this cohen-prague trip is potentially huge news
cohen denying that he ever went to prague (and holding up his passport as proof) was the biggest hole in the steele dossier.
if this report is true and cohen was lying, the steele dossier starts to look a lot more credible
Welp, the US is going to attack Syria.
Thanks for WW3, joos.
So....how many missiles didn't get blown up by Putin?
trump campaigned on not attacking syria.Originally Posted by devidee
since he wasn't lying and isn't an idiot, i'm sure you're mistaken
really though, bringing back the czar of the iraq invasion, michael bolton, was a fantastic idea don
load up on oil stocks boys....going to be a fun ride.
I really chose a great time to get sober.
nice job team retard well done
The market tanking were starting to bomb other countries huge tax cuts for the super rich and I assume the economy will be garbage within the next 2 or 3 years
Trump and the GOP are right on schedule with putting us right back into the shitter
Last edited by big dick; 04-13-2018 at 05:55 PM.
Russian jets have been scrambled.
Fucking Mossad.
I remember this gas attack vividly, it didn't happen that long ago.Sarin isn't stored as an active mix because it's amazingly dangerous to do that and completely unnecessary. The "expert" in question has been proven to be lying and fabricating evidence several times before.
At the time i looked up more about this and even wrote on this site, but this isn't a matter of opinion or slight disagreement on theoretical matters. It's just simple facts.
RT is a propaganda channel. They started with the "how great is Russia" angle and then moved on to "how bad is the rest of the world" angle. That doesn't mean everything you see on that channel is lie. Sometimes is just selective truths and sometimes it's just neutral fluff. No one is saying propaganda can't be entertaining. On the contrary propaganda is more entertaining and more appealing. It's the WWE of information.
The initial reports within minutes were "Syrian government gasses civilians" and this rhetoric continued. Within 72 hours of the attack the USA were already sending cruise missiles to show just how severe their moral indignation was, at such a reprehensible crime.
Yet here we are over a year later and is there any "real proof" to what happened? No, and that's because there still is no real proof, and when you get into the fine detail of those pushing the anti Asaad agenda you come across words like "more likely then not" or "most likely".
Of course the USA has never knowingly manipulated and bullied the UN to support their actions now have they? In fact, your government has a track record in lying to the UN and has fabricated evidence to support their agenda on multiple occasions. You would be a fool to take anything they say on this matter to be fact.
On this gas attack in Khan Shaykhun a year ago, I'm not going to say I know what happened and who did it. If I was to assume who was responsible I'd be leaning towards the terrorists and Jihadists for obvious reasons like, they are losing and will benefit from this, and of course they are religious fucktards who will do anything for their cause.
Seriously, every form of media is biased to some degree.
The main stream media in your country is engaged in non-stop propaganda and leading your thoughts astray... same here in Australia.
90% of the news they report on isn't even news, it's entertainment.
The interviews I've watched on RT seem to be quite reasonable, I'll admit I don't watch it that often though. They usually have someone on one side of an argument and another guest on the opposite side, with perhaps someone in the middle. They seem to report on much more relevant and important issues then say CNN.
I really don't want a fight, and I don't want to lead this epic thread off topic.
But just think about this.
Your government is supporting Jihadists and terrorists, these so called moderates are really extremists.
Moderates don't run around cutting off hands and heads while demanding Sharia Law.
The shit these terrorists are doing and have been doing for years on the population, pales by comparison to a gas attack, now matter how awful this truly is.
You're fighting a proxy war, to destabilize a regime on the other side of the world.
The 2,000 odd boots you have on the ground are invisible. It's mostly a covert operation run by intelligence, and munitions experts then an actual fighting force.
Nope, I don't buy Trumps or The Wests moral indignation. And when you consider this latest CW attack is much more likely then not, to be perpetrated by the side being totally routed.
This is a Sovereign country. That recently had an election which overwhelmingly supported Asaad.
Yes I'l agree it's a bit of a sham, but which countries elections are not?
Your entire political system and foreign policy is a disgrace. Moral indignation is a look that doesn't suit.
Still not my government. Not my country.I remember this gas attack vividly, it didn't happen that long ago.
The initial reports within minutes were "Syrian government gasses civilians" and this rhetoric continued. Within 72 hours of the attack the USA were already sending cruise missiles to show just how severe their moral indignation was, at such a reprehensible crime.
Yet here we are over a year later and is there any "real proof" to what happened? No, and that's because there still is no real proof, and when you get into the fine detail of those pushing the anti Asaad agenda you come across words like "more likely then not" or "most likely".
Of course the USA has never knowingly manipulated and bullied the UN to support their actions now have they? In fact, your government has a track record in lying to the UN and has fabricated evidence to support their agenda on multiple occasions. You would be a fool to take anything they say on this matter to be fact.
On this gas attack in Khan Shaykhun a year ago, I'm not going to say I know what happened and who did it. If I was to assume who was responsible I'd be leaning towards the terrorists and Jihadists for obvious reasons like, they are losing and will benefit from this, and of course they are religious fucktards who will do anything for their cause.
Seriously, every form of media is biased to some degree.
The main stream media in your country is engaged in non-stop propaganda and leading your thoughts astray... same here in Australia.
90% of the news they report on isn't even news, it's entertainment.
The interviews I've watched on RT seem to be quite reasonable, I'll admit I don't watch it that often though. They usually have someone on one side of an argument and another guest on the opposite side, with perhaps someone in the middle. They seem to report on much more relevant and important issues then say CNN.
At the time Syrian government claimed that they didn't and they never have used chemical weapons. If that's true, then their opponents have gassed themselves 50 times in the last 7 years. They also hold the same line with barrel bombs. In that case their opponents have dropped on themselves 60k barrel bombs. That seems like a lot of work. Suicide is also against their religion. Sacrificing yourself while killing infidels is kosher. Killing yourself and the first 100 friends and closest family members for a blurb in Le Monde not so much.
There's also the part that for faction that has never used chemical weapons they sure did have an awful big stockpile of em. You know just for a rainy day. It's been raining in Syria for 7 years.
This whole Syrian chemical weapons issue is at the same level as consensus of global warming. One side is a few fringe whackos and paid experts. And the other side is 95% of everyone that has ever looked in to the issue.
You keep prattling on about weapons they destroyed.Still not my government. Not my country.
I remember this gas attack vividly, it didn't happen that long ago.
The initial reports within minutes were "Syrian government gasses civilians" and this rhetoric continued. Within 72 hours of the attack the USA were already sending cruise missiles to show just how severe their moral indignation was, at such a reprehensible crime.
Yet here we are over a year later and is there any "real proof" to what happened? No, and that's because there still is no real proof, and when you get into the fine detail of those pushing the anti Asaad agenda you come across words like "more likely then not" or "most likely".
Of course the USA has never knowingly manipulated and bullied the UN to support their actions now have they? In fact, your government has a track record in lying to the UN and has fabricated evidence to support their agenda on multiple occasions. You would be a fool to take anything they say on this matter to be fact.
On this gas attack in Khan Shaykhun a year ago, I'm not going to say I know what happened and who did it. If I was to assume who was responsible I'd be leaning towards the terrorists and Jihadists for obvious reasons like, they are losing and will benefit from this, and of course they are religious fucktards who will do anything for their cause.
Seriously, every form of media is biased to some degree.
The main stream media in your country is engaged in non-stop propaganda and leading your thoughts astray... same here in Australia.
90% of the news they report on isn't even news, it's entertainment.
The interviews I've watched on RT seem to be quite reasonable, I'll admit I don't watch it that often though. They usually have someone on one side of an argument and another guest on the opposite side, with perhaps someone in the middle. They seem to report on much more relevant and important issues then say CNN.
At the time Syrian government claimed that they didn't and they never have used chemical weapons. If that's true, then their opponents have gassed themselves 50 times in the last 7 years. They also hold the same line with barrel bombs. In that case their opponents have dropped on themselves 60k barrel bombs. That seems like a lot of work. Suicide is also against their religion. Sacrificing yourself while killing infidels is kosher. Killing yourself and the first 100 friends and closest family members for a blurb in Le Monde not so much.
There's also the part that for faction that has never used chemical weapons they sure did have an awful big stockpile of em. You know just for a rainy day. It's been raining in Syria for 7 years.
This whole Syrian chemical weapons issue is at the same level as consensus of global warming. One side is a few fringe whackos and paid experts. And the other side is 95% of everyone that has ever looked in to the issue.
Which are you? fringe whacko or paid expert?
The gas attack year ago was against Al-Nusra Front. They are not on the same side as US. US tends to bomb them too. The coalition doesn't openly support any terrorist organizations by international standards. Assad and Russia refer to everyone that's not on their side as terrorists. Hezbollah is on Assad's side. They have been down with Jihad for about 30 years. Compared to them Al-Qaeda and ISIS are young puppies. Whenever Hezbollah have an issue they can't agree with they turn to Supreme Leader of Iran. Most of the time that's some dude named Khomeini. He's not a moderate.
The largest faction the Coalition supports are the Kurds. They did most of the fighting in eradicating ISIS from Iraq and Syria. Currently they are busy fighting the Turks that are attacking the part of Syria Kurds control.
Glad you said openly.The gas attack year ago was against Al-Nusra Front. They are not on the same side as US. US tends to bomb them too. The coalition doesn't openly support any terrorist organizations by international standards. Assad and Russia refer to everyone that's not on their side as terrorists. Hezbollah is on Assad's side. They have been down with Jihad for about 30 years. Compared to them Al-Qaeda and ISIS are young puppies. Whenever Hezbollah have an issue they can't agree with they turn to Supreme Leader of Iran. Most of the time that's some dude named Khomeini. He's not a moderate.
The largest faction the Coalition supports are the Kurds. They did most of the fighting in eradicating ISIS from Iraq and Syria. Currently they are busy fighting the Turks that are attacking the part of Syria Kurds control.
So let's cut to the chase.
Do you agree or disagree that the US should be attacking, or even involved in Syria?
I firmly believe they should not be involved. And their meddling is causing much more damage then good.
I'm fairly sure that they aren't leaving if i disagree with their presence. That said at the time i didn't think it was a good idea to attack Iraq. Mostly because you could see what it would lead to and international community was strongly against that. International community isn't against this. Only ones opposing are Assad and his allies. With Iraq only ones for it were US and their allies. Also they were the only ones that thought there was enough proof of WMDs or that there was any urgency. This time it's completely opposite.Glad you said openly.
So let's cut to the chase.
Do you agree or disagree that the US should be attacking, or even involved in Syria?
I firmly believe they should not be involved. And their meddling is causing much more damage then good.
But now they might as well fix the mess they started. I don't know if they have any interest for it though. Nothing worth mentioning has happened yet.
I'm guessing they let Russians know in advance to avoid any diplomatic faux pax happening and they in turn let Syrians know. Then Syrians cleared a few blocks and manned a few extra shifts in their anti air defenses. The end result was a few hundred millions in burned hardware, several dollars worth of damage and 3 wounded. Success.
I remember the fist time very well, I was quite sure SH had no chem weapons, or nukes. The way they turned on their own weapons inspectors was stunning.I'm fairly sure that they aren't leaving if i disagree with their presence. That said at the time i didn't think it was a good idea to attack Iraq. Mostly because you could see what it would lead to and international community was strongly against that. International community isn't against this. Only ones opposing are Assad and his allies. With Iraq only ones for it were US and their allies. Also they were the only ones that thought there was enough proof of WMDs or that there was any urgency. This time it's completely opposite.
But now they might as well fix the mess they started. I don't know if they have any interest for it though. Nothing worth mentioning has happened yet.
I'm guessing they let Russians know in advance to avoid any diplomatic faux pax happening and they in turn let Syrians know. Then Syrians cleared a few blocks and manned a few extra shifts in their anti air defenses. The end result was a few hundred millions in burned hardware, several dollars worth of damage and 3 wounded. Success.
Went to war based on lies, and a million Iraqis are dead.
Funny how all these years later so many people say they knew it was all a big lie.
Remember vividly the very moment I twigged. My WTF moment... and nobody genuinely thought he had no CW's and nukes.
Even my family members would ridicule me when I said he has none of those weapons.
Not assuming you saw through the lie, you seem to have other reasons for not wanting to attack Iraq in the beginning.
Russians are going nowhere. Not going to ramp it up and risk directly engaging the Russians.
Trump says this is a one off... makes me think he's lying.
Assad the eye surgeon is a monster.
Trump the philandering oddity is morally outraged.
Would be so much easier to paint Trump as a monster, gotta admire the spin doctors.
You can gamble oil or lock a sure thing with defense stocks. My favorite is Raytheon. Priced like a growth stock cause it is one.
Set up a trust for your unborn grandchildren. I don’t know about oil, solar or nuclear power in their future but I do know tomahawk missiles are forever green. Unmanned shit is a lock too.
Has a tremendous dividend that has recently increased too. Dividend reinvestment program. RTN makes war attractive in a number of ways.
Last edited by Sanlmar; 04-14-2018 at 04:00 AM.
Link to another long post...I remember the fist time very well, I was quite sure SH had no chem weapons, or nukes. The way they turned on their own weapons inspectors was stunning.
Went to war based on lies, and a million Iraqis are dead.
Funny how all these years later so many people say they knew it was all a big lie.
Remember vividly the very moment I twigged. My WTF moment... and nobody genuinely thought he had no CW's and nukes.
Even my family members would ridicule me when I said he has none of those weapons.
Not assuming you saw through the lie, you seem to have other reasons for not wanting to attack Iraq in the beginning.
Russians are going nowhere. Not going to ramp it up and risk directly engaging the Russians.
Trump says this is a one off... makes me think he's lying.
Assad the eye surgeon is a monster.
Trump the philandering oddity is morally outraged.
Would be so much easier to paint Trump as a monster, gotta admire the spin doctors.
https://pokerfraudalert.com/forum/sh...l=1#post520565
...quoting another discussion in the beginning of the war. I felt the same way before the start of the war.
I also knew then Iraq had CWs. That has been recorded and proven by roughly everyone. They lacked nuclear capability. Nobody cared about their CWs. Since those were paid and sold by US to their former ally it was considered too hypocritical to be appalled by.
Ps. Dear Sah_24 Kurds are the biggest faction Coalition has trained and supported that were/are fighting Isis. There's a context type of thingie there. Assad's troops, Russians, Iranian, random Jihadis, all westerners etc. are excluded from that group . Oh and die in a grease fire. If you have something to say post it, you stupid mouth breathing faggot.
There are currently 36 users browsing this thread. (1 members and 35 guests)
Reply With Quote