News: US prepared to act on Syria without UK support - Page 3

Albany Guest

Quote:

Originally posted by UAE

They can't, they have interest in all of this.

Im with this attack, the things that happened in the past weeks were extremely horrible. Assad giving Hitler a run for his money.

Oh, of course, cause killing a few hundred civilians in your own country in one attack with chemical weapons is just the same as invading multiple countries and undertaking a campaign of Genocide against one specific religious minority, and all in all, being responsible for about 40 MILLION deaths. Yup, the too are completely comparable.......

Assad is a brutal dictator, but comparing him to Hitler is hyperbole of the worst kind and honestly an insult to other people's intelligence.

Honey

Quote:

Originally posted by Chris191

WW3 here we come

Why do people keeping saying stupid **** like this?

Did WW3 happen when we attacked Iraq? Did WW3 happen when we got involved in the Balkans? Did WW3 happen when we attacked Iraq the second time? Did WW3 happen when we attacked Afghanistan? Did WW3 happen when we attacked Libya? No, so stfu if you don't know anything about the situation. Iran doesn't have the capacity to successfully attack the US, let alone start a world war.

teresaguidice

Quote:

Originally posted by GagaChicago

Wait were they threatening us or the UK?

it's not about them threatening us. the syrian government orchestrated a chemical attack on their own people and the usa, uk, and france are talking about intervening

Hollywood.

Quote:

Originally posted by Scandal & Media

Hopefully Canada stays out too since we've been more loyal to the UK.

Didn't the US also say they would attack Iran for supposed nuclear weapons?

-----

Does anyone know when this is supposed to happen if it does

Harper's has been kissing America's ass for years. I doubt Canada will get invovled though.

Troye

I can't support anything the US does anymore. Even if Syria is supposedly using chemical weapons on its citizens, the outcome of Russia/China etc intervening is not worth it. I rather we sacrificed the needs of the few for the many. Especially if WW3 (however ridiculously overdramatic it sounds) would arise out of this.

This is probably not a very popular opinion. But remember that there's been terrible acts committed that the media has yet to cover; so this isn't something we should just jump at recklessly for sake of moral outrage. It needs to be proven that the action won't cost the US or any other nation dearly.

SupahBass05

Why though? WHY? How sure are people that the chemical attacks have been committed by the Syrian government and not some 3rd party group?

dannylex

Oh America, your day will come some day.

seanoh

Quote:

Originally posted by Honey

Why do people keeping saying stupid **** like this?

Did WW3 happen when we attacked Iraq? Did WW3 happen when we got involved in the Balkans? Did WW3 happen when we attacked Iraq the second time? Did WW3 happen when we attacked Afghanistan? Did WW3 happen when we attacked Libya? No, so stfu if you don't know anything about the situation. Iran doesn't have the capacity to successfully attack the US, let alone start a world war.

But WW3 actually could start from this... Russia and China weren't breathing down America's necks when those invasions happened. I'm against this, as America is using propaganda. America provided the rebels with weapons, and now they're framing the government so they have an excuse to fight and drag Iran into this.

--

I read somewhere that the attacks are being planned for Saturday till Wednesday, when Obama will meet with the Russian president.

teresaguidice

Quote:

Originally posted by SupahBass05

Why though? WHY? How sure are people that the chemical attacks have been committed by the Syrian government and not some 3rd party group?

we don't but its the logical assumption

Secretary of State John Kerry made the case Monday. "We know that the Syrian regime maintains custody of these chemical weapons," Kerry said. "We know that the Syrian regime has the capacity to do this with rockets. We know that the regime has been determined to clear the opposition from those very places where the attacks took place. And with our own eyes, we have all of us become witnesses." On Tuesday, White House spokesman Jay Carney reiterated the point, saying that "anyone who approaches this logically" would conclude that Assad is responsible.

teresaguidice

Quote:

Originally posted by seanoh

But WW3 actually could start from this... Russia and China weren't breathing down America's necks when those invasions happened. I'm against this, as America is using propaganda. America provided the rebels with weapons, and now they're framing the government so they have an excuse to fight and drag Iran into this.

--

I read somewhere that the attacks are being planned for Saturday till Wednesday, when Obama will meet with the Russian president.

no it absolutely can't start from this. usa bombs syria, in retaliation iran would maybe attack israel, america would give israel $$$ but wouldn't get into combat with them. that's about it. china and russia might support and arm syria but they aren't getting into actual war with america, that's ridiculous

Auris

Can my country listen to Ron Paul for even two seconds?

DaXoXz

Idc as long as US wins and "Party in the USA" get that boost.

Now that i got your attention. Nicolas Maduro, the "president" of Venezuela, said that US attacking Syria has to do with an assassination plan to him coming from the US government. What do you guys think?

.:Allen:.

This is not going well.

ChainDolla

http://www.latimes.com/news/la-fg-wn...,4025128.story

welp the chinese are chiming in too

also, there has been an attack on school using incendiary shells (napalm) which are prohibited by UN's resolution and it's usage on civilians is classified as war crime. The attack killed 10 children and left the rest of them with severe burn injuries

http://www.scotsman.com/news/world/s...rted-1-3067065

Adir

Stop worrying.
Obama knows what he's doing.

highwind44029

Quote:

Originally posted by DaXoXz

Idc as long as US wins and "Party in the USA" get that boost.

I see we have our priorities in place.