Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
PSU: Accepting "since 2003" quotes since 2003.
Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
Home | Forum | Chat | Wiki | Social | AGN | PS2 Stats |
|
|
View Poll Results: Whom to believe? | |||
Pro-Invasion people | 2 | 18.18% | |
Anti-Invasion people | 2 | 18.18% | |
Trust noone and you'll be safe | 7 | 63.64% | |
Voters: 11. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
2013-09-19, 02:19 PM | [Ignore Me] #46 | |||
Private
|
it is also highly unlikely that Assad's forces would simply abandon a stash of these weapons in terrain controlled by rebels or about to be overrun by reblels. But that is up for debate, it is certainly possible for the rebels to have their hands on a stash of these weapons but that is no certainty. As for the target, why would rebels deploy a chemical strike in one of the territories controlled by them? This could potentialy be explained by infighting but is less likely than a strike by the official army since these posess means better suited to deploy such and attack and it is undeniably in their best intrest to strike at territory controlled by their enemies even tough there is a remote fucked up possibility that some messed up and borderline insane rebels targeted themselves in order to provoke a response from the western world. generaly I believe that Assad's forces are to blame for this attack, and despite the distinct possibilty that the western world have multiple intrests in the region, fact remains that chemical weapons are deployed, one of the most horrible weapns know to man and a death i would rather not die if I had the choice. It is one of the few means of warfare that is enteirily illegal in the international community and it is for a bloody good reason. It is not a huge step to deploy nuclear weapons once the step is taken to use chemical and biological weapons. Once these weapons are deployed, you know things are propperly fucked up, shooting civilians or even soldiers with a rifle, tank, artillery or any other conventional weapon is already a messed up thing to do as a human being, but weapons like this? If the soldiers responsible for this are not an emotinal wreck in the knowledge of just what they have done, they are litle better than the worst of the SS during the second world war. In fact, this is little different than what Hitler and the Nazis did to the ****, blacks, handicaped, etc in the conentration camps, the only difference being that the victims are not imprissoned and a lot of them are activly fighting back. As for the point of chemical weapons, the reasoning is that it kills organic beings over a very large area, huge when compared to conventional explosives and extremely more likely to decimate a city's population, leaves the buildings intact and utterly shatters the morale of enemy troops and civilians unfortunate enough to have to pay witness to the sheer carnage of such a weapon. The pilot that drops the bomb does not see the results first hand, the survivors do, and I do not believe I am strong enough mentaly to bear witness to such an event and ever recover my emotional ballance. It would haunt me for the rest of my life. So I am for the invasion, Assad's regime has done some seriously fucked up things and that should come to a halt. Altough it is more than likely that Assad's successor will probably be as bad, if not worse if the rebels take power, a clear message has to go out, this cannot be tollerated, this cannot be tollerated and a world where someone gets away with this is barely more civilised than when we were bashing each others head in with stones and had barely discovered fire. The argument goes that Syria is not Obama's juristiction, but then again so was Nazi Germany and there are few who deny that Nazi germany was pretty fucked up, even when the princple of "the victor writes the history" is taken in considderation, we are so long past that event now that we are getting a less biased view year by year but still agree than what the Nazi's did to ethnical minorities was bad and borderline evil. So by these arguments and explainations I declare myself in favour of the invasion plans |
|||
|
2013-09-19, 03:40 PM | [Ignore Me] #47 | ||
First Lieutenant
|
Not our problem, not our war. If Assad is such a villain, it is up to the people of Syria to depose him, not FSA terrorists that are funded and backed by US and Israel (and apparently Saudi Arabia, who allegedly sent 1,200 death row inmates to join FSA forces).
__________________
|
||
|
2013-09-20, 12:07 AM | [Ignore Me] #48 | |||||
Sergeant Major
|
Here's a few links to get you started: http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/09...-had-sarin-gas https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HCJ...e_gdata_player http://www.mintpressnews.com/witness...eapons/168135/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5kda1KhqlU http://www.infowars.com/5-lies-inven...weapons-attack
Ok, you personally go fight it then. Please be sure to go to a site like liveleak and do a search of some of the videos of your new "Syrian rebel" allies have proudly put out. I'm not posting links as it's stuff that will make most people feel like throwing up, but you huller need to see it.
Last edited by Helwyr; 2013-09-20 at 12:17 AM. |
|||||
|
2013-09-20, 03:32 AM | [Ignore Me] #49 | |||
Private
|
And yes, I know about some of the stuff the rebels have done, which makes me just as sick as the deployment of chemical weapons but for us to just stand by idly while people are being massacred on such a scale, especialy with weapons like these. While I do agree that there needs to be far more evidence as to whom launched the attack, we shouldn't just stand by and let it happen, which is at the core of my arguement. While I admit that I am lacking in keeping track of the developments of this conflict and am generaly poorly informed on the matter of chemical weapons that does not automaticaly invalidate my concerns over the deployment of these weapons. Personaly I find it more likely for Assad's forces to be the culprit of these attacks seeing as how their forces have both a greater intrest in a strike on the affected regios and a greater fammiliarity with the operation of these weapons. Despite the fact that some of the rebels (which are not in any way my allies as you implied) are guilty of despiceable acts and crimes against humanity, and I wouldn't for the life of me wish to live under their reign, we cannot just stand by on the sidelines when chemical weapons are deployed. This should be thouroughly investigated and when clear proof is provided as to whom is the culprit they shouldn't just get away with "just give us those weapons and everything will be ok". I do not deny that to act now without evidence would be rash and some would say immoral my opinion is that we should intervene the moment such evidence is found. And I know that the US droped some messed up shit on vietnam but one should keep in mind that thresholds are crossed in syria, and that the conflict could drasicay escalate beyond this point. The core of my argument is not that we should just rush straight into a war but rather that in my eyes the arguments that Assad's forces are guilty are easier to believe and hold more merit than those that the rebels did it. And That Millitary intervention is a nessecity now that chemical weapons are deployed. To just let this happen while we stand on the sidelines, or even worse, to let the culprit get away with it would be highly moraly objectionable. This isn't about helping the rebels achieve victory, but to put an end to this drastic excalation. While I agree that the obama administration should present any evidence they have against the Assad regime to the internattional community before striking against Syria I firmly believe that once that evidence is provided and proven to be legit, a millitary strike is the right course of action. I do not condone the actions of anyone involved in this conflict, least of all the rebels, but a peacefull solution is no longer an option should appropriate evidence be presented as to whom is guilty of using chemical weapons. If we do not intend to punish those guilty of using them what is the point of making them illegal in the first place? |
|||
|
2013-09-20, 03:47 AM | [Ignore Me] #50 | |||
Private
|
On the other hand, both sides have sunk deeply, very deeply in fact, so there is the remote possibility that the rebels deployed gas in their own territory (which would remove the need for a delivery system) either because of infighting between rival rebel factions or to provoke the western world into a reaction, which would be so messed up I cannot tell which scenario I find more appalling. |
|||
|
2013-09-20, 08:39 AM | [Ignore Me] #51 | |||
Lieutenant General
|
So the lack of delivery system is not an argument anymore: someone who had a delivery system used said system. Any source for the rumour of Assad's brother giving the order? It's quite possible, the Assad family controls a lot of high ranking posts in the country. Last edited by Figment; 2013-09-20 at 08:40 AM. |
|||
|
2013-09-20, 02:23 PM | [Ignore Me] #52 | |||||
Sergeant Major
|
We are also not the World's policeman. I'm not sure what country you're from huller, but the US is broke and the majority of the people and especially those that have to actually fight these wars are sick and tired of them... Especially when nothing really good results from all the blood, tears, and $$$ that is spent. If you think "punishing" Assad is so important are you then willing to go over there yourself and risk life and limb? How about selling your home, car, and any other assets you might have to pay for a bomb or two? |
|||||
|
|
Bookmarks |
|
|