User Controls
Conflict Shitpile
-
2017-04-05 at 9:22 AM UTCBONUS
'rebels' planning a media blitz on chemical weapons the day before it happened -
2017-04-05 at 10:01 AM UTC
-
2017-04-05 at 6:15 PM UTCWhy do you think the US wants to establish the kurds? Nobody gives a shit about the kurds. Hilary might've. Maybe. If Russia fucked off at least. But under Trump there's no way. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see it, but its pretty far fetched imo.
-
2017-04-05 at 6:24 PM UTCIf it's a choice between the shit'ites and the turds, America chooses the Kurds every time. They'd rather fund pashmerga than touch Iran, to fight ISIS.
-
2017-04-05 at 7:16 PM UTC
Originally posted by Discount Whore Why do you think the US wants to establish the kurds? Nobody gives a shit about the kurds. Hilary might've. Maybe. If Russia fucked off at least. But under Trump there's no way. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see it, but its pretty far fetched imo.
it's not about the Kurds, they're just a tool. it's about gas pipelines and energy dominance - I'll elaborate in a little while when I'm not on my phone. -
2017-04-05 at 9:11 PM UTC
Originally posted by aldra Assad has nothing to gain from using chemical weapons - it's never been proven that he has in the past; as a matter of fact the original sarin attack in Ghouta, which Obama used as a 'red line' to officially get involved in Syria, was definitely not launched by Assad/the SAA and quite likely engineered or at least enabled by the Turkish intelligence services. For more information you can check out the interviews with the head of the UN investigation team, Carla de Ponte, and the excellent article by Seymour Hersch "The Red Line and the Rat Line". Further, Eren Erdem is facing treason charges for giving RT details of instances where Turkish nationals were released without charge when caught smuggling nerve agents and precursors into Syria.
On top of that, after the Ghouta fiasco Assad turned over all of his chemical weapons stocks for destruction.
The SAA and Tigers have completely reversed all rebel gains over the last few months - they're in a position of strength, not desperation. Given that and the physical evidence, I believe the official SAAF version of events.
Like I said though, once I'm more familiar with the facts on the ground I'll post a proper thread on it
remember when, during the yuoslavia war, the pro-US side was crying 'deys be bombing ref-yew-geeez wid dem mortars! deys be raciss!!!1!' then the russians provided ballistics and telemetry data proving the bombardment originated with the pro-US faction?
good times...good times.
false flags are always fun for everyoneThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2017-04-05 at 10:02 PM UTCSo Assad being behind the recent chemical attack is most likely bullshit, right?The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2017-04-05 at 10:04 PM UTC
Originally posted by inb4l0pht So Assad being behind the recent chemical attack is most likely bullshit, right?
Originally posted by aldra Assad has nothing to gain from using chemical weapons - it's never been proven that he has in the past; as a matter of fact the original sarin attack in Ghouta, which Obama used as a 'red line' to officially get involved in Syria, was definitely not launched by Assad/the SAA and quite likely engineered or at least enabled by the Turkish intelligence services. For more information you can check out the interviews with the head of the UN investigation team, Carla de Ponte, and the excellent article by Seymour Hersch "The Red Line and the Rat Line". Further, Eren Erdem is facing treason charges for giving RT details of instances where Turkish nationals were released without charge when caught smuggling nerve agents and precursors into Syria.
On top of that, after the Ghouta fiasco Assad turned over all of his chemical weapons stocks for destruction.
The SAA and Tigers have completely reversed all rebel gains over the last few months - they're in a position of strength, not desperation. Given that and the physical evidence, I believe the official SAAF version of events.
Like I said though, once I'm more familiar with the facts on the ground I'll post a proper thread on itThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2017-04-06 at 3:59 AM UTC
Originally posted by infinityshock remember when, during the yuoslavia war, the pro-US side was crying 'deys be bombing ref-yew-geeez wid dem mortars! deys be raciss!!!1!' then the russians provided ballistics and telemetry data proving the bombardment originated with the pro-US faction?
good times…good times.
false flags are always fun for everyone
I was too young to really know what was going on when Yugoslavia was getting a pounding. I've tried reading about it but propaganda's melded with fact over the years and I've had trouble finding sources that even make sense. -
2017-04-06 at 4 AM UTC
Originally posted by aldra it's not about the Kurds, they're just a tool. it's about gas pipelines and energy dominance - I'll elaborate in a little while when I'm not on my phone.
The short of it is this:
The main reason for the fomentation of war and general instability in Syria is two competing gas pipelines
The US and gulf states want a GULF PIPELINE, but Assad rejected those plans in favour of the IRAN PIPELINE.
The reason for the GULF PIPELINE is to create a competitor for Russian gas in the EU; they currently hold something of a monopoly (Keep in mind that this was also one of the major reasons for inciting the 'revolution' in Ukraine). It's also an existential necessity for some of the Gulf states, specifically Saudi Arabia because their oil supply is not infinite (I suspect their reserves won't last a whole lot longer) and they've done an extremely poor job of diversifying their economy. Oh, and of course Israel is trying to sell the gas they've been pulling out of the Golan - gas deposits are one of the main reasons they refuse to give it back.
The reason for the IRAN PIPELINE is to deliver Iranian gas to the EU - they're desperate to open their economy after decades of sanctions because without a massive uptick in production, their young population is going to have extreme unemployment issues. There's also the goal of delivering energy stability to Lebanon, which has been highly inconsistent due to blockades and sanctions since the Israel-Lebanon war.
The Kurds fit into this as a sort of backdoor for the GULF PIPELINE. Assad said no, so the US and gulf states tried to depose him. They severely underestimated his popularity and failed to predict Russia aiding him, so now that goal seems completely unrealistic. If they can create a Kurdish vassal state, that is, declare independence for the Kurds in Northern Syria (the 'Rojava' region) and give them a puppet-ruler like Barzani, they can build their pipeline without Assad's permission - they can simply build across the new 'independent state'.
GULF PIPELINE: Qatar > Saudi Arabia > Jordan/Israel > Syria > Turkey > EU
IRAN PIPELINE: Iran > Iraq > Syria > Lebanon > EU
I drew this map from notes so while it should give you a general idea as to what's going on it's probably not accurate
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2017-04-06 at 8:57 AM UTCAnd this is why we don't have good alternative fuels yet. Too much money in fighting over oilThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2017-04-06 at 9 AM UTCI would fight over some good hash oilThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2017-04-06 at 11 AM UTCReject, just wanted to let you know that that was my 420th thank. My nigga. Don't wanna shit up this thread tho.
-
2017-04-06 at 11:05 AM UTCIt's an honour to give you your 420th bro
-
2017-04-06 at 12:09 PM UTC
Originally posted by aldra I was too young to really know what was going on when Yugoslavia was getting a pounding. I've tried reading about it but propaganda's melded with fact over the years and I've had trouble finding sources that even make sense.
I was there. good times...
it's a shame cameras weren't as prolific then as they are now...I'd have some good pics. the best pics I had were of multi-story buildings on the outside...and empty hulls on the inside.
everything that went on over there was propaganda. that, and literally every day the participants had to be evaluated to see who was friends with whom...and who wasn't friends with whomever else any more. that was a pain in the dick.
the joke about B&H of 'boyzitgunna hurtwhenitgoezinya' started to get stale from being over played but it's surprising how effective it is in day to day conversation. -
2017-04-06 at 1 PM UTCThought you would finid this interesting (tl;dr: basically a breakdown that rules out sarin)
https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/63jtub/russia_says_syria_gas_incident_caused_by_rebels/dfuqf4l/As my comment is highlighted, I feel like it's necessary to be more thorough. Stockpiled sarin is kept as two different agents because it breaks down in a couple months at best and a few weeks at worst. One of the major precusors is isopropyl alcohol or isopropyl amine, both extremely flammable. They have to be mixed before use or the blasting charge used to aerosolize the sarin will just burn up the isopropyl precursor instead. Unless there was an actively maintained chemical depot making sarin monthly there someone had to have fired sarin from a weapon for it to be there. Sarin precusors are binary agents which means they are safer to store than regular chemical weapons specifically because an explosion at ammo dumps won't release nearly as much as sarin as other active chemical weapons. Killing 72 people and leaving others in a damaged state - here is a video after the attack:
https://mobile.twitter.com/EliotHiggins/status/849205200992841729/video/1
Two other relevant points I came across on the discussion:
First:
"Every report I have read mentions all of the victims foaming at the mouth. Sarin does not cause foaming at the mouth. Foaming at the mouth is absent from most nerve agents, especially organophosphates. The fact that victims are foaming at the mouth points much more towards chlorine based chemical weapons. It's possible that the weapons could have been a mixture of chlorine compounds and organophosphates, but I doubt it. Several sources I have read about today's attack also mention paralysis. Organophosphates, especially sarin, cause massive spasms. Paralysis could have meant that victims were unable to voluntarily move which is certainly a symptom of body spasms. However, the more common use of the term paralysis refers to a body that is still, or appears to be locked in place. The stories I have read all used the term paralysis and didn't bother to go much further into that matter. And none of these sources mentioned spasms. I'm no chemical weapons specialist, but my first degree was in biochemistry. I know enough to say that the descriptions of symptoms certainly don't sound like acetylcholinesterase inhibitors were at work. Those damn near always involve body spasms. Very obvious ones. Not to mention shitting and pissing yourself. They never cause foaming at the mouth. They cause drooling, crying, and severe runny noses, but no foaming at the mouth. As I said earlier, that's a chlorine thing, not organophosphates. Also, sarin can be spread from an initial victim to others who come in contact with them for up to 30 minutes after initial exposure. Where are the mentions of first responders falling ill? I still haven't seen any. And I've been looking. This wasn't sarin. Was it a chemical weapon? Maybe. Perhaps even probably. It certainly was a chemical though. A chemical other than sarin. Your first link only cites pinpointed pupils as their proof of sarin. You know what else causes pinpointed pupils? TONS of drugs and chemicals. You would think that if they were shitting and pissing themselves while convulsing dramatically, which sarin virtually always causes, those doctors would have shown that off. Or at least mentioned it. But they didn't. They showed the absolute least unique symptom of sarin exposure. Again, this was not a sarin attack. I honestly find the tweet you shared to be quite suspicious. I'll be doing some digging into these people who are so insistent upon us believing that sarin was used, yet have no desire to show or even mention any of the truly defining characteristics of a sarin attack. NONE of these victims are showing any signs of convulsions. NONE of these victims are displaying bronchospasms or bronchorrhea, even remotely. They appear to be either heavily sedated or comatose, not choking to death on their own sputum. You know what else causes pinpointed pupils unresponsive to light? Heroin. That or chlorinated agents such as mustard gas. Mustard would also explain the foaming at the mouth. I would expect to see blistering if it were mustard though, and you can't really see enough of the victims faces or bodies here in high enough detail to be sure. The only relatively closeup picture in your second link seems to show blistering on the face of the boy. Sarin causes no blistering. None. It is a nerve agent. Do you know what absolutely does cause blistering, as well as all of the other listed symptoms, especially foaming at the mouth and paralysis? Sulfur mustard… Was this a chemical attack? Absolutely. Sarin? Absolutely not. The men in your first link are either far too ignorant to be providing medical care in this situation, or they are being deliberately dishonest. I'll let you decide which you think is more likely."
Second:
"I would like to also bring to people's attention the closeness in proximity of Idlib province to Turkey. This is a very key point to consider as factions in Turkey have not only been providing conventional weapons and small arms to the Syrian rebels, but they have also provided to them chemical weapons precursors, and not only that, but the Turkish government has even planned to stage a false flag chemical weapons attack in Syria. Please see the following sources below for more details.
Testimony from UN that rebels are using chem weapons:
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSBRE94409Z20130505?irpc=932
Rebels caught with Turkish Tekkim products used to make chemical weapons:
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=95d_1369914320
Syrian radical Muslim rebels displaying their stockpile and testing out poisonous gas:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXn39KqxxtE
Iraq captures Jihadi rebels attempting to make chemical weapons:
http://news.sky.com/story/1098214/iraq-smashes-al-qaeda-poison-gas-cell
Rebels captured with Sarin at Turkish border:
http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/explosives-seized-at-syria-border.aspx?pageID=238&nid=48064
And again rebels captured with Sarin:
http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/un-adds-al-nusra-to-sanctions-blacklist.aspx?pageID=238&nid=47985
Because the Turkish government was planning on staging a false flag attack to justify intervention in Syria:
http://www.dailydot.com/politics/turkey-youtube-ban/
Turkish Whistleblowers Corroborate Story On False Flag Chemical Weapons Attack In Syria:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/10/23/hersh-vindicated-turkish-whistleblowers-corroborate-story-on-false-flag-sarin-attack-in-syria/"
I leave you guys make up your mind on it and post any other relevant information.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2017-04-07 at 1:52 AM UTCSYRIA - US HAS FIRED 59 CRUISE MISSILES AT A SYRIAN AIRBASE
https://www.rt.com/news/383782-us-strikes-syria-tomahawaks/ -
2017-04-07 at 1:59 AM UTC
Originally posted by aldra SYRIA - US HAS FIRED 59 CRUISE MISSILES AT A SYRIAN AIRBASE
https://www.rt.com/news/383782-us-strikes-syria-tomahawaks/
godammit.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2017-04-07 at 2:03 AM UTC
Originally posted by aldra SYRIA - US HAS FIRED 59 CRUISE MISSILES AT A SYRIAN AIRBASE
https://www.rt.com/news/383782-us-strikes-syria-tomahawaks/
And here i was sitting thinking Trump was the non-interventionist guy. Guess the state's gonna' state. Anarchism when.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2017-04-07 at 2:05 AM UTC
Originally posted by Sophie And here i was sitting thinking Trump was the non-interventionist guy. Guess the state's gonna' state. Anarchism when.
He was, but the neocons made him their bitch.
http://thesaker.is/the-trump-administration-goes-neocon-crazy/ if you want to know more
