BS: If Russia didn't do it..?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: bobad
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 04:08 PM

Question for you good people, when did calling other posters "shits" become part of being civilised.

It has been apologized for so get off your high horse.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 03:52 PM

For Keith. A slight change of venue to illustrate the media war. I find the viewpoint quite challenging.

https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/media-mass-deception-180409092703608.html

And to follow, a map of Syria showing the dispositions of all combatants. Apart from the US forces. However we are told they are east of the Euphrates (ie the Syrian and Kurdish border)

Now for anyone with a mind to think, the map represents the de facto partitioning of Syria with embedded assets to ensure it's permanence.
The Turks also have a Kurdish problem. (Divide and conquer?) There have been a number of coalition airstrikes in the vicinity of this border on Syrian assets and also on Deir Az Zor when Syria booted the "rebels" out a few months ago
As the map is from Al Jazeera the explanatory notes need to be used with caution.
Now it must be obvious to anyone that the entire area is a mishmash of competing factions, most not very nice people.
Being very cynical, I would say Isis fights the Syrian Army all the time and America carries out sorties on supposed Isis(in reality the Syrian Army) on mondays and thursdays, and the rest of the week is training Isis and rearming them to continue the "good" fight. But slowly the mask is dropping. The end game is regime change. Meanwhile the state dept and pentagon play mix and match.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 03:51 PM

Not so Kenny. The offending text, now deleted, read

You shits are in bed with Putin and Assad.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Kenny B (inactive)
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 03:35 PM

Raggy ... u on the right thread ? your mention of shits is the first on this thread

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Raggytash
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 03:25 PM

Question for you good people, when did calling other posters "shits" become part of being civilised.

Just wondering like ..........

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 01:35 PM

I'll mention that I've also observed aggressively conservative young americans employ similar argument tactics on youtube...

Not very mature of enlightened.. hopefully they may grow out of it...????

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 01:32 PM

It seems to me that a chap persistently making 2+2=5.98765432345 to suit his own ends...

ie.. if you said 'that' then what you really mean is...
"this this this this this and this, even though it's basically the opposite of what you meant when you said 'that'..."

is not a very positive, honest, intelligent form of debate...
never has been.. never will be...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 01:20 PM

Iains,
Well Keith in all honesty when it comes to the various sects of headloppers I make no attempt to keep up with the name changes.

So you are unable to distinguish between the war against ISIS and the Syrian civil war!

Hardly worth trying to discuss either with you then.

Like all civilised people, and the UN, I supported the war against the evil and genocidal ISIS. You are on your own on that one.

The West chose not to engage in the civil war, except in response to use of poison gas by Assad.
Russia and Iran chose to engage fully on the side of Assad, who was close to defeat but now close to total victory thanks to them.

Hope that helps.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 01:00 PM

Well Keith in all honesty when it comes to the various sects of headloppers I make no attempt to keep up with the name changes.
There is a narrative that the coalition is fighting the latest reincarnation of terrorists, but there is a strong counter argument that suggests covert support. There are numerous reports of helicopters whisking away the leading lights on the basis of when the going gets tough, the tough get going. It is never questioned where all those shiny brand new toyota technicals come from in their droves
And how do all those US and Nato munitions end up in terrorist hands and territory?
    There is sufficient data out there to suggest that the war about terror and fighting Assad in Syria is really all about promoting regional instability, regime change and the formation of fractious statelets that can be controlled easily.
A dispassionate review of the numerous data sources suggests we are being lied to on a scale that is unprecedented in all prior history.

It is time the emasculated mainstream media reclaimed their independence, integrity and curiosity. They have many questions to both ask and demand answers to.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 12:48 PM

Any one up for writing a very boring overlong new folk song

"Russia dunnit - or did they...???         
yes they did
no they din't
yes they did
no they din't
yes they did
no they din't
yes they did
no they din't
yes they did
no they din't
Russia dunnit - or did they...???         
yes they did
no they din't
yes they did
no they din't
yes they did
no they din't
yes they did
no they din't
yes they did
no they din't
Russia dunnit - or did they...???         
yes they did
no they din't
yes they did
no they din't
yes they did
no they din't
yes they did
no they din't
yes they did
no they din't
Russia dunnit - or did they...???         
yes they did
no they din't
yes they did
no they din't
yes they did
no they din't
yes they did
no they din't
yes they did
no they din't

All join in now.. I think you know the words
you should have thought about getting a pint and going for a slash
when the last song finished.
All together now
repeat until last orders bell and chucking out time...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 12:39 PM

I think it was the zlangrunits of Alpha Centuri.

Either that or it was you. This whodunit business is very suspicious.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 12:33 PM

May I be so bold to assert that this, and the previous similar titled, thread
responds to the official presumption that Russia dunnit..
Here we ask but what if they didn't.. who else did and why...???

It's an exercise in imaginative conjecture and hypothesis
to prioritise sceptical questioning over dogmatic answers..

That's all - mind stretching fun and games - hopefully to illuminate, rather than trivialise very serious current news events...

Therefore, in this context it's mostly irrelevant and boring if any folks keep banging on and on
that horrible big bastard Russia did it.. over and over again...

Not in this thread please...

Thread drift and interesting diversions are fine, no problems with that...
just stop banging with on with the same old monotonous tune that don't need to be sung here...!!!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 12:12 PM

Iains,
So you have no interest in the fact that thousands of people are being killed in a totally illegal war performed without UN sanction.

The war against ISIS was sanctioned by UN, so you have just changed wars.

It is estimated in excess of 400,000 Syrians have been killed. The media may call it a civil war, but there is plenty of evidence to
suggest it is a proxy war,

Again, you and the rest of us were discussing the civil war, not the war against ISIS. The alleged poison gas attack was part of the civil war, not the war against ISIS.

This discussian has been about the poison gas attack in Syria and the nerve agent attack in Salisbury. The debate has been about Russia's culpability in those incidents.
Hence the title!

I suggest a new thread if you want to discuss the war against ISIS. Previously everyone here has supported it. You seem to be arguing against it. It should make for an interesting discussion.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Raggytash
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 11:22 AM

Iains, I have appreciated many of your posts on this subject. You have provided many thoughtful, incisive and meaningful contributions and I'm sure many of us on here have learnt from you posts.

However you do not stand any chance at all of educating some people so for the sake of your sanity don't jump through any more hoops it is a complete waste of time. I'm sure you have noticed that I, and some others, ignore the idiot, some would say troll.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 10:35 AM

Iains - it's like trying to reason with a mid Medieval era Crusader...???

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 10:01 AM

Isis is operating on Syrian territory
The coalition is targeting Syrian territory
Strangely enough Syrians live Syria(Those that have not become refugees)
If Syrians live in Syria and the coalition has carried out thousands of missions releasing munitions in Syria, then it is naive to the point of blockheadedness to refuse to acknowledge that Syrians have likely been killed when in close proximity to explosions.

The Coalition has so far confirmed 218 of 2,493 claimed incidents as causing 770 civilian fatalities. In addition 85 further civilian deaths have been confirmed in unidentified incidents, at least 80 of which were the result of non-US Coalition actions.

In addition to these confirmed events, it is our provisional view at Airwars that between 5,181 and 7,920 civilian non-combatants appear likely to have been killed in 977 further incidents where there is fair and uncontested public reporting of an event – and where Coalition strikes were confirmed in the near vicinity on that date. Some 183 of these likely incidents were in Iraq (1,551 to 2,301 reported deaths) and 794 events in Syria (with a reported fatality range of 3,630 to 5,619.)

At least 1,281 children and 805 women are reported to be among those killed in confirmed and likely events, along with 4,697 or more civilians reportedly injured. Airwars presently lists the names of 2,976 reported civilian fatality victims from confirmed and likely Coalition events.

Across both nations, 151 alleged civilian casualty incidents have so far in our view been discounted, ie are highly unlikely to have involved Coalition aircraft (751 to 1,153 claimed deaths). This categorisation is often a result of Coalition feedback on alleged incidents. An additional 384 to 533 civilians reportedly died in 62 events where the reporting appears fair, but where it remains unclear whether the Coalition carried out any attack in the vicinity on the date in question.

A further 2,353 to 2,741 claimed deaths are attributed to 423 alleged Coalition airstrikes which are presently weakly reported or single-sourced.

An additional 6,581 to 10,271 asserted fatalities resulted from 510 contested events (for example, claims that the Iraq Air Force or proxy ground actions might instead have been responsible.)

Some 149 further contested events (943 to 1,384 deaths) may have involved Russian aircraft in Syria. And 21 additional contested events (139 to 179 deaths) were attributed variously both to the Coalition and to Turkey.
Now stop being a stupid boy and stop arguing. Wars kill people indiscriminately.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 08:59 AM

Don't say we didn't warn you...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 08:36 AM

Iains,
I would have severe reservations about the attribution of casualties

Syria would have reported any.

I know that the coalition and MSM like to emphasize surgical strikes, but even with smart weapons(and what percentage are dumb weapons?) mis targeting occurs.
How many surgical    strikes hit schools, buses,hospitals, generating capacity etc ect.

Again, Syria would have reported any.

The idea that civilians do not get killed by all sides in this conflict is preposterous.

It is preposterous to suggest that Western strikes have killed civilians in this conflict.
There has only been one previous strike against Assad. Last year an air base was hit.
Putin's and Assad's air strikes have caused civilian deaths in this conflict.

The strikes you now refer to were not against Assad or his regime. They were part of the war against ISIS, and not relevant to this discussion.
Syria was also fighting ISIS.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 07:09 AM

Keith.
three U.S.-led coalition strikes on a school near Raqqa in March 2017 killed 150 residents - roughly five times the toll acknowledged by the Pentagon, which said at the time that dozens of militants and not civilians were killed.

The U.N. investigators found no evidence that Islamic State fighters were at the school and said the U.S.-led coalition had violated international law by failing in its duty to protect displaced civilians known to be sheltered there since 2012.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 07:03 AM

Keith - I'm addressing you by name for this post = I didn't see your apology, but respect that felt you needed to say sorrry.

Your 'offending' post was hilariously out of character, and was amusing - not taken as hurtful..

Seriously there was no need to apologise for such a trifle amongst the usual level of robust BS banter,
insults, and counter insults..

My default position is i don't agree with deletions at all, ever..
unless the posted material breaks hate speech laws that put mudcat in jeopardy.

..and calling me a **** is water off a ducks back - sticks 'n' stones and all that...

So, all's well, and you keep yourself well...

now back to as we were......

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 07:01 AM

Keith. Documented data below with very instructive graphics. I would have severe reservations about the attribution of casualties. I recommend you carefully study the methodology of collation and attribution. It is a grey area in my opinion.
I know that the coalition and MSM like to emphasize surgical strikes, but even with smart weapons(and what percentage are dumb weapons?) mis targeting occurs.
How many surgical    strikes hit schools, buses,hospitals, generating capacity etc ect. The idea that civilians do not get killed by all sides in this conflict is preposterous.
https://airwars.org/data/

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 05:43 AM

Iains,
Merely throwing the odd statement back with a question mark is hardly a counter argument. If you dispute what is said at least try to give a supporting argument, otherwise there is little point in acknowledging your presence.

Throwing back statements with a question mark is asking for the statement to be justified.
In case that was not obvious, I also put a question, e.g. "Who is bombing whose homes in Syria?" and "What Syrian assets and infrastructure have been targeted by the coalition Iains?"

No Western country is bombing homes in Syria. Only 3 military targets were struck and without a single casualty.
No infrastructure or assets were targeted except illegal ones under international law.

PFR, I asked Joe to remove my post from late last night. He kindly did but also deleted my apology which you may not have seen.

I am very sorry for the things I said in that post. I was unwell and not myself.
Sorry,
keith.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 05:04 AM

A view from the trenches!
https://ahtribune.com/culture-media/2233-skripal-and-douma.html

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 05:01 AM

Congratulations Donuel. Another post of just hot air wandering about in a maze of obfuscation.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Donuel
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 06:50 PM

Iains Rules of Order must be obeyed or you will receive demerits and insults. Very Trumpian.
No one here will advise you to be nice person except yourself.

You remind me of the internet of 2001.
Just when you sound sane you go 'A Link Too Far'
Many of the Trolls of that era contracted virulent soul eating cases of Conspiria. Those who survived might work for bots by now.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Raggytash
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 03:42 PM

Hoops Iains, and ever more hoops.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 02:55 PM

Keith The standard of your literary efforts at rebuttal are far exceeded by Janet and John Book 1. Merely throwing the odd statement back with a question mark is hardly a counter argument. If you dispute what is said at least try to give a supporting argument, otherwise there is little point in acknowledging your presence.
yours is the consummate response of querying all just by the use of ?
To be taken seriously you need to put a little more effort into your warblings here!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 02:07 PM

..if you say so...

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 02:05 PM

So what?
not taking such clump headed folks seriously, dismissing, and ignoring them

Your view of the Shadow Foreign Secretary.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 12:36 PM

So what..

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 12:17 PM

PFR,
.."Please may we bomb your homes to maim & kill your families, thank you very much...???"

Who is bombing whose homes in Syria?

Iains,
Very convenient how coalition airstrikes target Syrian assets and infrastructure

What Syrian assets and infrastructure have been targeted by the coalition Iains?

"I find it worrying you are so convinced of your own righteousness."

Rightness not righteousness! I am in good company PFR. Emily Thornberry says she is convinced it was Assad too.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 10:52 AM

"I find it worrying you are so convinced of your own righteousness."

on a forum like this we have the option of not taking such clump headed folks seriously, dismissing, and ignoring them...

It's when they wield real power in the real world that's truly terrifying...!!!

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 10:46 AM

I think truth is more important than hoops. There is plenty of data out there to to suggest that what has happened on the ground in Syria has a reality at odds with the story presented by the mainstream media. Some, like the sphinx may like to keep their orifices below the sand of the Nile and thereby remain closed to alternatives and thus inscrutable. I however get the hump, like the camel, when people refuse to entertain the idea that perhaps other beliefs may have a factual basis.
Very convenient how coalition airstrikes target Syrian assets and infrastructure and simultaneously the terrorist are able to reform and attack.
Very inconvenient when said terrorists are found to have caches of western weaponry. Does Father Christmas shower his largesse on terrorists?
This thesis could be developed extensively but it would be a wasted effort.
I find it worrying you are so convinced of your own righteousness.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 08:30 AM

"Iains, Syria is a civil war."

.."Please may we bomb your homes to maim & kill your families, thank you very much...???"

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 08:20 AM

I think you are jumping through hoops, Iains. Any minute now you will not be able to jump high enough and you will 'lose' ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 07:31 AM

Iains, Syria is a civil war.
No Western country is engaged on either side.
Russia and Iran are heavily engaged on the side of Assad, otherwise he would not be winning.

So you have no interest in the fact that thousands of people are being killed in a totally illegal war performed without UN sanction

Not by us or any Western power.

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 07:24 AM

"Why, why, why Delilah ?"
I am as confused as you! My original links are repeated below.
"A funny thing happened on the way to the forum"
here is the original.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/war-is-good-for-business-insider-trading-secret-information-and-the-us-led-attack-against-syria/5637056

and the second

https://www.blacklistednews.com/article/65342/missile-manufacturer-raytheons-value-rose-by-25-billion-immediately-following-the-syria.html

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 05:42 AM

I make your links Russian millionaire's Global Research and "not available"
"Why, why, why Delilah ?"
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 05:35 AM

Keith if you need to be told I suggest you sign up for remedial classes.
It is estimated in excess of 400,000 Syrians have been killed. The media may call it a civil war, but there is plenty of evidence to
suggest it is a proxy war, initiated by the same people that destroyed Libya and Iraq.

With the added bonus of this and
that

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 04:34 AM

Iains,
So you have no interest in the fact that thousands of people are being killed in a totally illegal war performed without UN sanction

What war is that Iains?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Apr 18 - 06:57 PM

"So you have no interest in the fact that thousands of people are being killed in a totally illegal war performed without UN sanction. "
I'm more interested that many thousands more have been systematically detained, torturesd and murdered for decades without the Us, the UN or Britain showing the slightest interest in stopping it - your refusal to discuss it is an indication that it doesn't disturb you in the slightest
The coalition was a product of the failure of anybody to do anything to stop it so when those same people who sat on their hands and did SFA while that was going on invade a country strikes me as unbelievably hypocritical
Waste of time my asking you to comment on that one (again)
Isis is our monster - we turned a group of interned cranks into a world threat and you want me to pick sides - no thanks
I watched the victims of the gas attacks being cleaned up by rescue teams - I've watched the survivors cradling their dead from Assad's slaughter of civilians for several years now, I read the daily stories of the massacres - particularly in Homs, I watched the series on the refugees who made it to Britain where survivors sporke over the telephone to their families back in Syria
Ths is probably the worst closely day-to-day reprted series of atrocities ever and you want me to worry about an attack that hasn't been sanctioned by the U.N. - are you for real?
One of the things I find most grotesque in all of this, and for that matter, of all wars, is that there are legal and illegal ways of slaughtering thousands and that all you have to so is get permission from a committee and you can invade anybosy.
For crying out loud - what kind of    Science-Fiction world are we living in.
I've made my point about the invasion - I'm against it, but that doesn't mean I'm taking sides, as you are
I will be surprised if you respond to any of this - you haven't so far
Jim Carrolll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 22 Apr 18 - 06:28 PM

So you have no interest in the fact that thousands of people are being killed in a totally illegal war performed without UN sanction. A war carried out by the same coalition responsible for a death toll that exceeds largely unsubstantiated allegations of Assad's killings by hundreds of thousands. Your tunnel vision ideology leads you up some inhuman pathways.
   Nearly 50 years ago, Bob Dylan romped through a century of American warfare in his song “With God on Our Side.” From killing Indians to developing nuclear weapons, in Dylan’s view Americans acted with the hubris of knowing they had divine approval. After all, “You never ask questions / When God’s on your side.
    What were the justifications offered?
    Humanitarian in Libya
    Alleged WMD in Iraq
    Alleged Chemical weapons Syria

    Does the view above, eloquently expressed by Dylan, explain why you only assign guilt to one side?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Apr 18 - 10:44 AM

Still taking sides
Not interested

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 22 Apr 18 - 10:03 AM

Jim I keep saying there are no angels in this confrontation. My interest is trying to unravel the truth. The reasons given in the mainstream media merely provide unverified pretexts for illegal actions. The way the novichok fiasco is unravelling lends credence to this belief.
Had russian counter missile defences really taken out all those missiles, what would that do to the stock of Lockeed and others of their ilk that thrive on the international arms trade? So what to make of competing claims as to who shot down what?
What to make of Genie Energy drilling illegally on the Golan Heights in stolen Syrian territory? What to make of America sitting on Syrian Energy sources?
Perhaps being a banker should be made a capital offence?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Apr 18 - 08:27 AM

"Jim the only way to judge severity is by the number killed. "
I'm not attempting to judge the "severity" neither should any human being be; it's the cause of these shitty wars that should concern us and the effects they are having on this planet and its people
Neither Assad or his opponents can take the high ground her so why support any of them - nobody ever asked me or mine whether our money should be spent in the pursuit of oil (which is what all these things are basically about)
Just watched a survivor of the latest Afghanistan atrocity - a young woman who said "all I want is to live lives in peace and go to college - too much to ask?
Not as far as I'm concerned
Any moron who believes that these attacks were made "on humanitarian grounds: " is a friggin' moron (but in this case, we knew that anyway
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 22 Apr 18 - 08:15 AM

Jim the only way to judge severity is by the number killed. Putting labels on participants does not lessen the crime.

"Another anonymous quote (from The Strategic culture Foundation) doesn't move us on from here one iota"
The authors clearly list themselves.
You make your usual attack on the source, not the content.

Do you expect me to also discount everything in the mainstream media simply because they are proven organs of propaganda or a particular political bias?
I make this point again. Do you only believe what the BBC tells you?

I make no secret of casting my net as wide as possible. I also make it very clear I do not believe everything my sources say.

Can you not sort wheat from chaff, or do you throw the baby out with the bathwater?

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Apr 18 - 07:59 AM

"
Jim there are nuggets of truth in what you say, but your presentation skills need work on. "
Matter of opinion - they seem clear enough to most people
"How many has Assad killed in the last 10 years?
How many the coalition?"
Not even a consideration - once certainly does not cancel out the other and Assad's reign of terror goes way back beyond the present conflict and is the cause of it
You can't justify crimes by pointing to other criminals
Assad tortured and murder many thousands before Isis was the tinkle in anybody's eye and when this is all over he will murder many more if he is not banged up as a war criminal - the nature of the beast
Everything else in your posing is an example of your taking sides, which sets you apart from the rest of us - as far as I am concerned, my concern has been for the loss of life and liberty of vast masses of humanity - as far as the politicians are concerned - I hope they all rot in their self-made hells and leave the the rest of the planet to get on with their lives
Another anonymous quote (from The Strategic culture Foundation) doesn't move us on from here one iota
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Apr 18 - 07:28 AM

“Military force used against a state to punish it for infringing an international convention violates the prohibition of force under international law,”

That was not the legal argument used.

BBC,
"In the summary of legal advice given by Attorney General Jeremy Wright to Mrs May, Downing Street outlined why the UK was "permitted under international law" to take measures in the face of "overwhelming humanitarian suffering".
It said there were three reasons why the strikes met international laws for military action on humanitarian grounds:
The "repeated lethal use of chemical weapons by the Syrian regime constitutes a war crime" and it was "highly likely the regime would seek to use" such weapons again
Other attempts to "alleviate the humanitarian suffering caused by the use of chemical weapons" had been blocked and there was "no practicable alternative" to the strikes
The action was "carefully considered" and the "minimum judged necessary for that purpose""

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Iains
Date: 22 Apr 18 - 07:24 AM

Jim there are nuggets of truth in what you say, but your presentation skills need work on.

The media present Assad as a murdering tyrant.

How many has Assad killed in the last 10 years?
How many the coalition?

Seems the tyrant aspect is dominant over the murdering.

A few items to consider:

1)We are told most chemical weapons are binary.
Question: The recent missile mission in Syria supposedly targeted the factories producing chemical weapons. Now if you blow up stockpiles of A and B do they not mix? When they mix do they not produce toxic clouds?
Now who is the guilty party in this case? How many people were poisoned as a result of this carefully crafted chemical weapon attack?
Was is not a war crime worthy of International opprobrium?
What did we have? not a whisper!
I notice that during a recent UN debate when the Syrian representative had the floor to point out a few uncomfortable truths, the arrogant US representative got up and walked out!

2) The Novichok story by no means convinces everyone.
A summary below.
summary

3)The chemical weapon allegation at Douma was publicised as a false flag event by the Russians and Assad weeks ago. The first western reporters on the ground report false flag-no evidence seen. White helmets evacuated along with the terrorists. I wonder why?

4) The missile attack was supposedly on chemical weapon facilities, the Russians claim the attack was to degrade Syrian air defences.
Who to believe?
What are the more strategically important targets?

5) The coalition(US) had no UN sanction for the missile attack.
Why carry it out before the OPCW had time to investigate and report?

6) The media rarely mention is that Chinese troops are already on the ground in Syria to fight thousands of Uyghur militants, whether in ISIS or the Chinese al-Qaeda.


"The United States is not the only country with red lines. By disregarding and violating other states’ legitimate security interests, be it Russia or China, President Donald Trump risks opening the Pandora’s box of drawing in additional great powers to defend the Syrian government from terrorists and regime change.
China has key interests in Syria"

Subject: RE: BS: If Russia didn't do it..?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 22 Apr 18 - 05:30 AM

As happens Iains I am in ttal agreement over the illegality of this attack - nothing about this dirty, dirty war is or should be legal
Not the point
The important things is that it is immoral and inhuman and siding with one side or the other makes anybody who does that part of it
If you find that "insulting" - feel free to do so
Jim Carroll