Post info
Peace, freedom, equality, tolerance, and justice for all
12.04.2017 (439 days ago)
Post view

Weapons of Mass Distraction
by cosmicrat ·
12-April-2017, 5:25 pm

Weapons of Mass Distraction

Who used poison gas in Syria? The answer depends on who you ask. No side of the question has any more credibility than any other when it comes to knowing and being truthful. No one who answers to Trump can believed, because Trump himself is a prolific serial liar, and he, unfortunately is Commander in Chief.

The Syrian government and their ally, Russia, would be just as likely to lie if it served their interests.

No one, however, has explained why it would have made sense for the Syrian government to knowingly use chemicals. They are winning back territory. They want the support of the people, and to be able to govern once the terrorists are defeated. And they know the kind of reaction chemical warfare brings.

It does make sense for the ISIS/Al Qaeda/rebels to perpetrate such an attack to blame, and weaken support for, the government. They have no problem killing civilians in Syria or anywhere in the world, and often brag about it.

Logical motive doesn't prove guilt, but since we lack believable facts, logic is what we have to work with. It is possible, of course, for governments to act irrationally. Ours certainly has.

Just what is so special about chemical warfare in the first place that it requires an outside nation to respond to punish it? Killing people is wrong, and killing many people is wronger. Causing pain and suffering before death adds to the wrongness. That's what war does.

The allies firebombed Dresden and Tokyo in WW 2. We A-bombed 2 Japanese cities. The US used napalm and Agent Orange in Vietnam. The US helped Sadaam use poison gas against Iran, and used depleted uranium ordnance in both wars against Iraq, causing a huge increase in cancer and birth defects for decades afterward.

While nuclear weapons have not been used since 1945, we have maintained huge stockpiles of them and the means to deliver them anywhere. We claim the option to use them, even in a first strike.

So, what standards are we upholding and presenting to the world? Are we really the moral authority on humane infliction of war killing and maiming?

No, we have picked one of many means of destroying lives in war to use as a tool of propaganda, hoping to distract from our responsibility for the huge death toll in Syria, and to promote regime change. Whether the accusation is true or false doesn't matter for that purpose.

--cosmicrat  April 12, 2017

Order by: 
Per page: 
  •  diogenese19348: 

    From a real-politic standpoint, you have three groups vying for control of Syria.  None of the three have any respect for human rights.  If you attack one, the other two gain ground.  There is no way to put a more acceptable group in charge.  That said, what the hell is the point of bombing one of them if you don't like their tactics?  This is one conflict the US just needs to stay the hell out of.  There is no upside.  The best we can hope for is the stabilization of the county, and the current government is probably the group that has the best chance of stabilizing it.  If we didn't learn a lesson from Iraq and Libya, when the hell are we going to learn it?

     436 days ago·1 replies1 replies 
    0 points
    •  Anonymous: 

      Dio, Islam began attacking our nations ships right after we won our independence from england, the first two presidents paid the hostage fees and the right of passage fees just like the other heads of state in europe had been doing.

      When Jefferson became our third president he said enough is enough, raised a naval fleet and in 1803 and went to the Barbary coast and to Tripoli and Libya and cleaned out the muslim pirates so that all nations could travel freely.

      When jefferson was secretary of the united states, he was able to get a hold of a quran and learned about our enemies and what they believed in.  in his papers he wrote to john adams the 2nd president of the united states and stated that we must not pay the ransom fees or the right of passage fees but go and wipe them out.

      The then president adams disagreed and paid the fees, that ended when jefferson stated no more and went to war with the pirates and the muslims in Libya and Tripoli and mad it so that all nations could travel freely.

      The muslims hated how our nation was founded then and they hate it still today because of religious freedoms and with islam there is only one religion allowed, you either convert or you die, and if you convert from islam its called apostasy and a death warrant aka a fatwa is issued for your death

       435 days ago·1 replies1 replies 
      -1 point
      •  cosmicrat: 

        Pirates act out of greed, not religious reasons.  

        Terrorist groups don't attack because Christianity, or religious freedom.  Their opposition arose from the acts and effects of our foreign policy, and that of European nations, on a variety of Muslim-majority nations and territories.

        Extremists often exploit religion, interpreting it for their purposes.  Slavers did that.  Right-wing extremists do that.  The Klan, or antiabortionist murderers of doctors, or other hate groups do not represent mainstream Christianity, nor do Muslim extremists represent their religion.

         434 days ago·1 replies1 replies 
        0 points
        •  Anonymous: 

          The caliphate, at that time gave the blessings to the Muslim pirates to go out and plunder and convert.

          please do a better job with history and facts, the klan are still controlled by the democratic Party 

           434 days ago·1 replies1 replies 
          0 points
          •  cosmicrat: 

            Where do you get your absurd notions?  I suspect you make them up to support your hate.

             433 days ago·1 replies1 replies 
            0 points
            •  Anonymous: 

              First off, using the accusation the ploy of hate is funny. 

              Im a Native American indian, who's ancestors were forced on the trail of tears, was it wrong that it happened, yes but its what a winning military does. Instead of separate but equal nations within a nation should never have happened.

              i get my facts from history books that have not been altered to suit the speaking points of a political party, case in point which you can verify on your own on the next sentence.

              reparations to former slaves happened right after the civil war by Lincoln and congress, they gave every former slave 40 acres and a mule, as reparations. President (democrat)Johnson right after Lincoln's assination reversed the reparation and gave the land back to the plantation/former slave owners. 

              Here is a bit of history you were never taught, the Gettysburg address only applied to the slaves in the southern states who tried to leave the union. The States in the north were not forced to give up their slaves until 4 years later.

              so please keep accusing me of hate, it's a hilarious tactic, the only thing I actually hate is not having is 5 cups of coffee to drink each morning, It takes to much energy and time to hang onto hate, I have better things to do than to live on hate. 

              Hate is what you see the Democratic Party doing every day since Trump was elected, hate is what fuels George soros to try and bring America down by dividing it.

               429 days ago·1 replies1 replies 
              0 points
              •  cosmicrat: 

                I think you meant the Emancipation Proclamation, which, by Executive Order, freed the slaves in the states and areas under rebellion, which he had the authority to do, but in states not at war with the Union, legislation was needed, specifically the 13th Amendment.  The Gettysburg Address was 10 months later, a short but eloquent eulogy.

                Native Americans, in today's terms, would have been labeled "terrorists" whenever they fought to protect their lands and people.  Labels differ by point of view.  It is good to understand both sides of any conflict instead of generalizing and assuming the worst about them.

                 418 days ago 
                0 points
  •  SecretCorners: 

    "There is no point in you or anyone continuing to repeat the baseless lies about Hillary Clinton"

    If you are talking about the claims of Hillary having sex with Huma then I can agree; even married to Weiner I can't see Huma wanting to have sex with Hillary.

     436 days ago 
    0 points
  •  cosmicrat: 

    Up to your first comma, I agree.  War is NOT clean, and never has been.  The evil is war itself.  Making an issue about how one is fought, with what weapons, especially when the US has done the same or worse, is pointless.

    No, we are not in a "war between religions".  The US does not represent, nor fight for, ANY religion.  Terrorist groups do not legitimately represent one either, though they falsely claim to.

    What the US DOES represent, and is Constitutionally obligated to, is freedom of religion-- the right to affiliate with any religion, or none at all.  That is not negotiable.  Personally, I don't "embrace" ANY religion, but I do stand for the right to, without discrimination.

    This was not about Trump, but about the stupidity of intervening in anyone else's civil war, even one we covertly helped start, and the illegitimate excuses that are made for doing so.

    It is also not about blaming either party.  Neither have been able to control or stop the corporate greed that seeks to bleed the world that leads to wars and misery.  Throughout our history, some good people have been able to slow them down for awhile, but the ill effects of capitalism never go away.

    There is no point in you or anyone continuing to repeat the baseless lies about Hillary Clinton.  Those lies have had their effect, and the election is over.

    We now have the worst President in American history, and I and millions of others can only work to make his term as short as possible and prevent as much of the damage as we can.

     437 days ago·2 replies2 replies 
    1 point
    •  SecretCorners: 

      "It is also not about blaming either party.  Neither have been able to control or stop the corporate greed that seeks to bleed the world that leads to wars and misery."

      Actually, yes, both parties are to blame as both parties are corrupted and are own by the corporate greed.  Don't forget the TPPA that Obama was trying to push through.  Don't forget the trade agreement he made with South Korea.  Both parties love them some war; because war means large profits for them, for both parties.  Look at how the Democrats grinned and slap Trump on the back for committing an illegal act of bombing Syria.  The Democrats will be as happy as everything if Trump engages in an all out war with Syria.  They can laugh all the way to the bank.

       436 days ago 
      0 points
    •  SecretCorners: 

      "We now have the worst President in American history,"

      He has not been in office long enough to say the worst president in American history; there has been some rather bad ones.  He has been a disappointment so far; turning out to try and do everything for corporations and the rich.  However, I would expect that from any of the others that ran for office under the Republican ticket if they had won and had control of both the House and Senate.

       436 days ago 
      0 points
Weapons of Mass Distraction