Posted on 04/26/2013 9:07:44 AM PDT by JohnPDuncan
CBC out of Canada reports unnamed Syrian officials speaking to the Associated Press denying the use of chemical weapons against foreign jihadist 'rebels' within the country that seemed to surface yesterday and that were repeated by Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel.
The report also quotes a Syrian lawmaker Sharif Shehadeh:
Shehadeh called the U.S. claims "lies" and likened them to false accusations that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction — a claim U.S. policymakers had used to justify the invasion of that country in 2003.
"What is being designed for Syria now is similar to what happened in Iraq when Colin Powell lied in the Security Council and said Iraq possesses weapons of mass destruction prior to the U.S. invasion and occupation of that country," he said.
Meanwhile Israeli officials are calling for the US to respond to the now debunked assertion that the Syrian regime used chemical weapons:
"I think the U.S., as the leader of the Western world, should lead the efforts with our partners in Europe and Israel and to take action with what we're seeing happening today in Syria," Israeli Deputy Defense Minister Danny Danon told CNN.
The question remains why Israel is so eager to see the collapse of the Assad regime. Do they believe they can control whatever Muslim Brotherhood puppet replaces him? If so this is extremely naive thinking from our Israeli friends as it would no doubt signal the start of an even longer and more protracted civil war. Also the evidence from Egypt suggests that when the Muslim Brotherhood takes control they immediately persecute Christians, re-write laws along fundamentalist religious grounds and cause political and social unrest.
We’re supposed to trust ‘unnamed officials’ and AP? They’re more trustworthy than the govt?
“This doesn’t make me a leftist troll!”
No, but your insistence that we’re wrong when shown information that disproves your position does.
Your constant waving fo Robert Taft and claims of conservative status while bloviating leftist talking points like “But.. but.. they didn’t attack us!” does.
If you really ARE a young un, then you should at least OPEN YOUR DARN EARS instead of bloviating at us when we tell you, “The world and that situation is far more complicated than your pared back pizzled flatbread thesis make it out to be.”
Have you taken a survey to determine where you are politically? Do you think that will help you get respect?
heheh your view won’t be popular Little Ray.
I certainly agree he should be able to defend his regime - and his people - however he see’s fit.
The ‘red line’ is going to be exploited to get the US involved. Obama should have kept his mouth shut.
This thing has been going on for 3 years now. The syrian people prefer Assad over the islamic nutjobs otherwise they would have got him out by now. The fact is they’re united in not allowing these jerks to take over their country. I’m not saying Assad is a good guy or anything (he’s not) just analyzing the facts.
Yes ive taken those surveys and they show me as right-wing heading towards libertarian but I reject all these kind of labels and I prefer the constitution.
Lets all start from there and if so then most of the Fed government and its agencies would be shut down. I’m part of the “shut it down” coalition.
But our disagreement appears to be philosophical.
There’s nothing you can show me to change my mind: I could care less if Saddam has 10,000 nukes aimed at US cities like the Soviets did I still wouldn’t support invading Iraq.
“I could care less if Saddam has 10,000 nukes aimed at US cities “
You do realize that Saddam three times tried to assassinate George Bush, right?
If he hadn’t been stopped by the Israelis, he’d have had a nuclear reactor at Osirak designed specifically to produce nuke weapon material.
His attempts to kill George bush shows a level of psychopathy in leadership that says he most definitely WOULD have used a nuke.
As it sits, he used Sarin on his own people at Halabjah.
AND he repeatedly violated teh surrender agreement which by teh terms meant an immediate return to war.
He repeatedly fired on our men at the border and fired at our pilots patrolling the no fly zone.
But, as you said, “There’s nothing you can show me to change my mind”
Which means you’ll never see anything anyway.
You have your blinders on and claim to be “informed”.
Here’s the simply answer Tammy: I dont know and I dont care.
My position is philosophical: If not attacked then no war.
I’m not getting involved in “did he or didnt he” have WMDs.
The soviets once had 10,000 nukes pointed at US cities but Russia or its satellites states were not invaded.
I supported the Israeli’s doing whatever they wanted to do about the nuke reactor. That’s their business.
I dont know about the assassination attempts. We certainly took him out though.
“I dont know and I dont care.”
So why are you here, and why did you bring it up?
“My position is philosophical: If not attacked then no war.”
But we were attacked, Saddam fnded terrorism as well.
Ever hear of Salman Pak?
That’s where some of the 9/11 attackers trained.
It’s in Iraq.
The Madrid bombers trained there too.
Really?
How quaint.
And how just like the leftist troll JohNGalt of you.
He said the same things you know.
http://www.freerepublic.com/~johngalt/
Yeah, his talking points and goal post moves didn’t save him either.
I didn’t bring it up... certainly not my intention.. just defending myself from attacks.
Ain’t no good guys in Syria. There is just bad (Assad) and Worse (the Rebels). But, after the catastrophes in the wake of the other “Arab Spring” revolutions, you’d think the Obama regime would have learned something, but nooooooo.
Why, you’d almost think Obama was supporting the formation of Islamist governments!
Not familar with the user and i’m not a troll sir.
I support the constitution, truth, liberty, justice, limited government and peace.
I’m in my 30’s. I’m here to learn, co-ordinate activism and expose Obama’s guns 2 jihadists scandal.
“I didn’t bring it up!”
LOL.
First page of the thread, right in the “article”:
“Shehadeh called the U.S. claims “lies” and likened them to false accusations that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction — a claim U.S. policymakers had used to justify the invasion of that country in 2003.”
And then YOUR POST in thread:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3012724/posts?page=6#6
“The New York Times which supported the war against Iraq and which is just publishing propaganda from the CIA.
There was never any WMDs there.”
You are a liar.
That’s how I see it too. I will never support a despot like Assad but i wont support his even worse rivals too.
Firstly my post contained a quote from a syrian official.
Secondly, I was responding to another user.
Certainly not my intention to debate something that was debate 10 years ago and when I was in my 20’s.
“Not familar with the user and i’m not a troll sir.”
This after lying and claiming you didn’t bring up Iraq.
Yeah, we believe that.
Don’t we guys?
We believe this, right?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3012724/posts?page=6#6 <-——where you brought up Iraq personally, and the “article” body makes mention of it.
But hey, “I never brought it up!”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/3012724/posts?page=132#132
But, you said you didn’t bring it up.
Your article did, and then... You did.
And your claim is false.
And you have said that you don’t care and nothign will change your mind regardless of how much evidence is shown to prove your position false.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/3012724/posts?page=126#126
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/3012724/posts?page=128#128
I brought it up in the context of a reply to another user.
I said it was not my intention to have a debate over something from 10 years ago.
I’m not a liar, a leftist, a troll or anything else you accuse me of.
Lets just forget it because we’re never going to change each others mind? I am opposed to all war unless attacked. That’s my position. It’s not changing. Yours is different and it probably wont change. I’m not here to try nor bait you. I promise.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.