This thread is like............world war 3.



Edited by iridium1010: 3/3/2014 02:42:07 PM

1. relevance?
2. yes, it was entirely based on the content of the residue rather than the origin of the attack

they proved a gas attack, they didnt prove who did it

the wrong questions were asked
or if you are the taskforce, ask only the questions relevant to the outcome you want to receive

I don't see how that negates what I was saying.

You should probably both read up a bit more on the joint history of both countries, I think. They've barely ever been part of separate nation states from the middle ages until the 1990's, of course they're demographically intertwined.

You should watch this BBC video.

Of course these guys are a minority, but the interim government also passed a bill revoking the rights of Ukraine’s regions to make Russian an official language alongside Ukrainian. That law was quickly revoked, but yeah there's enough evidence to see why they would have concerned about their safety and their rights.

On the other hand:



Of course, you can't prove at what time each photo was taken, etc.

1 - Is there any conceivable difference between Syria and Australia?
2 - Have you read the findings of the UN Commission charged with investigating Ghouta?

exposed the hypocrisy of your position again, yes

furthermore, Russia is also a trading partner with Syria. they had long standing pre-existing contracts to sell them arms.
As for the gas attacks in Syria, there is no evidence to support this was perpetrated by the government. its merely speculation from sources connected with the militant terrorist rebels.

:oops: :oops: :oops: You've done it again.

Russia is allied with Syria in the same way the USA is allied with Australia
Russia has a navel port in Syria at Tartus, as they also have at Sevastopol in Crimea, Ukraine
why wouldnt they want to protect their military interests?

how is this any different from Australia hosting numerous bases and troops of the USA?

Exactly right. Necessary pretense for an action planned in advance.

In the 1930s under Stalin I believe, but will stand corrected. Russians have definitely put down roots in the place but the area's ethnic mix isn't up for discussion as no one is threatening the Russians of the area. Any attempt by Putin to paint the invasion as being the protection of the ethnic Russians is nothing more than a smokescreen. It's a land grab, pure and simple.

Yeah. Biggest demographic change has been the expulsion of the Tatar.

Why have you said nothing about the regular arms shipments Russia and Iran have transferred to Syria? In point of fact; Iran has sent troops to Syria with little or no protest on your part.

Recently as in al- Qusayr, and Ghouta. No word of protest at the use of gas against civilians either.

No I think the ethnic balance was roughly the same before Hodomor, and even before the formation of the USSR.

so that would be a yes
define 'recently'?

The US provided very little support to the Syrian opposition until recently.

question, did the western interests tied directly to the United States provide support to the Syrian opposition in the forms of arms shipments or not?

1/10 terrible troll :lol:

-PB

You clearly know nothing and have read even less on the issue. The vast majority of the Syrian opposition in its initial stages were defectors from the Baath army, local self-defence militias, and the feeble remnants of the Muslim brotherhood which was annihilated in the 80's. The vast majority of which were committed to a civil state, and loosely secular in nature. The opposition's diaspora leadership is almost exclusively secular. Now, given that they got no tangible support from the West for 2 or so years, the only mechanism by which they could attain access to weapons was through certain Arab nations which have no scruples about supporting (and even insist on) Islamism.

Given such a reality, why are we surprised that the Islamists have the ascendancy? The moderates have no response to the taunt;

"Where is the West now? Your people are being killed, and they don't care. The West hate Muslims. Only we look after the interests of the Muslims. etc etc."

Logic 101.

As to Libya, I'm tempted to say that you've discredited yourself by referring to Gaddafi's Libya as 'secular'; a ridiculous claim if only one had the eyes to see Gaddafi's support for Jihadists, and international gangsterism. Gaddafi's Libya was a gangster mafia state; wholly owned by the Gaddafi family. I make no apologies for applauding the scumbags removal.

As to the nature of the Libyan opposition, well, that is another issue altogether. In the next struggle, I support Libyan democrats against Libyan theocrats, and make no apologies for doing so.

There is only 1 one world government I want to live in. Robot president Nixons DOOP. Led by the fearless Zapp Brannigan.

Why would they bother taking over an insignificant territory with no resource wealth or tactical significance?

I love conspiracy theories. And speaking of reptilians, have you seen the clip of Justin Bieber in Court when the judge is reading out his charges? Justin's eyes change for a couple of seconds, scary stuff :d

sounds far fetched

Im going to give you some information which you probably never considered and has been effectively hidden from the populace in general, so prepare your mind. All governments and major international organisations such as banks and religions have been infiltrated by an invisible world government of shape shifting reptilians whose ultimate goal is a one world government destroying all national sovreignty. Do some more research and once you're aware of the Agenda and the methods used to implement it it's much easier to make sense of global events. You're welcome.

so let me get this straight,
the jihadists just appeared out of nowhere to support the Syrian opposition to Assad because the west wouldnt intervene with ground troops?

furthermore, you've ignored my point on Libya specifically. you do realise the rebels were armed, trained and funded by western interests and since Gaddafi was overthrown (violently raped and hacked to death without trial) the previously secular country is now under Sharia law?

how does that reconcile with your democratic morals?

Fuck off you clown. If at any point I expressed support for jihadist scum, I apologise, it certainly wasn't my intention. The Jihadists are there in Syria precisely because the Syrian opposition found no ready support from the West.

so arming and funding islamic militants to conduct violence including mass rapes and killings of local Christians in Syria, Libya and Egypt is ok with your morals in the name of democracy?

http://www.buzzfeed.com/alisonvingiano/times-russia-condemned-the-use-of-force-without-un-approval

](*,) ](*,)

At least I can make a basic moral distinction between democracies and non-democracies. I stake out a position for myself instead of indulging in juvenile ten cent whataboutism.

Yes, I am very Syria's.

simple test of intellect, you missed my pun

so, you wont boycott anything that inconveniences your personal life in any way?
you sound like a real hardcore activist

No I am not Syrian. But I happen to enjoy Middle-Eastern jam. As for boycotting Chinese products, well, that is impossible. The Reds have taken over.