it is against a Shia country, we will tolerate it and call them rebels.

@JoeNY the only problem with your logic is that you are assuming that those in power have rational minds. When someone like Assad has their power theatened, they tend to think short term solutions, ignoring the long term consequenes. If he did in fact use chemical weapons, it was based in a most irrational desire to dole out pain, punishment and death to those who are threatening his hold on the country

@HOTTICKET-2304234: Yes because like Iraq and Afghanistan, Libya was so long and drawn out lasting a whole 5 months. Of course this is assuming that Turkey doesn't level them first.

"Red line" means more sanctions... as if that would fix anything. I mean seriously, if NK can get away with its 2nd nuke test since Barack Obama took office, do you think some petty mustard gas in little 'ole Syria is going to prompt any harsher of a response?

Ben,

Youre right. We will probably end up giving Assad more money.

Jayfos. If you and all of the war Mongers who love war would sign up for duty and bring your billions of dollars to fight wars, you can go to war, otherwise, if you are not willing to do that, STFU.

Ben...

How many wars can you afford to pay for? How many more wars is the American public willing to pay for with the blood of our own men and women? How many countries would you be satisfied in going to war with at once? What would your response be?

Their punishment....no large soda drinks

Yes Mayor Bloomberg has a lot to do with this.

Both sides will accuse the other of using chemical WMD's. I believe it's Damascus that used them, Assad has lost world support so he has nothing else to loose, except for Russian support, which is large.

Luckily the loss of life and use of WMD's is limited so far, unlike when Saddam used Chemical WMD's. Oh, I forgot, he didn't have any.

But unfortunately, it's always the innocents who die from WMD's, not the terrorists on either side.

The Assad regime says the rebels launched the chemical attack. If that is the case then where did they get the chemicals and the means to put them together and launch them? Either Assad is lying or he has lost control of his chemical weapons stock piles. Either way the international community needs to put a stop to this whole mess. The Russians and Iranians need to step away from Assad. The Russians should be told that they will not lose their warm water port if they stop backing Assad. Once They are out of the Assad camp it should make it much easier to depose Assad.

As for Mr. Obama, the unleashing of these chemical weapons poses a national security risk to US and our allies, the time for words is passing, take action before our national security is compromised any further. If you don't take action we will become more vulnerable to attacks as you will be seen as a weak leader (read no leader, just a stuffed suit).

The problem people are failing to address is that Assad has shown he is willing to do anything short of suicide to keep himself in power. The question I have to ask is what would he accomplish by using Chemical Weapons? Israel has said this is a line that if crossed would make them have little choice but to go after chemical and biological stockpiles to keep their own citizens safe because of the possibilities of cross boarder contamination. One could ask if Israel did do this to help give them a reason to go after Syria chemical and biological stockpiles, but I really have a hard time logically giving them credit for this because if they were ever caught being involved with this, the fallout would be far worse then any reward would be. They would inflame every Muslim country into a outrage (of course you hardly heard a word when they used these weapons on their own people), but for Israel to do this would unite the whole Muslim world against them much worse then what they are now. I can see no logical reason that Israel would chance sacrificing everything with Syria weakened and a possible War with Iran coming up, to chance uniting the factions in Syria against them.

Nor do I think Assad did this. The European powers along with the US have stated again and again that the one thing that would get them to put boots on the ground and become militarily involved would be for Assad to use his WMD's against his own people. Assad has too much to lose, and with Russia and Iran arming him to the teeth, terrorist coming over from Hezbollah to fight for him, to use these weapons would widen the conflict and most likely would spell the end of his rule and most likely would set off a wider conflict in the area.

So who could have set these weapons off (if indeed they have been used), could it have been the rebels? By pushing this through they know that this will most likely set off the European governments along with the US to become more actively involved, and in the end would help them get the arms they so desperately need. While we in the US have heard the call for sending in our boys and for expanding our help in this conflict, I think Obama has been walking a tight rope because the last time they sat back and let a Arab uprising succeed was in Libya and Egypt. What did we get out of it, the burning and murder in our embassy of our ambassador. One only needs to look at the Muslim Brotherhood to see the problems we have had from Egypt. So if America was involved it would be to create a event that would not only allow us to go into Syria, but would also allow us to widen the conflict and go after Iran. Then you have the European nations, some of them have been pushing to provide arms to the rebels. France has been the most vocal of all, and I do not see them having a problem with helping set off this weaponized chemicals. But there could be a drawback of setting off their Muslims within country (unless this is the goal to have a excuse to deport all of them).

I do not know who used Chemicals but I think it is either the Rebels, the CIA or the European Union security forces.

AG99

JoeNY does have a point. It would be stupid of Assad to use chems on his own people, but not so stupid for the rebels to do so. I doubt it was either, but rather someone who wants to ratchet up the conflict, probably an outside agent who wants to see the fall of the current regime and institute their own in the aftermath.

Yet Assad possesses chemical weapons and he has shown no restraint in killing his own people, by the tens of thousands. The only way we are likely to find the truth is to send weapons inspectors to the scene. That however is another thing Assad is not likely to allow. He has been pretty hesitant to allow UN inspectors into Syrian cities in the past.

WHAT??????!!!!!!!

No one has accused Israel, the eternal scapegoat, regardless of how irrational, of playing both ends against the middle???

(Thought for sure that was what Joe was getting at. My apologies, Joe.)

The idea of women and children being attacked by chemical weapons is heart wrenching. I think it's way past time for other Mid-East countries to actually do something about it. Turkey, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, et al, where are you?

Ask google, they have their cameras on all the time as well as a hundred other countries around the world. I have an idea release all that information and let all of us go over it and figure out how it happened.

To be honest, look at what is happening in Cyprus. Today they are deciding if the they are going to let the banks go after depositors money. Can we all say "False Flag". I think this is the Muslim Brotherhood, Al Qaeda or someone paid by the world bankers to get this war with Syria and Iran started. The wealthy war mongers are the ones that profit from these wars. This will be all in the news and then we will forget about what is happening in Cyprus. If the World bankers get Cyprus's money, they will start going after other countries money also, including America.. Mark my words it will happen.

If America goes into this war, it will bankrupt us and the world banks will come for our money too. We need to wake up and stay out of this. Ron Paul had it right. We should become an isolationist country for at least a few years and get rid of these huge banks that are bleeding us dry, alone with the federal Reserve. We have got to think of our self's right now. America is hanging on by a thread. Obama needs to step up to the plate and tell the world we are not getting involved. No matter what party you agree with, we need to stay out of this!!! We would be spreading our military way too thin and will only get our Men and women killed!

As a side note. We should all read up on what Iceland did. They arrested the bankers and kicked them out when the bankers came for their money a couple of years ago. Notice how that was never in the main stream media. America has got to stand up to these thieves. If we don't, we are doomed.

Scremini,

I really don't think Israel is behind this. It would be political and actual suicide for Israel. As another posted stated this would unite the middle east against Israel and I don't think that Israel is going to be that stupid. With that being said, It might have been Iran behind it to dup everyone into thinking it was Israel to also try to get this war started. Iran has been chopping at the bit to go after Israel. American Just needs to stay out of this, at least until we know for sure who did this. If we go off half cocked and fall for a false flag, America will be crucified by the rest of the world.

He said she said. Neither side can be trusted. The Rebels (Islamic Terrorist/Activist) started this revolt in Syria and they are responsible for either winning or losing the Civil War they started. The U.S. should not under ANY CIRCUMSTANCES become involved in any way. Any aid given to the Rebels (Terrorist/Activist) will be used to buy weapons. Those weapons will eventually used to attack American interest and kill U.S. Citizens. If either side wishes to dispose of the other using chemicals, that is their decision because given the option the Rebels would use the same tactics as those they wage war upon. Let them battle to their demise and deal with those that survive. At least this would mean less Islamic Terrorist to attack others in the future.

CRYSTYE -- Iceland is still bankrupt today. If is wasn't for the Banks O'Bama would have no one to get those large political contributions. In addition you would not get the monthly Welfare Check and Food Stamps. O'Bama condemns what he calls the 1% in Public but then goes to bed with them when no one is watching. O'Bama is a typical Socialist Dictator.

Crystye, definite food for thought. Thanks. How does the song go? "Wars aren't good for nothin'. Say it again."

Lots of conflicting agendas, and human tragedy measured in the millions. Mess with Syria, you are messing with Iran and Russia. Fail to act, and we allow thousands more to die. Jump in, and we further bankrupt ourselves and send our own precious young people off to die.

Concur. We need to get our own house in order.

As a 22 year Navy vet and retiree, I'm not exactly an isolationist. Existential threat to our survival or sovereignty, I'm there. But if we cannot agree on living within our own means, how can we help others? We already owe our grandchildren to China, and this just to fund programs that re-elect the current crop of scalawag lawyer incumbents, mostly but certainly not exclusively Democrats, to another two, four or six years of white collar crime.

Let's not kick off another VietNam, Iraq or Afghanistan war until we're clear on what we're really doing there in the first place.

No one has accused Israel, the eternal scapegoat, regardless of how irrational, of playing both ends against the middle???

Much as you would like to believe otherwise, a lot of the criticism of Israel is quite rational.

Just remember Israel has chemical weapons and are opposed to the government.They also have been wanting the US to get involved just like they did with Iraq!It was Isrealy intelegance that Bush believed in.

Lots of well-thought out comments, but my feeling is that they are mostly likely to be wrong because we don't really have a lot of information about what's going on over there. This is the Middle East. That means wheels within wheels within wheels. Unfortunately, we are also subject, in our own country, to people who have resentments and agendas left over from our own idiotic involvements, so there's going to be a lot of low-fact pontificating as well. Me, I am just waiting for more information to figure out what's going on.

“Terrorists on Tuesday launched a rocket containing chemical materials,” it said.

Right, because we all know that the rebels have hundreds of scud missiles ready to fly against their own areas

(sarcasm)

I hate the thought of the use of chemical weapons, BUT, they don't want us, they want our money. They want our money so they can buy our weapons. They want our weapons so they can use them against Assad today & then against us tomorrow.

SCREW'EM. We have no need of this war. Live or die, I don't care, this is your war. Your country, your war, you fight it, you pay for it with your own money.

I will never be willing to send my grandchildren, or my neighbor's, to serve in your defence.

Davey,

Your welcome. I am a Navy Wife. So I agree with you also. I am an Independent ( So I voted for Ron Paul) and an ex-Financial Accountant at Citibank (Quite due to their underhanded practices and to be a stay at home Mom). I can see the damage that the Federal Reserve is doing to this country. Devaluing our dollar by printing worthless money.

Joe, Just for the record, I do not get Welfare and Food stamps....But I do agree that both political parties are in bed with the 1%'ers. And Iceland may be bankrupt, but they are slowly coming out of it. If they had not broken the yolk of the world banks they would never see the light of day. They would always be owned by the banks. If we did the same it would hurt at first and be a depression, but it would not last for ever and we would be able to come back to the America we know and love. If they don't stop printing money, we are in for it like America has never seen, a much worse situation than the great depression.

I also notice that none of the main stream TV news channels are carrying this story. I wonder why? I would think this would be all over the news..

All comes down to....."this is not our war".

JayFos: Countries ignored hitler till he finally invaded france... because 'that was enough'

Not so. Hitler invaded France because the country's leadership, along with Britain's, declared war on Germany after Hitler's invasion of Poland. Contrary to popular belief, Hitler didn't want war with Britain and France. It was the Allies that sought WWII, just as it is NATO that now seeks war throughout the Middle East.

JoeB-460595

CRYSTYE -- Iceland is still bankrupt today. If is wasn't for the Banks O'Bama would have no one to get those large political contributions.

And yet it was Bush that GAVE billions to the banks...not loaned...GAVE!

So, that is where the stockpiles of chemicals went BEFORE Saddam Hussein was taken out.....SYRIA.

Wait a minute.....the Progressive keep saying that WMD did not exist in Iraq and blamed the Iraq War on Bush the Republicans.

So....what is the United Nations going to do now since chemical weapons are being used in Syria. Maybe send in a Blue Helmet or two without weapons, or just implement sanctions.

So........the world should rush to help the rebels?

I'm not saying we go to war, I'm saying that the "red line" comment is no more credible and just as belicose as the rhetoric being spewed from North Korea. It's all posturing, but there's no use in posturing because we've lost all credibility by now. I say we keep our mouths shut next time and let them deal with their own problems, unless we're in a position to back our words up with "concrete action", as our government also likes to say so often.

CRYSTYE: I also notice that none of the main stream TV news channels are carrying this story. I wonder why?

I guess they haven't finishing fabricating the evidence that they need to make the NATO-backed terrorists, er, "rebels", look like the victims of the very atrocity that they perpetrated.

ldo

So, that is where the stockpiles of chemicals went BEFORE Saddam Hussein was taken out.....SYRIA.

The Syrian chemical capability was supplied by their allies ... the Russians.

Wait a minute.....the Progressive keep saying that WMD did not exist in Iraq and blamed the Iraq War on Bush the Republicans.

If the shoe fits... Throwing up smoke screens will not validate GW's war.

So....what is the United Nations going to do now since chemical weapons are being used in Syria. Maybe send in a Blue Helmet or two without weapons, or just implement sanctions.

Who the hell knows what the UN is going to do...probably nothing. What do you think they should do?

Hello folks, listen to all the warmongers on this blog. Your indoctrination is complete. We are God's gift to the world and everyone else are third world scumbags. Our intentions are only to spread democracy with all the trimmings like a central bank, depleted uranium shells (the gift that keeps on giving), extraction of their resources, decimation of their countries infrastructure and huge scores of displaced and murdered innocent men, women and children.

You know we are funding Al Qaeda in Syria, right? We did that in Libya as well so I guess that makes them "good" Al Qaeda, but we are fighting them in Afghanistan, Yemen and Mali which makes them "bad" AL Qaeda, right? Not to mention the US isn't beyond a flase flag or two to start a war. Remember the Gulf of Tonkin or Weapons of Mass Destruction?

We don't even care who we support as long as they help us achieve our short term goals. Unfortunately the same people we are supporting and arming now we will be fighting later and they will kill American soldiers with the weapons we gave them.

In our short 237 year history we have bombed over 67 countries and have been at war for 217 years. Now you have to ask yourself who are the real terrorists? Even though you don't drop the bombs or pull the triggers your support for war makes you complicit in the death and destruction. If you believe in Karma, hopefully it will be kinder to you than war has been to many innocent men, women and children.

Jayfos

Countries ignored hitler till he finally invaded france... because 'that was enough'

Just to info you. Britain and France declared war on Germany after Germany invaded Poland.

Crystye: "Toughest job in the Navy = Navy WIFE" Thanks for your hubby's service and YOURS. Your perspective on the financial universe is key. WAAAAAY above my IQ or paygrade. KEEP 'EM HONEST!!!

Everyone else: Show me a politician of EITHER party that ISN'T in bed with 1% power-brokers. ESPECIALLY the wealthy communists on MSNBC, like Chris Hayes, whose book "Down with the 1%" is such hypocritical Marxist counterpropaganda. Please tell me he (and his ilk on MSLSD) ISN'T the typical 1% trying to manipulate the rest of us by pretending to protest against the "Evil One Percenters"...

trust

have been at war for 217 years

Not even close to it.

@flnobody, oh yes we have!

Nothing wrong with wealth, and the power that comes with it. Just please spare us the self-righteous counterpropaganda smokescreen designed to hide the Machiavellian machinations.

Wealth, and private property rights, allow us to make a difference in the world, and define our freedom. Just don't impose a Marxist Tyranny that will subjugate our children for countless generations to come.

CRYSTYE:

No, I'm sure Israel isn't behind it. It's just that she gets accused of everything regardless of how outrageous, and I was going for sarcasm.

My sympathies for all affected, and for the environment, as well.

@flnobody, oh yes we have!

Trust, you must be including things like the cold war in your calculation. Either way you are the one who is off the mark. Adjust your tin-foil hat and start over.

Hello folks, there is a lot more going on in Syria than the MSM presstitutes are allowed to report. There are oil pipe lines in the equation amongst other Geo-political factors. Enclosed are two excerpts and two URL’s to two of many articles that outlines these extenuating circumstances. It’s not about democracy or human rights folks it’s about money, power and greed.

Syria, Turkey, Israel and a Greater Middle East Energy War
by F. William Engdahl

“NATO is already clandestinely engaged in the Syrian conflict, with Turkey taking the lead as U.S. proxy. Ankara’s foreign minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, has openly admitted that his country is prepared to invade as soon as there is agreement among the Western allies to do so.

The intervention would be based on humanitarian principles, to defend the civilian population based on the “responsibility to protect” doctrine that was invoked to justify Libya. Turkish sources suggest that intervention would start with creation of a buffer zone along the Turkish-Syrian border and then be expanded. Aleppo, Syria’s largest and most cosmopolitan city, would be the crown jewel targeted by liberation forces.”

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/10/11/225863/

A tale of two security headquarters

The Syrian Intelligence War

by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya

There is much more to the conflict in Syria than meets the eye. Syria is currently the scene of a cold war between the US, NATO, Israel, and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) on one side and Russia, China, Iran, and the Resistance Bloc on the other hand. Amidst the fighting between the Syrian government and anti-government forces, an intense intelligence war has also been taking place.

Voltaire Network| Ottawa (Canada)| 1 August 2012

http://www.voltairenet.org/article175218.html

Hummmmmmm ~~~ "Agent Provocateurs" are everywhere employed by governments (even our own), and others whose interest are furthered by conflict and war .... to stir up problems.

Syria presents a most complicated problem ... civil war ... and yet Assad is reportedly supported by a majority of Syrians, .. should we support a minority of the populous simply because they have revolted against a "Tyrant" who represents the majority?

Over throwing Assad will not bring democracy to Syria or long term stability to the region ... in fact, perhaps play into increased instability .. playing into the hands of another of the regions players ...whose interest are more instability ..

The intrigue of this arena .. makes the Borgia s look like bit players ... Before joining sides we had better consider what our real long term interest are ..

Who do these "Agent Provocateurs" that did this reprehensible act belong to? ... anybody wanta guess? ..lol

depleted uranium shells (the gift that keeps on giving)

depleted uranium shells are so low on the R value they are not much to worrie about unless you like to sleep with them under you pillow for some odd reason.

The question: Because of the attack, is America going to be pulled further into this conflict? We will become further mired financially? Don't fall for this.

Hello @Jon-998022, c'mon play nice! I haven't called you a looney for your opinions or facts you present in your posts. Let's take for example your post just yesterday when you posted:

“Want to read something familiar? Read 1984. The direction things like this take our country are eerily similar to that novel. USA soon to equal Oceanian?”

That is your post right? Orwell’s 1984, USA soon to equal Oceanian. Some people would call that tin foil hat propaganda.

People who live in glass houses!

Mimi-of topic, if you go to Argusleader.com story might interest you-yesterday. Peace

Hello @Johngis, I think if you asked most people if they thought Uranium is safe I don’t think many would say it is. U238 is used in depleted uranium shells with a half life of billions of years.

“Uranium decays slowly by emitting an alpha particle. The half-life of uranium-238 is about 4.47 billion years.”

NI: Global Issues for Learners of English > The Issues > Iraq > DU weapons > More about DU

Depleted Uranium

What is Depleted Uranium?

Depleted Uranium is a waste product that is made when uranium is processed to use as fuel for nuclear reactors and for nuclear weapons. In this process, uranium is separated into enriched uranium (more radioactive than natural uranium), and depleted uranium (less radioactive than natural uranium).

RADIOACTIVE: giving off a harmful form of energy that comes from the breaking up of atoms

The enriched uranium is needed for nuclear weapons and as fuel in nuclear reactors. The depleted uranium is not used for anything, it is waste. The full chemical name of this waste is Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride (depleted UF6), but it is often called just DU.

About 500,000 tons (over 450, 000 metric tons) of DU has been produced in the USA since the 1940's.(1) The U.S. Department of the Environment has a Depleted Uranium Management Program to make sure that DU is stored safely and that none of it escapes into the environment. Of course, it costs a lot of money to store DU this way; that is why DU is sold very cheaply to the arms industry to use as a covering on ammunition.

How is DU dangerous?

It's radioactive

Depleted Uranium is less radioactive than natural uranium, and it is much less radioactive than enriched uranium. However, DU is radioactive, and it will remain radioactive for a very long time. (The half-life of DU is 4.5 billion years.)

It's a chemical poison

Depleted Uranium is also a chemical poison. Uranium is a heavy metal, like lead and mercury, and heavy metals are poisonous.

What does that do to people?

The website for the US Depleted Uranium Management Program says that DU can cause risks to people's health because:

Uranium is radioactive and can therefore increase the likelihood of cancer in people who are exposed to it;

Uranium is a heavy metal. If you breathe in uranium or if you eat food that contains uranium, it can get into your bloodstream and it can have toxic effects on your body organs, mainly your kidneys;

If DU is exposed to the air, it can produce a chemical reaction with the moisture in the air. This makes a dangerous gas that damages your lungs if you breathe it in. (2)

TOXIC: poisonous

KIDNEYS: the organs that clean waste from your blood, and make urine

What about DU weapons?

People breathe in DU dust

When DU weapons are used, the DU burns and produces a fine dust, which people breathe in. This dust gets into the ground and into water and so it also gets into the food that people eat.

http://newint.org/easier-english/Iraq/dumore.html

That is your post right? Orwell’s 1984, USA soon to equal Oceanian. Some people would call that tin foil hat propaganda.

Nice Red Herring but this has exactly what to do with your comment regarding years being at war? You are wrong, you know you're wrong so i thought you could use a little attenuation. So sorry if a struck a nerve.

Yet another attempt to drag us into a Jihad.. A chlorine bomb can be made very simply that's why they call them poor mans nukes.. Some dry pool chemicals some C4 and a dispersant accelerator which shall remain nameless.. All you would have to do is look at WW1 technology, as simple as tear gas but much more deadly.. Last time they tried to drag us into this quagmire with plain old bug killer and they almost did if it weren't for the UN inspector who said nope..

Hello Jon, is that your post?

“Want to read something familiar? Read 1984. The direction things like this take our country are eerily similar to that novel. USA soon to equal Oceanian?”

If I'm wrong about that and misleading please let me know and I will humbly apologize.

Hello Jon, if you don't think the Cold War was a war that's your interpretation. When thousands of Americans die supporting an ideological conflict I call that war.

In terms of the cold war, a lot of people died in countries who chose sides between communism and "democracy" why do you think they called it a "cold war". 382 American military personnel were killed in direct combat with Soviet, North Korean, Yugoslavian, Chinese, Cuban, and other Communist guerrilla forces outside the Vietnam & Korean wars between 1945 - 1991. Additionally, thousands more were killed while stationed overseas and training for potential conflict with Communist bloc forces. In the Federal Republic of Germany, over 2300 American servicemen died between 1965 - 1975 alone. It is impossible to know how many personnel from the opposing forces were killed. But in addition to enemy action, friendly fire, and accidents, those attempting to defect were routinely killed, along with civilians doing the same.

Will you deny we are a warring nation?

Well now it is here. They have crossed Oblahblahblahs red line. And after they crossed that red line they were told that now we are "seriously concerned" . O M F G ! ! ! How will the Syrians and especially Assad be able to even sleep now. Boy oh boy. I imagine that just 50 or 60 more chemical attacks and they will be told that we are approaching being seriously upset. I'm sure that will stop them.

Hello folks, remember all of these wars and aggression towards other countries is being done in our name. Let's stop this madness. We can quibble about a few years or add some here and there but the list is way too long for us to be considered a peaceful nation.

As hard as this is let's look at our history and record:

We have been a country for almost 237 years bombed over 67 countries and have been at war for 217 years!

The Revolutionary War – 1775 – 1783

The Whiskey Rebellion – 1789 - 1794

The War of 1812 – 1812 – 1814

The Mexican American War – 1846 – 1848

The American Civil War – 1861 – 1865

The Spanish American War – 1897 – 1898

The Indian American Wars – 1775 – 1918

World War I – 1914 – 1918

World War II – 1941 – 1945

Cold War 1945 – 1992

The Vietnam War - 1962 – 1973

The Invasion of Grenada – 1983 – 1984

The Invasion of Panama – 1989

Operation Desert Storm – 1991 – 1992 (Kuwait)

Operation United Shield – 1992 – 1995 (Somalia)

Operation Determined Falcon – 1998 – 1999 (Kosovo, Albania)

Operation Enduring Freedom – 2001 – 2012 (Afghanistan)

Operation Iraqi Freedom – 2003 – 2011 (Iraq)

Operation Freedom Falcon – 2011 - ? (Libya)

Operation ? - 2011 - ? (Syria, Yemen, Somalia)

Operation ? - 2013 - (Mali)

The US under Africom plans to have troops in 35 countries by year end 2013.

Other wars not listed:

Nicaragua, Haiti, Laos, Cambodia, Angola, Mozambique, Honduras, Chile, Congo, Yugoslavia, Lebanon, Somalia, Angola, Columbia, Peru, Yemen, Pakistan, Grenada, Mexico, etc..

The point of the list was to show that we have been in wars for most of our history and that we are a warring nation. Perhaps we can agree on that. Instead of defending our aggression and atrocities perpetrated on other sovereign nations your time would be better spent advocating against a warmongering mindset that is if you aren't of that mindset.

depleted uranium shells are so low on the R value they are not much to worrie about unless you like to sleep with them under you pillow for some odd reason.

generally true as far as the statement goes. when outside the skin, the alpha particles generated by U-238 can be stopped by the dead skin layer or a piece of cloth/paper. the problem lies when small particles of oxidized or "spalled"(from U-238 AP rounds) Uranium actually enter the body (lungs especially, where they get lodged) and then damage cells.

Trust, get over yourself.

The enriched uranium is needed for nuclear weapons and as fuel in nuclear reactors. The depleted uranium is not used for anything, it is waste. The full chemical name of this waste is Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride (depleted UF6), but it is often called just DU

wrong, UF6 is used in the enrichment process, and isn't good for making much of anything else. the AP shells are made from metallic uranium (fluorine removed).

from Argonne national lab:

Uranium hexafluoride does not react with oxygen, nitrogen, carbon dioxide, or dry air, but it does react with water or water vapor. For this reason, UF₆ is always handled in leak tight containers and processing equipment. When UF₆ comes into contact with water, such as water vapor in the air, the UF₆ and water react, forming corrosive hydrogen fluoride (HF) and a uranium-fluoride compound called uranyl fluoride (UO₂F₂).

at normal air pressure, UF6 turns directly into a gas from a solid form at 134 degrees F, hardly something you would make an armor penetrator from

get your facts right, trust

Hello Mark, you know you are arguing with an article written by some scientists not me, right?

(1) Information from website of Physicians for Social Responsibility:
http://www.psrus.org/Nuclear_Security/DU/du_vweb8.htm

(2) Information from the website of the US Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride Management Program Information Network:

My point is that Uranium in any form isn't healthy.

To ask why Assad would use chemical weapons against his own people, given the threat of international retaliation, is absurd. Why does a madman do anything? Why is Kim Jun Un threatening to attack the US? He will continue to poke the tiger until he has a reason to fear the tiger...if all the tiger does is grumble and go back to sleep, he will take a step further, and then another. I don't want to see us get in another war, lord no, but there must be someone smart enough to figure out how to stop this monster from destroying his own country and murdering his people (Syria? North Korea?). Would a drone strike be too obvious?

what good is the opinion of physicians (medical doctors, not scientists) when they can't get their facts straight? they are right about the effects when Uranium is in the body, but wrong about the material being used. UF6 is absolutely NOT used in depleted uranium shells (which your quote claims as being the case), it Is used in the process of separating enriched Uranium from depleted uranium.

note also that I said that there is indeed a risk with depleted uranium (or any form of Uranium, including Uranium in its natural state for that matter), but the risk only occurs when the Uranium enters the body. this can happen in the form of Uranium oxide or minute particles being inhaled (a particular concern for tank crews, since they in a closed environment with potentially strongly elevated U dust concentrations, they should be closely monitored for increased incidences of lung cancer.

a pure slab of uranium would be of no health concern as long as it didn't oxidize (which it does) or wasn't exposed to physical wear, dislodging minute, inhalable particles.

as far as toxicity is concerned, this is true for any heavy metal.

ok sorry everyone, Trust is wrong.... we have only been fighting for 211 of our 237 years as a country!

you know cause that extra 6 years trust was off by really makes the difference....

not to mention all the killing manifest destiny we enjoyed before we became a nation.

Government blame Rebels.

Rebels blame Government.

Obama Administration blamed a Youtube video for our embassy getting blown up.

You are not going to get the truth here at MS/NBC.

Davey,

Thanks for YOUR service!! It takes us all working together as a nation, not all this divide and conquer political BS, that the parties want to keep sprouting. I just wish everyone else would wake up and see what they are doing to this country..sigh.

Scremini,

Sorry. I did not realize you were being sarcastic. All this America has to get involved in every conflict is getting old. We just need to stay home for a while and pay our OWN bills for a change!!!

This ain't our problem so F..in what if he used chemical weapons. This ain't our fight. Assad is fighting Islamic rebels not his entire population. Id rather see Assad win. Who needs more crazy Islamists in power like in Egypt (good move obam,a) Libya, Tunisa etc. At least under the dictators the only real people that suffered were crazy islamists. Egyptians are now learning it was better under Mubarek then the supposedly good Muslim brotherhood. Regular citizens didn't have it that bad, people of other than Islamic religions were left alone for the most part. We should stay the hell out of the middle east let them fight their own wars American boys don't need to die for muslims that hate them anyway.

Crystye: I'm old enough a dog to see politicians of both parties send our young people off to DIE so they can get reelected.

Patriotism yes. Foolhardiness no.

Propaganda is a poor substitute for truth.

"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act..." George Orwell

Many are unaware - that the murders of Syrians - is in fact an ethnic cleansing of Christians from the population.

The focus of the deaths of these Christians has not been publicized the way it would be - if the killings were Muslim. Christians have been killed holding prayer meetings in their homes.

Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Jay Carney all condemned "The Youtube Video" that made Muslims mad (supposedly) enough to attack and kill our citizens and Ambassador.

No one from the Administration is complaining as Syria continues in the killings of Christians by Muslims - which is Sad and Pathetic - for a President who was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize

What up Obama?

Davey,

So true!!! Both sides are bought and paid for.. I makes me so sad that some people can't see it for them selves.

""They wouldn't have used it if not for the silence of the international community on the crimes and massacres committed in Syria for the past two years," he said."

Islamic guns have many open ends! They have many holes in between too!

Seventh century Sunni Islamists and tenth century Shiites are fighting from each side of open guns!

When they kill or do genocides of non-Muslims or stone females, they don't bother about international community!

When their guns don't work well, then holes with biggest lies, chest beating, weeping, begging for help open up.

Look how this seventh century shameless Sunni beast is talking about "international community"!

Can't these shamless "proud" battle each other? Why do they need our help?

Our presence in other countries at war has been important to maintain some sense of stability while protecting our homeland. I know it sounds hard to believe, but if we just stayed in our little corner of the world, imagine what would happen...come on now, "think"...imagine what would happen. Don't just throw crap out here...."think".

On another note, when a government tries to turn the inhabitants of the country against each other, chaos reigns and the country begins to fail...resulting in a dictatorship. Can you see that happening in the US? I can.

MWP38506

I agree but most of America is convinced that our Intel was wrong. They had enough time to dismantel & move everything out. But we have a whole bunch of people that will never believe Sadam had anything like this.

No, we only gave them 14 months warning to move everything, I'd say they needed at least 14 1/2 to get anything across the border.

I agree he had lots of time to move a lot of hardware ,chemicals etc.He was not the innocent fall guy for American interest's.To me he was a serial killer,running the corrupt government of Iraq

NaCl H2O

Maybe instead of deer, you should hunt something that fights back.

Maybe you need to mind your own business. I slaughter as many as the law allows. They taste good. I will hunt what I want, when I want as long as it is within the law. Go eat some tofu & bamboo sprouts.

Well, I will always remember Sen. Byrd trying to make things more fair, he knew we would win but heroically pressed for more time for the Iraqis to be able to get ready.

Deer are excellent eating, especially burgers.

Because he didn't? They weren't even at the point where they could make chemical weapons yet.

No problem with deer, yummy. My point is you don't go hunting bow/gun hunting without arrows or ammo. Nor, would you send them off to grandma if you KNEW you were going to attacked. Saddam was stockpiling anything he could get, not exporting it.
Does not make sense when he knew we were coming for him.

Actually there were statements about chemical and nuclear material going to Syria. I'd venture they have both kinds of weapons.

Tell that to all the Kurds he killed in the Northern part of Iraq.

Keep dreaming MWP3.

This chemical attack, if it actually occurred, was probably a false flag operation, to get the US involved.

Regarding Iraq, we had satellite surveillance on Iraq at all times. It would have been impossible for them to move all the stuff we claimed they had to Syria. We interrogated all their officers, and offered rewards. No one came forth. In addition, we claimed they were manufacturing chemical weapons. If so, what happened to the equipment in the factories? Not one truck driver, forklift operator, peon in a weapons factory or anyone else with credibility came forward.

Keep grasping at straws, you morons.

There were satellite photos of truck convoys going from Iraq to Syria at the start of the Iraq war. These trucks were definitely believed to contain WMDs, including chemical weapon from Saddam's stockpile. As for who fired this, if it was indeed a chemical weapon, I would lean toward it being one of the rebel groups. I say this for two reasons. First, Assad knows full well what will happen to him if his government were to use chemical weapons. It would bring a number of nations off the sidelines and align them against his regime. On top of that, the US has been keeping a pretty close eye on Assad's chemical weapons stockpiles and I doubt they could have used them without it being detected. Secondly, the attack appears to have hit an area under the control of government forces. It would not make any sense for the government to launch a weapon like this into an area where its own forces were located. Then of course there is the fact that the so-called rebels are not one group and there are a number of extremist factions among the different rebel camps. I would not put it past one of these extremist groups to use a weapons like this and then try and blame it on the government to up the ante in this two year old war. Also, many of these extremist groups are not Syrians, they are outside agitators, so they would have less of an issue using a weapon like this against Syrians. They do not share that national identity with the Syrians and it would make it easier for them to justify in their own minds the use of these weapons against Syrians.

@Jacob - They clearly had chemical weapons prior to the war because they gassed the Kurds.

@JS in SD - Really hard to say. Could be a rebel group wanting to up the ante as you say, could be a rebel group wanting to make it look like the government. Could be the government wanting to make the rebels look bad. Hard to really say either way. Seems like if there was a scud launch, that it would have been tracked.

IF Iraq had WMD's or CW's, and I don't think they did, why did they not use them? They did it before.
Here Syria, hold my guns while I throw rocks?

Salt water,

IF Iraq had WMD's or CW's, and I don't think they did, why did they not use them? They did it before.
Here Syria, hold my guns while I throw rocks?

I agree with your reasoning here. If you know you're going to be invaded, no matter the circumstances, you're not going to give up any weapon that could give you an edge over your enemies. If Russia launched a full scale invasion of the west coast, we wouldn't be moving our nukes to Canada. We'd be sending them to Russia expedited delivery atop a missile.

To suggest that Saddam would give up weapons in the face of a better equipped, better funded, better trained adversary just to make the adversary look bad is crazy.

JS in SD....

Love SD, but gonna have to side with Ralph on this one. The attack on the Kurds happened in 1988, and none of the chemical weapons suspected of being used in that attack included chlorine gas.

It is believed that Iraqi forces used multiple chemical agents during the attack, including mustard gas and the nerve agentssarin, tabun and VX;^[3] some sources have also pointed to the blood agenthydrogen cyanide (most of the wounded taken to hospitals in the Iranian capital Tehran were suffering from mustard gas exposure).

I would also add that even with trucks "believed" to be loaded with WMD's, our primary focus at the time of entering Iraq was not chemical, it was nuclear. Remember "yellow cake"? However, I would agree with you that the rebels have more to gain by setting off a chemical weapon, as they know that it was a "red-line" drawn by the international community, and would equal an immediate military response by the west and NATO. Nothing can be ruled out at this time, and even up until the early 90's we tried to pin the Kurdish attack on Iran. Probably because we were one of the countries that supplied a necessary precursor chemical used in the attack. Our surveillance tech is better now, but that doesn't mean we'll ever be 100% on who fired the rocket. Bottom line, it's a bad thing that has happened, but we shouldn't be trying to justify the Iraq War based on an assumption that chemical weapons existing in 1988 "could have" been moved to Syria, and "may have" been involved in this attack. One thing is for sure.....this is a mess!

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

Based on the reported symptoms, a nerve gas is the likely weapon. Nerve gases cause suffocation by inhibiting muscle action.

Mustard gas doesn't cause trouble breathing and its effects are usually felt later. It also has a distinct odor.

So the reports, if true, would definitely rule out any alleged Iraqi stockpiles that found their way to Syria. Nerve gases have a shelf life of weeks to months depending on purity.

Pragmatic....

Mustard gas would indeed cause trouble breathing, but it wouldn't likely kill people immediately like this attack did. You're also right about the smell of mustard gas. It sounds like a classic Chlorine bomb, and Chlorine gas would have the same effects described by these victims, which is also what they smelled in the air. Nerve gas would have been more efficacious in its killing efficiency, and they wouldn't only be experiencing difficulty with breathing after exposure. They would be having far more severe reactions and would be expressing a broader spectrum of symptoms.

Wow people still believe Iraq had WMD? Yes he did he used them all when he gassed the kurds. We found tons of evidence and paperwork saying he had no WMD he thought if he played it off that he had any it would keep is enemies at bay enemies like Iran etc. Just get over it there was no WMD when we invaded.

Let's see, Iraq move thousands of tons of weapons and we did not see them. And they had WMD's we could see, but weren't there.

It sounds like a classic Chlorine bomb, and Chlorine gas would have the same effects described by these victims, which is also what they smelled in the air. Nerve gas would have been more efficacious in its killing efficiency, and they wouldn't only be experiencing difficulty with breathing after exposure. They would be having far more severe reactions and would be expressing a broader spectrum of symptoms.

The article is mentioning convulsions and loss of consciousness. The main effect of chlorine gas is pulmonary edema or fluid in the lungs. The victim pretty much drowns in their own body fluids. Convulsions and loss of consciousness are more consistent with nerve gas.

@ hakstarr

Well, Iraq HAD them....what happened to them...they just didn't disappear....at least into thin air?

And regarding this idea that Saddam wouldn't get rid of his WMDs as some sort of preparation for US invasion; I don't buy it. I believe Saddam would never have used WMDs on US soldiers because of the retribution he would have gotten. He was far better off hiding them(if you hold to that ideology) and making the invasion look unprovoked. Either way for him it ended poorly. I just can't buy into the fact that we KNEW he had them....and then they disappeared. I recall that many believed they were transported to Syria....now we see CWs being used there. We just don't know who used them.

JS wrote -There were satellite photos of truck convoys going from Iraq to Syria at the start of the Iraq war. These trucks were definitely believed to contain WMDs, including chemical weapon from Saddam's stockpile.

JS, if we had satellite images of trucks going from Iraq to Syria at the start of the war, which were suspected of carrying chemical weapons, don't you think we would have somehow stopped them or obliterated them with our massive air power? Don't you think Bush and Cheney would be shouting it from the rooftops, along with the entire Republican Party? Only an absolute moron would keep clinging to the illusion that Iraq had chemical weapons and somehow sent them to Syria, even though we were watching with satellites.

Keep trying though, if you want to keep looking like of an idiot. The weapons inspectors combed Iraq, both before and after the war. No WMD and no sign they had been manufactured. Sorry!

Chas - The chemical weapons, which Iraq once had, were destroyed by US and UN troops after the first Gulf War. We have stated as much. It is too bad you didn't read the news. Perhaps you were listening to Rush Limbaugh or Fox News.

There is no proof as yet that anyone deployed chemical weapons in Syria, much less proof that it was done by the Syrian government. There are forces at work that want the US to intervene in the worst way. Those forces would do anything to make it happen, which is why we must be cautious.

Was it a false flag attack?

Chas01c,

And regarding this idea that Saddam wouldn't get rid of his WMDs as some sort of preparation for US invasion; I don't buy it. I believe Saddam would never have used WMDs on US soldiers because of the retribution he would have gotten.

I'm sorry I don't believe what you're talking about. No leader, no matter how stupid they are, would give up the ace in the hole to embarrass the enemy. If Saddam had them, he would have thrown everything he had at us as we got close to Baghdad. Saddam had nothing to gain from refraining use of chemical weapons. He knew that toppling him was objective number one.

Hmmm... Conspiracies aren't always just theories, are they?

If Assad, an ophthalmologist by training, wanted to justify using WMDs on his own people, how better to justify this than to say the other side used them first?

Kurdistan isn't that far away, is it? Nope, Saddam DEFINITELY never had WMDs...

yes, Iraq had chemical weapons, they used them up against the Iranians and the kurds. Syria has been long known to have plenty of their own chemical weapons stockpiled.

I see a bunch of people doing their absolute best to justify our utterly useless war in Iraq and the $3 trillion it will ultimately cost us (interest and the cost of the wounded) along with the 4000+ lives lost and the 20,000+ permanently maimed

Let them kill each other off, We wont have to worry bout them attacking us or The rest of the world feeding them or The rest of the world having to fight their own battles for them.

Yes thats cold, LEAVE us alone an we will leave you alone. KEEP our money here in The states, QUIT giving it away to people that hate us.

How can you have "the Mother of all wars", if you send all your weapons to another country?

MWP38506

There was wide spread speculation that the Iraqi chemical weapons went to Syria in the run up to the war in Iraq, at some point we may know for sure...

Widespread Speculation...

Thank you for your definitive statement of justification for the Bush Administration's war that resulted in the deaths of over 4,000 American Service Members and over 100,000 Iraqis. That's almost as convincing as "Yellow Cake Uranium".

Try something new...try dealing in facts...when we have them.

Okay, how about the fact that many other countries intel agencies agreed with us and also thought that Iraq had WMD's. That's a fact we have and it's still only Bush's war?

C'mon man!

who cares who used it government or rebel.. destroy the weapons so we do not have to deal with it later such as falling into the wrong hands or the government using them. Termite incendiary bombs should do the trick. Just send out a shot notice warning so the area around can be evacuated.

Jon-998022

Okay, how about the fact that many other countries intel agencies agreed with us and also thought that Iraq had WMD's. That's a fact we have and it's still only Bush's war?

How about the fact that Bush claimed there were not Weapons Inspectors in Iraq...while they were there in Iraq?

How about the fact that the internal British memo referred to as the "Downing Street Memo" stated that the Bush Administration was determined to "fix the intelligence around the policy"?

How about the false claim of Yellow Cake Uranium?

How about the the claim by the Administration that if we didn't strike right away there would be a smoking gun (implying Iraqi involvement in 9/11) in the shape of a "mushroom cloud"?

How about the Administration providing Colin Powell with false intelligence to present to the United Nations?

...would you like me to go on? By the way, more Democrats in Congress voted against the Iraq war than for it. And no, it's not just Bush's war. We are all responsible for not stopping him from invading a sovereign nation.

reno 911

Saddam had tons of chemical weapons at one point in time.

Yes, during the Iran-Iraq War. He also used them on the Kurds. According to the UN Inspectors they had been destroyed. No evidence has been found to the contrary.

We watched convoys of trucks going to Syria.

Who knows what they have.

That means slightly less than nothing. Are you trying to claim, in your own unique way, that trucks going into Syria are proof that the Iraqis transferred chemical weapons (under the US Air Force noses (remember the no-fly zone)) and under the UN Inspector's noses? You really are reaching to justify the actions of the Neoconservatives aren't you?

And how about the fact that neither Bush nor Cheney can leave the borders of the US becaue they would be arrested and tried in the World Court? Is the whole world wrong after evidence came to light that the war was based on manufactured and manipulated intel? No matter what Saddam Hussein was, the fact remains that our forces were parked within missile range of Iraq for weeks waiting for the word to let fly. WMD was all smoke and mirrors. There was even no evidence that anything was manufactured since the Iraq-Iran war and there was never any evidence that any of the terrorists involved in 9/11 came from Iraq. Colin Powell was the only honorable man in the entire cabinet. He was manipulated, kept outside the group because he knew what the ground war would be like and advised against it, and he was hand fed a bunch of bullsh*t to present to the UN. He had enough patriotism and loyalty to the COUNTRY to complete his four years as Secty of State because his quitting too soon would point the fingers at the administration. He was the only smart one in the cabinet. Ari Fleischer, too, might have a few spoonfuls of honor. He left his post and the administration citing "personal reasons" without further explanation. My opinion is he could no longer stomach what he was expected to do--lie to the media and the American people--and he could no longer find any innovative ways to do it. And with all the evidence that has been surfacing, there are people still beating the hallelujah drums to justify what was done in Iraq.

Thank God, no WMDs were used!

When US is killing Islamic terrorists in Paki areas with drone strikes, then UN and its agencies remembered that Pakistan is a "sovereign" nation with "proud" people.

Syria is a “sovereign” nation of “proud” people. UN and its agencies have no business to meddle in a sovereign nation like Syria.

But playing in the sand is fun.

But if Obama follows thru on this and doesn't move the line, the lap dogs will accuse him of not getting permission, (which he already has), violating the constitution AGAIN, (never impeached him for the previous ones) and what ever else they can bark about.

It's an arab problem, let them solve it. The western world needs to stay out of this mess. Thanks to Bush/Cheney screw-ups, there is no leader left in the mid-east that can control the other countries. Yes, Saddam was a thug, but he did serve a purpose. So he happend to kill a few of his fellow Muslim's, who cares?

They have been killing each other for many years, why stop now? Let them fight to the finish, less for us to take care of later, and outside of the low informed lap dogs, people realize it.

My prediction: The US will satisfy itself that it is Assad who is beginning to use chemical weapons, and as a result, in keeping with Obama's warning about this being a red line, will start to ship certain elements within the rebels more lethal aid, primarily anti-tank weaponry, but perhaps shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles as well. This will not be done directly, but through Arab intermediaries. Half the American right will criticize the President for involving us in an Arab war, and the other half will criticize him for not doing more.

Stay out of Syria. Let them gas each other to death. Neither side is our friend and BOTH sides are evil.

How long will the United States and world continue to be bystanders? What is it going to take before Assad is taken out? What if they're just testing the world response before a major chemical weapons attack that ends the rebellion?

It always seems like we arrogantly think, "No way that's happening" only to find out that "Yeah, people are really doing that and hundreds have died in mass graves or just died in the streets." After what the Nazis did, why do we find it so hard to believe the level of brutality that people will inflict on innocents?

Not that it really even matters but, like any criminal investigation Who has the most to gain??

Assad may be a power hungry bugger but he is not stupid and he would have to know that using chemicals would inflame international opinion. Nato is itching to get involved, just like in Libya and the Assad government's use of chemical weapons would be justification. So I highly doubt the government did it.

Converse the rebels have been capturing a large number of government bases so likely has access to Chemicals, even if not exactly weaponized chemical weapons, although probably those also, With what Syria already had plus the remainder of Iraq's from just before the US Invasion, you know the very weapons we sold Iraq to use on Iran in the 80s??

Anyway, it would stand to reason that those with the most to gain and least to lose would be the ones to use these weapons first. However I have also seen a few posters propose more False Flag ideas, such as Nato, Israel, or the CIA doing it. For Israel the risk is too high but for Nato or the CIA the result would be the same as it would be for the rebels, an excuse for the Nato to get involved, which is seems is what they have wanted since the failed (by Nato logic) UN vote, Interesting... very interesting....

How long will the United States and world continue to be bystanders? What is it going to take before Assad is taken out? What if they're just testing the world response before a major chemical weapons attack that ends the rebellion?

I'm not willing to have more American boys die in another senseless war in the Middle East.

IT IS NOT OUR FIGHT!

What is it about that, that you don't understand? Are you dense or what.

Yes, Obama needs to kick his butt, or have Hillary do it.

Also, please be careful in the murder capitol of America; Can't your city pass some gun control laws to protect everyone?

Beverly, the people of Syria did not buy into this attempt to overthrow Assad... What is going on there would be a lot like your Chicago gangs taking over the Chicago. Once things started, the St Louis gangs and the Gary gangs and the Detroit gangs would all join in to get a piece of the action.

And you, like a million more like you would flee to Wisconsin

@OldTime - Hillary is no longer sec of state. It would have to be Kerry kicking his butt.

Chicago has some of the most strict gun control laws in the country already and it is not working very well as you can see. If someone is willing to gun down someone (murder, which is illegal), I doubt they will be concerned about a law about gun ownership.

That is like saying that the bank robber gives up robbing banks because they just lowered the speed limit near the bank so he has to drive too slow during his getaway.

Jim....

That is like saying that the bank robber gives up robbing banks because they just lowered the speed limit near the bank so he has to drive too slow during his getaway.

So there are more bank robberies today than say in the early 1900's? We didn't happen to evolve in our ability to protect banks from bank robberies by installing things like camera systems, silent alarms, better vault systems, bullet proof glass, and even armed guards? Do we have armed guards at every bank now? Or did we just use our brains and the tools at our disposal to make it more difficult for bank robbers to get away with the crime in the first place? I don't disagree with you about laws stopping criminals, but was the 6 month old baby, that was just killed, supposed to shoot back to protect itself? How many of the homicides in Chicago have happened to innocent folks living in the suburbs? How many happened on the south side within close proximity of known gang members?

Beverly::: It's not the people that want him gone,it's outside influence like Israel the want Assad gone and the US like puppy dogs fallow instead of taking care of it's own People?

Guns dont recognize State borders.

sleuth23

I don't disagree with you about laws stopping criminals, but was the 6 month old baby, that was just killed, supposed to shoot back to protect itself? How many of the homicides in Chicago have happened to innocent folks living in the suburbs? How many happened on the south side within close proximity of known gang members?

Sleuth, just a quick FYI, and you may have covered this a little later on but, the kid is not expected to 'shoot back', the 6mo old had the misfortune of being a gang bangers kid and daddy was reaping what he sowed, not that it does the child any good at all..

Beverly in Chicago

Assad can't get the hint. The people want him out. He needs to go.

Beverly, according to you and left wing American media 'the Syrian people want Assad gone. However other international press outfits, that are honest, will show you that he has support from the people in Syria at least some. We tend to over simplify things in American media these days.
It is much the same there as it is here, In America, Obama does not have the complete support of the American citizens, he has some support and that plus the way our system works means he is in charge. The same in Syria, Assad has support from some groups, others want him out. To say "the people do not want Assad, he needs to go" is at best an uninformed misunderstanding of the situation.
One can not have a civil war with no support for one side, that is not how things work.

Yawn

Perhaps when Obama went a 'snoozin he left Mr. Perez in charge...

@navyvet

And was Bush drunk when over 70 American's got killed at embassy's when he was POTUS? Since most of them were minorities, bush didn't see any reason to help.

You really are a little lap doggie, aren't you? arf arf arf poodle.

@sally-ann...your vagina is showing

"chicken hawk" you lack of testicals is showing.

navyvet98

The Benghazi attackers were obama's people. Thats why he went back to bed while four Americans were killed. Guess since they were all white people obama didn't see any reason to help.

And George W. Bush slept just fine while over 4,000 American Service Members died so he could be a wartime president...but then Teapublicans do have a short memory don't they!

Hey navyvet so you think having four white American Infidels(how they look at us) isolated in a Building, in a region that hates us, was a good thing? I mean WTF were they there? And if you want to blame O, you have to blame bush for over 6,000 deaths. If you are going to TRY and blame O, blame bush, too....idiot. Navy, figures!

SallyAnn-4595694

@navyvet

And was Bush drunk when over 70 American's got killed at embassy's when he was POTUS? Since most of them were minorities, bush didn't see any reason to help.

You really are a little lap doggie, aren't you? arf arf arf poodle.

Sally Ann, you really are a bit of a stupid tool hypocrite aren't you??? You pull things form the past to attack a poster by attacking a past president, regardless of whether it matters in comparison to the present, if both are true does it bring the dead back?? You pretend you are so rational and everyone else is a 'lap dog' when you reach the end of your leash in a second to attack what you see as the attacker with the same B.S. you call B.S when t hat say it.

How about you pull your head out of your butt, put on you big girl panties and actually think like a rational adult?? It may be a bit hard for you so I will start you off.

IF Bush allowed 70 minority American's to die in some embassy when he was president so he could get drunk, (I assume you are alluding to the 2 embassy bombings in Africa???) as you so ceaselessly claim is all o.k. now and just fine since Obama allowed all white people to die in the Benghazi attack as Navy vet claims??

I understand for your posts that you are not that bright, and likely either a partisan hack or a paid team obama media watcher but, I would submit to you as the voice of reason that even if both are completely true one does not excuse the other and both would be 100 wrong........

Chris, you reserved your criticizm for SallyAnn only, and NOT Navyvet98. Why? Because you agree with Navyvet98 mostly? Sounds like it to me, pal.

I'm a Navy Vet too, and I think Navyvet98 is full of sh!t, with his comment, to start with. Two wrongs don't make it right, but I don't believe SallyAnn or Navyvet98 in either case against Bush or Obama.

As an Independent, I see both sides' opinion and agree with FACTS only.

Definitely an interesting time to be an Israeli, eh?

Wallace, you are right. Any direct overt intervention by us would be HUGE propaganda for our enemies.

Any weapons we send would eventually be used against us or our allies.

Our Muslim friends need to stop funding their cousins killing each other...

Sally, you for one is one of the biggest Lap Dog's here, other then The Piggy, American @!$%#...er American Girl, Trust and so on.

Ah little Sallyann, same old tired and rather sad and pathetic B.S spewing for your filthy mouth again little silly... You do not know the players or even understand the game but you know the name obamma and you love him so yo attack with the same tired lines eh when anyone you disagree with uses his name??

See if this reads like your morning instructions:

Find someone bad mouthing the dear leader, call them names, ridicule their comment, do not actually debate the comment, just ridicule it. Be nasty, get in their face, dredge up the past but, never ever debate the merits of their comment in open forum.

I do hope you are at least getting paid you silly little support poodle........

david1262

Has Michelle talked about Syria ?

deerhunter --- judging by her looks she probably got bigger ones than her husband

David, are you ready to go?

@edgewatervince ---always ready to go 22 yrs in and counting. May not like the guy, but I will always respect the Commander in Chief position. Are you ready???????? something tells me you're not

I can see maybe having to go to war in Iran someday, but Syria not so much. We don't need to send our kids into another war to get killed for nothing.

just take the weapons out.. pretty simple and i don't mind if we lose a few drones..

Uh...yeah....Assad = Hitler. Like comparing apples to raccoons.

We who? America has spent enough lives and our money over there (middle east). There are other countries in the world and if they want to send there young men off to die and spend a bunch of money and accomplish nothing and have them hate you, weellll go ahead. We have already done our part. It's not our fight.

Actually WWII started in 1939 when Germany invaded Poland.

JustaGrunt,

If you want to get really technical, WWII started when Japan invaded China in 1937.

Treaty of Versailles, 1919, anyone? Hitler did have France sign the surrender in the same passenger train car, didn't he?

And WW1 was realy never completed and the Jap's were the responsible party of both wars!

When and if Isreal is attacked, one Arab country "nuked" will bring middle east peace.

Pragmatic,

The Japanese invasion of China did not really start WWII, since it was still contained within Asia at the time. when Hitler invaded Poland, that event brought England and France into the European war which started WWII. It was not until 27 September 1940 when Japan/Germany/Italy signed their pack did the Axis Powers come into being.

My turn Wi, how was Japan responsible for WWI, the fought on our side during that conflict.

Davey,

you are right in 1940 Hitler dictated that the French capitulation take place at Compiegne, a forest
north of Paris. This is the same spot where twenty-two years earlier the Germans had signed the Armistice ending World War I. Hitler intends to disgrace the French and avenge the German defeat. To further deepen the humiliation, he ordered that the signing ceremony take place in the same railroad car that hosted the earlier surrender.

And what PhD program are you pursuing, sir?

There was also proof of under ground rail roads that stretched the length of Iraq to Syria. I do believe Iraq had WMD"s and had plenty of time to move them to Syria. Why else would they have made the inspectors wait a couple of weeks to let them in?

Or how much went to N Korea - N VietNam or to Cheves

Fed Up-2683606

Hmm, Clinton (Bill) said that there were WMDs in Iraq in '98.

You are a Republican, why are you quoting Clinton...you all impeached him for lying and now he's your truthful authority?

Saddam's brother, Chemical Ali gassed Kurds in Northern Iraq.

So what's your point? He gassed them 3 years before the Gulf War (1988). No one disputes he had chemical weapons. That's why the UN Weapons Inspectors.

Reid and Pelosi voted to fund the Iraq war based on intel saying there were WMDs.

And that is exactly one of the issues regarding the former Administration's cherry picking and "fixing" the intelligence around the policy. Who do you suppose briefs Congress on Intelligence?

We gave Saddam over a year to hide his cache. Now rebels just across the border from Iraq apparently get access to a WMD...OMG, another Libtard propaganda lie bites the dust!

The general consensus from what I read seems to be that the Syrians developed their own chemical weapons based on technology provide by the Russians. But by all means...you and your fellow RWNJs should definitely go with the Iraq theory.

11 years....11 YEARS. Does that stuff even have an 11 year shelf-life?

Sarin nerve gas has a shelf life of weeks to months. The Iraqi stockpile as of the early 90's was weeks due to the impurities in manufacturing.

Tabun is slightly more stable, but not more than a few months.

Mustard gas, on the other hand, is stable for decades and even shells from WWII can be a hazard if found today.

Chlorine gas? Sodium Hypochlorite powder? All manner of other industrial chemicals? We don't even have independent confirmation that chemical weapons were used.

Saddam's stash? Who knows--we certainly gave him enough notice to convoy his weapons outtathere.

You know, you people on here might, just might sound a bit more intelligent if you would STOP CALLING NAMES . (You know who you are)

Is it any wonder why/how our own government can't get anything done, with you folks voting and spewing, geesh!!!!!!!

I just ignore most people here since they have no life. They are looking for free hand outs from their hero's in Washington DC.

I wish people would be notified when the others select "Ignore this Author". It would inform them that they are the only ones who are reading their idiotic & repetitive posts. Such as now as I make that selection on SallyAnn-4595694.

And what should Obama do? Start a war? get real its past the point where we can do anything

constructive for Syrian people

We all know Obama will do nothing. He is just a giant wind bag. Assad's chemical weapons stock piles, if the haven't already, will fall into the hands of those that want to kill US and be used in a city near you in the not too distant future. And, of course, Mr. Obama will try to lay the blame on anyone or anything other than himself. Probably J. Kerry or Hillary.

Yep, I'm sure the west is brimming with excitement over getting into yet another pointless conflict that will never end and determine nothing for a people who will condemn the great satan for bothering to help the first chance they get. If Obama has any real balls, he'll continue to remove troops already in a pointless conflict that will never end and determine nothing for a people who have already condemned the great satan for bothering to help, period, and ignore the "Damned if he does and damned if he doesn't" types who don't care about the outcome as much as saving their own self-centered face.

Michelle has his balls in her purse!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sounds like Obama isn't the only "wind bag" here.

the story said a scud missle was fired by the government . So why would anyone insert terrorists had some part of it ?

Hey didn't Obama supply money and weapons to the rebels?

You forget he just caused the military to be defunded with his sequester.

The only quoted account from a civilian was ""The Free Syrian Army hit us with a rocket, we smelled something and then everyone got dizzy and fell down." Duh, that's not Assad. This event was engineered by someone who wants to ratchet up the conflict, as someone said much earlier.

Assad should be taken down by Arabs, captured and sent to the Hague to stand trial.

While Obama is in the neighborhood, they can do a two-fer.