Getting rather serious this Syria thing.

[matone]

Peter Ford pretty much nails it with his simple,commonsense assessment ot the situation for me.

[Scully]

41 minutes ago, Hamster said:

The outside forces that you don't believe exist. 

That’s no answer. You can’t keep claiming there are ‘outside forces’ but then fail to name them. This is why people fail to take you seriously; I could claim all manner of things by all manner of ‘outside forces’ without naming them, but not if I wanted to be taken seriously. 

You claim that to be exposed to military grade nerve agents was a ‘test’, but you can’t be implying it was a test by the Russians as you claim they possibly weren’t responsible, so are you implying it was a ‘test’ by the British?

Ill ask again; If neither of these then who? 

[Rewulf]

3 minutes ago, Scully said:

That’s no answer. You can’t keep claiming there are ‘outside forces’ but then fail to name them. This is why people fail to take you seriously; I could claim all manner of things by all manner of ‘outside forces’ without naming them, but not if I wanted to be taken seriously. 

You claim that to be exposed to military grade nerve agents was a ‘test’, but you can’t be implying it was a test by the Russians as you claim they possibly weren’t responsible, so are you implying it was a ‘test’ by the British?

Ill ask again; If neither of these then who? 

Whether its an 'outside' force that is unknown, or a governmental power, that is known, I personally wouldnt like to say.

There are 2 or 3  possible scenarios at work here.
1. Its Russia, they want war, they dont care about about the US or NATO ,so they are going to poison and bomb to their hearts content, and be damned to the rest of the world.
If it leads to nuclear confrontation then so be it ,Mr bashars our friend, and gives us a foothold in the ME.

2. Its the US ,they want war, they dont care about Russia or any of its allies, and they are going to bomb Syria back to the stone age, and anyone who stands with them, including Russia, and if it leads to WW3 and nuclear confrontation, so be it, no one gases Syrians while we have something to say about it.

3 ? The unknown element, is manipulating one or both powers to further its own aims, be it a group of massive industrial corporations, and/or some shadowy SPECTRE style organisation (dont laugh !) zionist Jews who want their hostile neighbour neutralised ? 

Again ,who profits, you ? me ? I think not.
Is it just a point of circumstance ? Did we get really here because the western powers really have an issue with chemical weapon use?
Is it that they feel being blown apart or losing limbs to bombs and rockets they have supplied to the 'free Syrians' to be less barbaric than dying from chlorine or mustard gas ?

Does it even matter anymore ? The carrier group is inbound and ready to rock and roll.

One interesting point- Ms May has asked for 'proof' there was a chemical attack before she commits to military action ! 
And Mr blair says 'bomb them all, kill kill !' 

[Hamster]

47 minutes ago, Scully said:

That’s no answer. You can’t keep claiming there are ‘outside forces’ but then fail to name them. This is why people fail to take you seriously; I could claim all manner of things by all manner of ‘outside forces’ without naming them, but not if I wanted to be taken seriously. 

You claim that to be exposed to military grade nerve agents was a ‘test’, but you can’t be implying it was a test by the Russians as you claim they possibly weren’t responsible, so are you implying it was a ‘test’ by the British?

Ill ask again; If neither of these then who? 

Firstly I'd like to unreservedly apologise if I gave you the impression it mattered to me whether you take me seriously or not. Secondly perhaps some things are better left unsaid as there is overwhelming evidence in any case as to what or whom could be benefitting from demonising Russia. FWIW - no I don't think the British were behind the military grade malarky, the thought is something of a flattery to think they alone could pull such a thing unaided (or rather, uninstructed  ) they are of course by definition complicit though because at the highest levels of intelligence (not the same thing as government) it's quite inconceivable that they don't know who it/they actually was/were. 

The Empires agenda's are being disrupted something chronic, people and even the deep state do erratic, deranged things at times of desperation, war is almost always started by false flags. 

[DanBettin]

2 minutes ago, Hamster said:

Firstly I'd like to unreservedly apologise if I gave you the impression it mattered to me whether you take me seriously or not. Secondly perhaps some things are better left unsaid as there is overwhelming evidence in any case as to what or whom could be benefitting from demonising Russia. FWIW - no I don't think the British were behind the military grade malarky, the thought is something of a flattery to think they alone could pull such a thing unaided (or rather, uninstructed  ) they are of course by definition complicit though because at the highest levels of intelligence (not the same thing as government) it's quite inconceivable that they don't know who it/they actually was/were. 

The Empires agenda's are being disrupted something chronic, people and even the deep state do erratic, deranged things at times of desperation, war is almost always started by false flags. 

Is it top secret?

[Smokersmith]

I'm glad I'm blessed with an uncomplicated mind .... all sorts of stresses and tensions here !!

[Hamster]

7 minutes ago, DanBettin said:

Is it top secret?

On the contrary, just needs one to spot the bleeding obvious. 

Edited April 11, 2018 by Hamster

[Scully]

Apology accepted, though unnecessary as it is obvious by your unflinching desperation to convince us that we are all sheep of a flock blindly congregating at the behest of ‘outside forces’, that you do in fact want to be taken seriously, which we perhaps could do if you were more convincing by actually telling us who they are. 

You obviously have a very low opinion of our government, which is fair enough; but it is an opinion you also seem to share of your fellow PW’ers, which again is fair enough, but I can assure you it doesn’t even compare to the opinion some of us have of you and your incessant claims to know something we don’t but won’t share it. It’s time to put up or shut up. Who are the ‘outside forces’ you’re so familiar with?

6 minutes ago, Hamster said:

On the contrary, just needs one to spot the bleeding obvious. 

And there you go again! Spell out ‘the bleeding obvious’ for us lesser mortals! 

[DanBettin]

16 minutes ago, Hamster said:

On the contrary, just needs one to spot the bleeding obvious. 

Is it vegans? I can't stand vegans. 

[Smokersmith]

People with hats at a 'jaunty angle' ... ?

[Hamster]

19 minutes ago, Scully said:

Apology accepted, though unnecessary as it is obvious by your unflinching desperation to convince us that we are all sheep of a flock blindly congregating at the behest of ‘outside forces’, that you do in fact want to be taken seriously, which we perhaps could do if you were more convincing by actually telling us who they are. 

You obviously have a very low opinion of our government, which is fair enough; but it is an opinion you also seem to share of your fellow PW’ers, which again is fair enough, but I can assure you it doesn’t even compare to the opinion some of us have of you and your incessant claims to know something we don’t but won’t share it. It’s time to put up or shut up. Who are the ‘outside forces’ you’re so familiar with?

And there you go again! Spell out ‘the bleeding obvious’ for us lesser mortals! 

I don't have a particularly low opinion even of those PW'ers who are somewhat bereft of common sense and the ability of logical thought, it takes all sorts and to some extent it's an indication of the power of msm and brainwashing. Now, to have people whose opinion of me is unprintable is something of a badge of honour for me, trust me on that. 

[Westward]

Americans have a deep seated belief - albeit misplaced - that they "won" independence from an "oppressive regime" and created a free democratic society by force of arms. I'm convinced that this affects much of their foreign policy and drives them to intervene in countries where they're usually not wanted and where they usually make things far worse than they would have otherwise been.

To this day they remain incapable of realising that much of the world thinks that their basic attitude is : "We stand for democracy and God help anyone who gets in our way!"

I remember many years ago an ex army officer and WW2 veteran from the middle east campaigns saying that there are countries where democracy will never work and no matter how much we despise their regimes, the best we can do is leave them to get on with running their own affairs.

Syria is a basket case. Russia is in there because their economy is tanking and Assad is their biggest customer plus which they enjoy rattling America's ribs, America is in there because they think the rebel groups are freedom fighters and Russia is supporting a war criminal, Turkey is in there to bring down the Kurds and so it goes on and on and on and on. I don't know who brought down Daesh. Maybe the Kurdish militia, maybe the Russians, probably a combination but it certainly hasn't helped the underlying situation very much.

Ultimately who did what and to whom is largely academic because what really matters is how the hell is it ever going to get fixed?

 

[Dave-G]

41 minutes ago, Hamster said:

On the contrary, just needs one to spot the bleeding obvious. 

Seems to not be bleeding obvious though.

[Hamster]

1 minute ago, Dave-G said:

Seems to not be bleeding obvious though.

See above post ^^

[DanBettin]

1 minute ago, Hamster said:

See above post ^^

Entirely pointless exercise to elude to something you're not happy to be clear about mid-discussion. It's on par with "I've got something to tell you but I can't".

[sierra 11]

" Ill ask again; If neither of these then who?"

 

HIm >>>>  ..................Wibble.

[Zapp]

Let's not derail this any further please. If people want a debate about conspiracies etc please start your own thread.

[Hamster]

5 minutes ago, Westward said:

Americans have a deep seated belief - albeit misplaced - that they "won" independence from an "oppressive regime" and created a free democratic society by force of arms. I'm convinced that this affects much of their foreign policy and drives them to intervene in countries where they're usually not wanted and where they usually make things far worse than they would have otherwise been.

To this day they remain incapable of realising that much of the world thinks that their basic attitude is : "We stand for democracy and God help anyone who gets in our way!"

I remember many years ago an ex army officer and WW2 veteran from the middle east campaigns saying that there are countries where democracy will never work and no matter how much we despise their regimes, the best we can do is leave them to get on with running their own affairs.

Syria is a basket case. Russia is in there because their economy is tanking and Assad is their biggest customer plus which they enjoy rattling America's ribs, America is in there because they think the rebel groups are freedom fighters and Russia is supporting a war criminal, Turkey is in there to bring down the Kurds and so it goes on and on and on and on. I don't know who brought down Daesh. Maybe the Kurdish militia, maybe the Russians, probably a combination but it certainly hasn't helped the underlying situation very much.

Ultimately who did what and to whom is largely academic because what really matters is how the hell is it ever going to get fixed?

 

Many good points but Russia's economy is not tanking, fake news, they don't want Assad to fall because one of their only military bases in the world is there and they know Iran will come after Syria and since they share borders they cannot allow Western funded Sunni Islamist Wahabi terrorists that close, murica has 900 military bases. America is there to fulfil a pledge made before the start of the Iraq war to destroy 7 countries (all on record and video), they fund anyone who will fight Assad, Saudi Arabia is their right hand man, Turkey hates Kurdish independence but is primarily there to see if there's any land that can be stolen/permanently occupied while nobody is looking, Isis was destroyed by Iran/Syria using indispensable Russian cover and might (murica would have bombed and prevented this otherwise), Isis was conceived and created by murica/SA and other "allies". 

[JRDS]

2 hours ago, Rewulf said:

Whether its an 'outside' force that is unknown, or a governmental power, that is known, I personally wouldnt like to say.

There are 2 or 3  possible scenarios at work here.
1. Its Russia, they want war, they dont care about about the US or NATO ,so they are going to poison and bomb to their hearts content, and be damned to the rest of the world.
If it leads to nuclear confrontation then so be it ,Mr bashars our friend, and gives us a foothold in the ME.

2. Its the US ,they want war, they dont care about Russia or any of its allies, and they are going to bomb Syria back to the stone age, and anyone who stands with them, including Russia, and if it leads to WW3 and nuclear confrontation, so be it, no one gases Syrians while we have something to say about it.

3 ? The unknown element, is manipulating one or both powers to further its own aims, be it a group of massive industrial corporations, and/or some shadowy SPECTRE style organisation (dont laugh !) zionist Jews who want their hostile neighbour neutralised ? 

Again ,who profits, you ? me ? I think not.
Is it just a point of circumstance ? Did we get really here because the western powers really have an issue with chemical weapon use?
Is it that they feel being blown apart or losing limbs to bombs and rockets they have supplied to the 'free Syrians' to be less barbaric than dying from chlorine or mustard gas ?

Does it even matter anymore ? The carrier group is inbound and ready to rock and roll.

One interesting point- Ms May has asked for 'proof' there was a chemical attack before she commits to military action ! 
And Mr blair says 'bomb them all, kill kill !' 

Seems the traitorous bitch has decided to go without the proof bit or Parliament, what a suprise. The Salisbury farce makes perfect sense now with the added bonus she deflected attention from her total sell out on Brexit the week after.  She will now use Salisbury as an excuse not to go to Parliament. 

Edited April 11, 2018 by JRDS

[Scully]

Ah well....never mind eh! ?

[old'un]

Whether its  outside influences, brainwashing or anything else I think mankind is doomed to destroy its self, whether it happens in a day or 10, 20 or 30 years it will happen.

[DanBettin]

32 minutes ago, Zapp said:

Let's not derail this any further please. If people want a debate about conspiracies etc please start your own thread.

why? can threads not go off on a tangent?

[old'un]

26 minutes ago, DanBettin said:

why? can threads not go off on a tangent?

I didn’t think it had, but what do I know.

[Zapp]

There is going off at a tangent and going round and round in ever more meaningless circles.  This has been doing the latter for some time to the detriment of the original discussion.

[DanBettin]

2 minutes ago, Zapp said:

There is going off at a tangent and going round and round in ever more meaningless circles.  This has been doing the latter for some time to the detriment of the original discussion.

So? Shouldn't you let a discussion evolve? It's a discussion board. Not all threads are sensible and stay on topic.