Peppino Impastato Posted March 2, 2018 Share Posted March 2, 2018 6 minutes ago, welshbairn said: How do you know? That's my opinion based on a cross section of information. I have heard the Russians, British, Americans, various groups in Syria regime and otherwise and my judgement based on the logic of whether it would be in his interests to do so, as well as some independent observers like the ex UK ambassador. My considered opinion is no way Assad was involved, and the British and American governments are lying when they said he was and attempted to use it as a pretext for escalation. Just like wmd in Iraq, we were lying there too. You haven't given your opinion. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rugster Posted March 2, 2018 Share Posted March 2, 2018 5 minutes ago, Peppino Impastato said: That's my opinion based on a cross section of information. I have heard the Russians, British, Americans, various groups in Syria regime and otherwise and my judgement based on the logic of whether it would be in his interests to do so, as well as some independent observers like the ex UK ambassador. My considered opinion is no way Assad was involved, and the British and American governments are lying when they said he was and attempted to use it as a pretext for escalation. Just like wmd in Iraq, we were lying there too. You haven't given your opinion. My opinion is you're either a massive wind up merchant, or a complete and utter moron. I'm betting on the latter. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peppino Impastato Posted March 2, 2018 Share Posted March 2, 2018 3 minutes ago, Rugster said: My opinion is you're either a massive wind up merchant, or a complete and utter moron. I'm betting on the latter. Nobody was talking to you. It's astonishing after Iraq that people like you think oh our government wouldn't lie to us though. I mean how gullible can people be. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted March 2, 2018 Share Posted March 2, 2018 (edited) 13 minutes ago, Peppino Impastato said: That's my opinion based on a cross section of information. I have heard the Russians, British, Americans, various groups in Syria regime and otherwise and my judgement based on the logic of whether it would be in his interests to do so, as well as some independent observers like the ex UK ambassador. My considered opinion is no way Assad was involved, and the British and American governments are lying when they said he was and attempted to use it as a pretext for escalation. Just like wmd in Iraq, we were lying there too. You haven't given your opinion. I think it equally likely that a frazzled Syrian commander ordered an attack, possibly maneuvering against Assad out of anger due to casualties suffered by the Syrian Army and thinking he was too soft; or the Saudis and/or other Gulf states provided the tech and paid an Al Quaeda linked group to do it to hopefully bring the Americans into the war in a big way. I don't think the UN found anything conclusive about the source. In other words, I don't know. Neither do you. Edited March 2, 2018 by welshbairn 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rugster Posted March 2, 2018 Share Posted March 2, 2018 9 minutes ago, Peppino Impastato said: Nobody was talking to you. It's astonishing after Iraq that people like you think oh our government wouldn't lie to us though. I mean how gullible can people be. It's an open forum, you fucking roaster. You're talking to everyone and anyone who wants to reply. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peppino Impastato Posted March 2, 2018 Share Posted March 2, 2018 7 minutes ago, welshbairn said: I think it equally likely that a frazzled Syrian commander ordered an attack, possibly maneuvering against Assad out of anger due to casualties suffered by the Syrian Army and thinking he was too soft; or the Saudis and/or other Gulf states provided the tech and paid an Al Quaeda linked group to do it to hopefully bring the Americans into the war in a big way. I don't think the UN found anything conclusive about the source. In other words, I don't know. Neither do you. Come on man that's some serious mental gymnastics you're performing to concoct a frankly absurd and very far fetched story to satisfy your preconceptions. Nobody knows anything, you don't know the Berlin wall came down unless you saw it. You make judgements based on the information available. Your and most people's mistake is to assume we're somehow special and only our governments and Medi wouldn't lie to us. Despite so much historical evidence to the contrary too. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted March 2, 2018 Share Posted March 2, 2018 (edited) 11 minutes ago, Peppino Impastato said: Come on man that's some serious mental gymnastics you're performing to concoct a frankly absurd and very far fetched story to satisfy your preconceptions. Nobody knows anything, you don't know the Berlin wall came down unless you saw it. You make judgements based on the information available. Your and most people's mistake is to assume we're somehow special and only our governments and Medi wouldn't lie to us. Despite so much historical evidence to the contrary too. Your mistake is to believe everything you want to believe, never mind the source. What would the US or British Government have to gain by dropping chemical bombs on Syria and blaming it on Assad? It's not like they have shed loads of oil. P.S. Which theory do you find more absurd and why? Edited March 2, 2018 by welshbairn 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peppino Impastato Posted March 2, 2018 Share Posted March 2, 2018 1 minute ago, welshbairn said: Your mistake is to believe everything you want to believe, never mind the source. What would the US or British Government have to gain by dropping chemical bombs on Syria and blaming it on Assad? It's not like they have shed loads of oil. Why do you assume I do that. They obviously wanted to use it as an excuse to escalate the conflict which clearly has been our intention all along. Which would probably have meant boots on the ground imo. Why is anyone's guess. There could be lots of reasons. It was on the list of seven countries the last republican administration are on record as planning to change the government of through military means. Axis of evil etc. ThoughI do know a cracking theory about it as it happens. I'm sure you'd not agree. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted March 2, 2018 Share Posted March 2, 2018 1 minute ago, Peppino Impastato said: Why do you assume I do that. They obviously wanted to use it as an excuse to escalate the conflict which clearly has been our intention all along. Which would probably have meant boots on the ground imo. Why is anyone's guess. There could be lots of reasons. It was on the list of seven countries the last republican administration are on record as planning to change the government of through military means. Axis of evil etc. ThoughI do know a cracking theory about it as it happens. I'm sure you'd not agree. Edited my post to add a question. What's absurd about my alternative theories? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fullerene Posted March 2, 2018 Share Posted March 2, 2018 How exactly would you escalate the conflict in Syria more than where it already is? It's like saying Mount Everest isn't high enough. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peppino Impastato Posted March 2, 2018 Share Posted March 2, 2018 Maybe absurd is the wrong word convoluted then, both are plausible. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peppino Impastato Posted March 2, 2018 Share Posted March 2, 2018 2 minutes ago, Fullerene said: How exactly would you escalate the conflict in Syria more than where it already is? It's like saying Mount Everest isn't high enough. Have we invaded Syria? You could put a quarter of a million NATO troops on the ground that would be a slight escalation no? You could overthrow the Syrian government. Which has been the expressed wish of the UK and USA governments for years btw they openly say they want regime change. What a ridiculous question. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted March 2, 2018 Share Posted March 2, 2018 4 minutes ago, Peppino Impastato said: Maybe absurd is the wrong word convoluted then, both are plausible. That video is about the chemical attack under Trump's rule. I thought you were talking about the attack that Obama defied his Government by not using it as a red line for military invasion. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peppino Impastato Posted March 2, 2018 Share Posted March 2, 2018 I'm just using it as an example of how our media treat this and how misleading it can be if you take the BBC or CNN as gospel. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Connolly Posted March 2, 2018 Share Posted March 2, 2018 Quite nice to see this thread has multiple new posts and none of them are about a mass murder with a gun in the US. I expect normal service to resume soon though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RiG Posted March 2, 2018 Share Posted March 2, 2018 5 minutes ago, Mark Connolly said: Quite nice to see this thread has multiple new posts and none of them are about a mass murder with a gun in the US. I expect normal service to resume soon though. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-43262245 Not a mass shooting but still... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted March 2, 2018 Share Posted March 2, 2018 3 minutes ago, RiG said: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-43262245 Not a mass shooting but still... “Not a mass shooting” thread for this pish. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Moomintroll Posted March 2, 2018 Share Posted March 2, 2018 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-43262245 Not a mass shooting but still... To be fair it is Yet another US shooting which is the title of the thread after all. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RiG Posted March 2, 2018 Share Posted March 2, 2018 7 minutes ago, Granny Danger said: “Not a mass shooting” thread for this pish. *checks thread title* "Yet another US shooting" Good, I'm in the right one then. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted March 2, 2018 Share Posted March 2, 2018 2 minutes ago, Moomintroll said: 12 minutes ago, RiG said: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-43262245 Not a mass shooting but still... To be fair it is Yet another US shooting which is the title of the thread after all. We'd have a new one every 10 minutes. Standards need to kept, any killer of less than 4 is a loser. Sad. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.