Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
OverSword

Attacking Syria "Impeachable"

51 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Piney
48 minutes ago, Ellapennella said:

 

What does that even mean?

 Men who feel that threatened by women are chauvinist cowards.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ellapennella
Just now, Piney said:

 Men who feel that threatened by women are chauvinist cowards.

Can you share an example of this in relation to whom & why  you are saying that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
1 minute ago, Ellapennella said:

Can you share an example of this in relation to whom & why  you are saying that?

Watch some of his old radio show......My stepmother would of wrapped his ankles around his neck...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ellapennella
4 minutes ago, Piney said:

Watch some of his old radio show......My stepmother would of wrapped his ankles around his neck...

You're talking about Mike Pence, right? So you're calling him weak, is that it? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
1 hour ago, Ellapennella said:

You're talking about Mike Pence, right? So you're calling him weak, is that it? 

Yup! A complete princess....

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gromdor
2 hours ago, Ellapennella said:

Why is it that there seems to always be an excuse for  the middle east when their leaders get caught doing something wrong? 

eta

I thought this article  was interesting

http://www.mymcmedia.org/the-media-and-lies-in-the-middle-east/

Same reason why there is always an excuse when a US leader gets caught doing something wrong.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paranormal Panther
14 hours ago, DieChecker said:

Bah, the US has been participating in Military Adventurism since Thomas Jefferson sent ships after the Barbary Pirates of north Africa. 

Trump fired missiles at Syria last year after the chemical attack and the Democrats all stood on crates and applauded him. They'll not have the guts to go after him for doing the same now. Unlike Trump, the Democrats care what the Media says about them.

Jefferson was more than justified. The pirates attacked and threatened our sailors and our ships. Assad never even touched any Americans. He might not have even gassed his own people.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
On 4/15/2018 at 4:12 PM, Paranormal Panther said:

Jefferson was more than justified. The pirates attacked and threatened our sailors and our ships. Assad never even touched any Americans. He might not have even gassed his own people.

Reasons for attacking aside... The President has 200 years of precedent to do what he did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener

Well, I don't know the constitutional or legal background to this. However, I WOULD point out that Francis Boyle has something of a track record on this, and can hardly be called a "disinterested commentator". Indeed, he seems to be an activist against the US government. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Boyle#Activism_and_views

Some juicy tidbits from the above link..... 

"..... He claimed the Bush administration "would welcome the outbreak of a Third World War" and "is fully prepared to use tactical nuclear weapons against Muslim and Arab states and peoples." He also claimed that American treatment of Muslims and Arabs since the attacks of September 11, 2001 is "almost to the same extent that America inflicted upon the Japanese and Japanese Americans after Pearl Harbor." He concluded his speech by calling on American lawyers to "lead the fight against the Bush Jr. dictatorship."[6]..."

"..... For the good of all humanity, this Tribunal must condemn and repudiate the Federal Government of the United States of America and its grotesque vision of a New World Order that is constructed upon warfare, bloodshed, violence, criminality, genocide, racism, colonialism, apartheid, massive violations of fundamental human rights, and the denial of the international legal right of self-determination to the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North Americaand elsewhere around the world.[8]..."

(This was in support of a motion he presented, calling on the dissolution of the American Federal Government !! )

--------------------- He has been a legal advisor to the Palestinian Authority, and has offered legal advice to the Iranian government in support of their nuclear program. He lobbies for Hawaii to become an independent state. When it comes to Israel and Jews, he is even LESS "moderate" :P:D -------------------------------- 

"... ..all the major US news media sources are Zionist – every one of them. Likewise, higher education, here, in America, has become predominantly Zionist in its orientation, since I entered college in 1968. As a matter of fact, if I were trying to become a professor today, the Zionists would make sure I could not become a professor – exactly as they did to my friend Norman Finkelstein at DePaul University.....Obama was bought and paid for by Zionists. That's why Rahm Emanuel was his chief-of-staff, until just recently, when he decided to run for mayor of Chicago. Emanuel was bought and paid for to be put in there, the same way with [Dennis] Ross and the White House. Mrs. Clinton sold her soul to the Zionists in New York to get elected as senator from New York...."

".... n fact, Israel has never been anything but a Bantustan for Jews set up in the Middle East by the White racist and genocidal Western colonial imperial powers in order to serve as their racist attack dog and genocidal enforcer against the Arab and Muslim world. From the very moment of Western imperialism's genocidal conception of Israel in 1947-1948, Israel has historically always functioned as Jewistan – the world's Bantustan for the Jews....."

Mad as a box of frogs !

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener

Well, I don't know the constitutional or legal background to this. However, I WOULD point out that Francis Boyle has something of a track record on this, and can hardly be called a "disinterested commentator". Indeed, he seems to be an activist against the US government. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Boyle#Activism_and_views

Some juicy tidbits from the above link..... 

"..... He claimed the Bush administration "would welcome the outbreak of a Third World War" and "is fully prepared to use tactical nuclear weapons against Muslim and Arab states and peoples." He also claimed that American treatment of Muslims and Arabs since the attacks of September 11, 2001 is "almost to the same extent that America inflicted upon the Japanese and Japanese Americans after Pearl Harbor." He concluded his speech by calling on American lawyers to "lead the fight against the Bush Jr. dictatorship."[6]..."

"..... For the good of all humanity, this Tribunal must condemn and repudiate the Federal Government of the United States of America and its grotesque vision of a New World Order that is constructed upon warfare, bloodshed, violence, criminality, genocide, racism, colonialism, apartheid, massive violations of fundamental human rights, and the denial of the international legal right of self-determination to the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North Americaand elsewhere around the world.[8]..."

(This was in support of a motion he presented, calling on the dissolution of the American Federal Government !! )

--------------------- He has been a legal advisor to the Palestinian Authority, and has offered legal advice to the Iranian government in support of their nuclear program. He lobbies for Hawaii to become an independent state. When it comes to Israel and Jews, he is even LESS "moderate" :P:D -------------------------------- 

"... ..all the major US news media sources are Zionist – every one of them. Likewise, higher education, here, in America, has become predominantly Zionist in its orientation, since I entered college in 1968. As a matter of fact, if I were trying to become a professor today, the Zionists would make sure I could not become a professor – exactly as they did to my friend Norman Finkelstein at DePaul University.....Obama was bought and paid for by Zionists. That's why Rahm Emanuel was his chief-of-staff, until just recently, when he decided to run for mayor of Chicago. Emanuel was bought and paid for to be put in there, the same way with [Dennis] Ross and the White House. Mrs. Clinton sold her soul to the Zionists in New York to get elected as senator from New York...."

".... n fact, Israel has never been anything but a Bantustan for Jews set up in the Middle East by the White racist and genocidal Western colonial imperial powers in order to serve as their racist attack dog and genocidal enforcer against the Arab and Muslim world. From the very moment of Western imperialism's genocidal conception of Israel in 1947-1948, Israel has historically always functioned as Jewistan – the world's Bantustan for the Jews....."

Mad as a box of frogs !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gromdor

After seeing what went down and the results, I wouldn't call this an impeachable offense.  No casualties, two day earlier tweet warning and a phone call in advance.  Seems like the countries involved were cooperating to an extent.  It's more of a live fire exercise than anything else.  It's definitely not a declaration of war without congress.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ellapennella
On 4/15/2018 at 9:57 AM, Gromdor said:

Same reason why there is always an excuse when a US leader gets caught doing something wrong.

What I'm trying to show with that link was the propaganda  among the middle eastern Muslim world  does reveal itself as the same propaganda that Russia pulls on the United States...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paranormal Panther
13 hours ago, DieChecker said:

Reasons for attacking aside... The President has 200 years of precedent to do what he did.

We have 200 years of precedents of corruption too. 200 wrongs don't make a right.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
10 hours ago, Paranormal Panther said:

We have 200 years of precedents of corruption too. 200 wrongs don't make a right.

True enough. But, with government, when something is done for 200 years, it tends to be accepted. All of a sudden saying it is impeachable is just theatrics.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paranormal Panther
13 hours ago, DieChecker said:

True enough. But, with government, when something is done for 200 years, it tends to be accepted. All of a sudden saying it is impeachable is just theatrics.

I'm not referring to Trump. I'm referring to government and politics, both of which are rife with corruption and criminality. Of course, the never-Trumpers act out of desperation in their blatant attempts to ruin him. This latest charge is just the latest stunt in a long line of them.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener

I suppose that - strictly speaking - the title of Overswords opening post is correct. Syria COULD be regarded as grounds for impeachment. So could littering or jaywalking. Impeachment is whatever Congress wants it to be !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa
On 4/11/2018 at 9:13 AM, Dark_Grey said:

Trump should take the bait so he can be impeached, be replaced with a black Democrat and the news cycle will go back to nothing but positive stories about how great the country is doing. 

That seems a little silly.  The VP is not a Black Democrat, nor is the Speaker of the House/

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa
On 4/11/2018 at 1:49 PM, Uncle Sam said:

The left has been wanting Trump to go to war with Syria and Russia. Now that we might be going to war, they want to impeach him. Wow... anyways here is the situation in Russia.

Do you get some kind of direct communication from "The Left" or did Nostradamus tell you that? Who in their right mind would want to go to war with Syria and Russia.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa
On 4/12/2018 at 10:39 AM, Dark_Grey said:

Remember when Hillary wanted to go to war with Russia over "hacking"? It's terrifying how rabid some of them are to start WW3. Almost like there is untold money to be made...

See, we all think that is Republicans, you guys.  We could never be that crazy.  If it is not you and not us then who is it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa
On 4/15/2018 at 4:45 AM, Piney said:

Watch some of his old radio show......My stepmother would of wrapped his ankles around his neck...

We men often kid ourselves.  Women have always been the strong ones and the culture bearers.  As often as not they dry our tears, bandage our skinned knees, breathe life back into our faltering egos, and send us back out to play.  Meanwhile they get back to the  serious business of keeping the species going and cleaning up some of our messes.  Good men, wise men know that and try not to make too many messes.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa
On 4/19/2018 at 4:32 AM, Gromdor said:

After seeing what went down and the results, I wouldn't call this an impeachable offense.  No casualties, two day earlier tweet warning and a phone call in advance.  Seems like the countries involved were cooperating to an extent.  It's more of a live fire exercise than anything else.  It's definitely not a declaration of war without congress.

Its win-win.  Everybody gets to appear tough to their citizenry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Unfortunately

Correct me if I'm wrong, but some people seem to be coming off as believing this was solely a U.S. decision (although clearly that isn't the case).

Honestly I'm not sure that I see much of an issue. A government was gassing it's own people, all opposing countries are stating they have proof of this and can show it when necessary. Point of fact, someone in Syria was breaching the law so the US, UK and France decided to stop them.

The only issue I see is that it may have been an extreme decision (missiles), but frankly there isn't another option for people who openly break international law. If there had been mass civilian casualties and damage I would be appalled but as it stands everything seems to have gone well with no collateral damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
2 hours ago, Unfortunately said:

Honestly I'm not sure that I see much of an issue. A government was gassing it's own people

Allegedly. The bosses still haven't seen any proof that it actually happened or that Syria was responsible. 

2 hours ago, Unfortunately said:

all opposing countries are stating they have proof of this and can show it when necessary.

You're really OK with "we have proof but its classified" as justification to spend 100million taxpayer dollars? Man if my bank charges me an extra $5.00 fee I want proof it was justified. We're talking about 100 million dollars being spent bombing nothing at the same time the same people spending that money are telling us things like we cant afford programs such as Meals on Wheels. 

2 hours ago, Unfortunately said:

Point of fact, someone in Syria was breaching the law so the US, UK and France decided to stop them.

 

2 hours ago, Unfortunately said:

The only issue I see is that it may have been an extreme decision (missiles), but frankly there isn't another option for people who openly break international law

This mindest is part of the problem people are having with this situation. Where does this mindset stop? The US is illegally occupying Syria. Would you be OK if someone lobbed some missiles in our direction? 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Unfortunately
11 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

Allegedly. The bosses still haven't seen any proof that it actually happened or that Syria was responsible

How did you confirm this definitively? Do you have access to what each 'boss' gets to see? I don't mean this offensively, but making a claim like this without supporting evidence seems a bit on the radical side.

Quote

You're really OK with "we have proof but its classified" as justification to spend 100million taxpayer dollars? Man if my bank charges me an extra $5.00 fee I want proof it was justified. We're talking about 100 million dollars being spent bombing nothing at the same time the same people spending that money are telling us things like we cant afford programs such as Meals on Wheels. 

Bombing nothing? That is just false, please do more research. 

Quote

This mindest is part of the problem people are having with this situation. Where does this mindset stop? The US is illegally occupying Syria. Would you be OK if someone lobbed some missiles in our direction? 

Can you provide any articles in regards to the highlighted sentence? Not everything is a conspiracy, so rather than spouting outrageous claims blindly it would be best for you to provide supporting documents.

Also, you're speaking as if this was solely a US decision. Clearly that is not the case.

If you believe that the US, UK & France are lying to the world purely to attack "nothing" in Syria then I sincerely hope your next point of action is to provide articles/proof otherwise there isn't any substance to your argument. ^_^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
11 hours ago, Unfortunately said:

How did you confirm this definitively? Do you have access to what each 'boss' gets to see? I don't mean this offensively, but making a claim like this without supporting evidence seems a bit on the radical side.

Dude in America WE are supposed to be the bosses. We the people , we the ones paying for the missiles, we the ones who will have to send our youth to die, we have not seen the evidence. 

Quote

The very word 'secrecy' is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths, and to secret proceedings. John F. Kennedy

 

11 hours ago, Unfortunately said:

Bombing nothing? That is just false, please do more research. 

We bombed no enemies. 

12 hours ago, Unfortunately said:

Can you provide any articles in regards to the highlighted sentence? Not everything is a conspiracy, so rather than spouting outrageous claims blindly it would be best for you to provide supporting documents.

I'm not talking about conspiracy. Syria did not invite US forces into their nation, that is an illegal occupation. 

US Expands Military Footprint in Syria to EIGHT Bases, ‘Modifies’ Kobani Air Base

So that's 8 military bases established in a nation we have no legal right to be in. 

12 hours ago, Unfortunately said:

If you believe that the US, UK & France are lying to the world purely to attack "nothing" in Syria then I sincerely hope your next point of action is to provide articles/proof otherwise there isn't any substance to your argument. ^_^

My overall point is there is as much if not more motive for the US, UK & France to have perpetrated the chemical attack, or even to lie about one even happening at all as there is for Russia or Syria to have perpetrated the attacks. We simply do not know the facts. 

Oh but we do know we can expect even more us interventionism in Syria : Missile Strikes Are Unlikely to Stop Syria’s Chemical Attacks, Pentagon Says

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.