Senior American officials say the United States has planned to launch missile strikes against Syria “as early as Thursday” in order to punish Damascus over the alleged use of chemical weapons.
The unnamed officials told NBC News on Tuesday that the “three days” of strikes would be limited in scope, and aimed at “sending a message to Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad rather than degrading his military capabilities.”
On Monday night, four US warships were deployed in the Mediterranean within cruise missile range of Syria.
American defense officials said if the US wants to send a message to Assad, the most likely military action would be a Tomahawk missile strike, launched from a ship in the Mediterranean.
The US military has beefed up equipment during the past weeks. Several nuclear-powered submarines are reportedly in the water near Syria, also cruise-missile equipped.
The report came one day after US Secretary of State John Kerry accused the Syrian government of using chemical weapons.
http://www.eutimes.net/2013/08/us-begins-war-on-syria-as-early-as-thursday/
US begins war on Syria as early as Thursday
Discussion in 'News & Current Events' started by Revmitchell, Aug 28, 2013.
-
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
In other words, the Great Pretender's version of Clinton's multimillion dollar Cruise missile strike on a worthless patch of desert with a bunch of $10 tents pitched on it.
Utterly useless, pointless, and stupid. The equivalent of telling the class bully, as he's beating up another kid, 'Ooh, you are so going to get it!" Followed by nothing.
We need to do something. This is not it. -
InTheLight Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Hopefully the custodian at the White House will polish Obama's Nobel Peace Prize before the war starts. Once the Prize Committee requests its return I don't think it will get cleaned again.
-
-
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...nfirmed-assad-regime-behind-alleged-chemical/
The initial confirmation that the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad was responsible for a suspected chemical weapons attack Aug. 21 came from a tip from the Israeli intelligence service, western intelligence sources tell Fox News.
A special unit of the Israeli Defense Force -- an intelligence unit that goes by the number 8200, which is a military intelligence listening unit -- has been cooperating with the NSA, sources tell Fox News.
This Israeli intelligence unit helped provide the intelligence intercepts that allowed the White House last weekend to conclude that the Assad regime was behind the attack.
We could well ask, "Why don't the U.N. inspectors look at the Israeli evidence?" The answer lies in the question: " ... U.N. inspectors ... " -
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
If I were the UN I'd take any claims that Israeli' intell makes with a grain of salt simply because it has a vested interest in toppling Assad. And the NSA has been caught breaking the law and lying through it's teeth about it. That and everyone knows (maybe not everyone) Faux Snews itself lacks credibility when speaking on foreign policy as it is terminally infected with neocon warmongers and their followers..
There ya have it. Three compromised sources that would benefit from a military attack on Assad creating a narrative that serves their purposes. I don't believe it for a minute. Much as I disagree with the UN sometimes it does come to rational conclusions. -
church mouse guy Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
The best way to destroy Syria would be to force Obamacare on them. The Democrats need a war to detract from their miserable economic policies. WW I, WW II, Korea, and Vietnam were all started when a Democrat was in the White House.
-
InTheLight Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Would someone please explain why the US needs to get involved in this?
-
Several motivations are operating simultaneously. One is offered by Phil Greaves of Global Research: “There are predominantly two parties to blame for the sectarianism rife in Syria and spreading beyond its borders, they are: Saudi Arabia and Qatar. Sitting behind these states, and driving their destructive policy is, as always, the Empire of the era.
Those who gain the most from destabilizing whole resource-rich regions for their own benefit. For the last 60 years, that Empire has been the United States of America.”
A second explanation is the hypothesis of Paul Craig Roberts: “Perhaps the purpose of the wars is to radicalize Muslims and, thereby, destabilize Russia and even China.”
A third reason is held by many, including both Greaves and Roberts, which is that destabilizing Syria allows Israel to achieve its aims.
Fourth, for both the U.S. and Israel, this is a means to undercut Hezbollah, which is sponsored by Iran.
Fifth, the neocon agenda long ago was to roll up the “axis of evil”, including Iran and its ally Syria. Their agenda is world domination by the sole surviving superpower.
Sixth, the military-industrial complex and its lobbies on the Hill thrive on the profits, the work of war, the advancements, and the demand for their services that instability brings. The DHS thrives on an atmopshere of war and fear. Members of Congress thrive on making speeches about promoting rights and democracy, even though they are promoting war, instability, refugees and death. The State Department appears to have abandoned diplomacy and become subservient to the neocon influences.
CONTINUE . . . -
What will happen is Obama will have missiles lobbed into Benghazi by mistake to destroy any evidence or witnesses of what happened their. oops
-
InTheLight Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
But anyways . . .
Yeah they'd make out pretty well with new and bigger contracts, advancements in weapons, beefed up security and secrecy and so on, . . .
Yeah they'd make out like fat cats.
When they aren't being used to topple regimes unfriendly to the globalist's corporate interests they're being used as an outside threat to undermine our liberties and empower the government and of course fill the pockets of those who benefit from creating a militarized big brother police state.
Condi Rice was talking about it way back when.
Quit getting hung up on puppets.
How do you explain that? -
But anyways . . .
Yeah they'd make out pretty well with new and bigger contracts, advancements in weapons, beefed up security and secrecy and so on, . . .
Yeah they'd make out like fat cats.
When they aren't being used to topple regimes unfriendly to the globalist's corporate interests they're being used as an outside threat to undermine our liberties and empower the government and of course fill the pockets of those who benefit from creating a militarized big brother police state.
Condi Rice was talking about it way back when.
Quit getting hung up on puppets.
How do you explain that? -
-
And throw in the long history of false flag attacks and other dubious justifications and pretexts used for attacking other nations without evidence I'd say rushing to the aid of Al Qaeda because Assad is puttin a whuppin on em is the last thing we need to do. -
-
Anyone can look at all my posts on Syria to see I have never associated "all Syrians" with Al Qaeda.
Building such strawman arguments doesn't do much for your credibilty ole hoss.:tongue3:
Question. How is it you haven't thrown a fit at yourself for using partial quotes? You absolutely forbid me from doing that not long ago, remember that? I do.