Middle East landscape rapidly changing

[theskull1]

What exactly are you getting at here?  I could be wrong but it seems to me that you are arguing the absurd derivative point that it's not my opinion that is wrong but it's that I don't actually have the opinion I say I do.  Is that right?

No ....I want to know if it was the thought of unscrupulous regimes trying to arm themselves with nuclear weapons to protect themselves was what made you change your mind about military intervention against Assad?

I'd also love to know what points made in the articles in the Gaurdian or Robert Fisk have also made you think differently (you did say that were useful so I presume you got something from reading them)

[Franko]

Yes, amongst other things, for example, when I discovered that there was more evidence than I thought to suggest that Assad was not in fact responsible for the chemical attack.

How many examples would you like?

Whilst we are at this could you please outline for me your exact position on the issue and cite, with examples the exact points from literature/media/first hand experience which have caused you to arrive at it?

Yawn.

[theskull1]

I don't get why that was so difficult

In terms of evidence that Assad did or did not do it, the two boys that have pissed you off in regard to this discussion have been questioning the west's certainty about his guilt from the outset (without explaining to the rest of us what evidence they had). I don't know why you have a beef with them

[Franko]

Hence the reason I referred to their articles as useful and informative.  However, their reluctance to answer any question which does not fit with their view on this is seriously infuriating.  Like I said earlier, it's the I-know-better-than-you-so-don't-challenge-my-opinion attitude.

Itchy has asked numerous questions, quite a few of which remain unanswered because they don't fit with the USA/Israel = Bad mindset.

[theskull1]

I'd love to know what relevant questions you believe remain unanswered (not just unanswered to Itchy's satisfaction)

He did answer his own questions in one post. This loaded one sticks out

How many people should be gassed to death before the West takes action?
Itch's answer to his own question.
No more. Assad has crossed a line and action is needed. If none is taken then we can expect the gassing  to continue and increase. Future generations would look back and be  disgusted with us in the west. The Yanks are the best of a bad lot and I support their proposal to target some strategic military targets from the air for a short period, for no more than to act as a deterent. Its not perfect but its better than doing nothing or waffling at the UN or trying to organise a conference that would achieving nothing as the will is not there. I have yet to hear any other practical proposals on how to deter Assad. Some are more worried about handing some advantage to Israel than they are to protect innocent women and children from Sarin gas at the hands of a crazed loon

How is someone meant to answer that? And now that time has moved on would we all not agree that his stance should have changed by now?

[seafoid]

Hence the reason I referred to their articles as useful and informative.  However, their reluctance to answer any question which does not fit with their view on this is seriously infuriating.  Like I said earlier, it's the I-know-better-than-you-so-don't-challenge-my-opinion attitude.

Itchy has asked numerous questions, quite a few of which remain unanswered because they don't fit with the USA/Israel = Bad mindset.

The Israel lobby in the US is one of the main drivers of the push to war in Washington DC.
Start from there. Why does Israel want to get rid of Assad? To introduce the Rose of Tralee competition to Damascus and adopt puppies ?
And if Syria falls apart how many people are going to die and is it only civilians who die of sarin that count in terms of "something must be done'?  Are the rest "shit happens" or "suck on this"?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwFaSpca_3Q

Can anyone defend the USA/Israel = "good for the ordinary people of the Middle East" mindset ?       

BTW Tom Friedman talking about "our open society"- I wonder what he thinks about the NSA now.

[seafoid]

Al Jazeera on "Is the US a force for good in the world?"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3z6GmtrMCQ

[Franko]

Hence the reason I referred to their articles as useful and informative.  However, their reluctance to answer any question which does not fit with their view on this is seriously infuriating.  Like I said earlier, it's the I-know-better-than-you-so-don't-challenge-my-opinion attitude.

Itchy has asked numerous questions, quite a few of which remain unanswered because they don't fit with the USA/Israel = Bad mindset.

The Israel lobby in the US is one of the main drivers of the push to war in Washington DC.
Start from there. Why does Israel want to get rid of Assad? To introduce the Rose of Tralee competition to Damascus and adopt puppies ?
And if Syria falls apart how many people are going to die and is it only civilians who die of sarin that count in terms of "something must be done'?  Are the rest "shit happens" or "suck on this"?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwFaSpca_3Q

Can anyone defend the USA/Israel = "good for the ordinary people of the Middle East" mindset ?       

BTW Tom Friedman talking about "our open society"- I wonder what he thinks about the NSA now.

Unbelievable.

[johnneycool]

Unbelievable that it may seem, but the Syrian foreign minister just re-iterated that the reason Syria had chemical weapons in the first place was as a deterrent to Israels nuclear arsenal in the region.

Chicken and egg scenario, but Israel has had its fair share of lunatic leaders even if they're (sort of) democratically elected.

[seafoid]

Unbelievable that it may seem, but the Syrian foreign minister just re-iterated that the reason Syria had chemical weapons in the first place was as a deterrent to Israels nuclear arsenal in the region.

Chicken and egg scenario, but Israel has had its fair share of lunatic leaders even if they're (sort of) democratically elected.

Declaring the religious leaders in Iran insane is pure Orientalism.
Who says Israel is led by people who are strategically competent ?

Meanwhile

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2013/09/12/221723043/pro-israel-lobby-finds-longtime-supporters-defect-on-syria

The Obama administration is getting assistance from outside allies also trying to sell Congress on authorizing a military strike against Syria. Among the most prominent: strong backers of Israel.

Casino magnate and top GOP contributor Sheldon Adelson surprised many recently by offering to help President Obama get a resolution passed on Syria. And Capitol Hill was blanketed this week by some 300 lobbyists with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC.

[give her dixie]

Unbelievable that it may seem, but the Syrian foreign minister just re-iterated that the reason Syria had chemical weapons in the first place was as a deterrent to Israels nuclear arsenal in the region.

Chicken and egg scenario, but Israel has had its fair share of lunatic leaders even if they're (sort of) democratically elected.

Declaring the religious leaders in Iran insane is pure Orientalism.
Who says Israel is led by people who are strategically competent ?

Meanwhile

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2013/09/12/221723043/pro-israel-lobby-finds-longtime-supporters-defect-on-syria

The Obama administration is getting assistance from outside allies also trying to sell Congress on authorizing a military strike against Syria. Among the most prominent: strong backers of Israel.

Casino magnate and top GOP contributor Sheldon Adelson surprised many recently by offering to help President Obama get a resolution passed on Syria. And Capitol Hill was blanketed this week by some 300 lobbyists with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC.

Another classic example of "the tail wagging the dog"

[seafoid]

Unbelievable that it may seem, but the Syrian foreign minister just re-iterated that the reason Syria had chemical weapons in the first place was as a deterrent to Israels nuclear arsenal in the region.

Chicken and egg scenario, but Israel has had its fair share of lunatic leaders even if they're (sort of) democratically elected.

Declaring the religious leaders in Iran insane is pure Orientalism.
Who says Israel is led by people who are strategically competent ?

Meanwhile

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2013/09/12/221723043/pro-israel-lobby-finds-longtime-supporters-defect-on-syria

The Obama administration is getting assistance from outside allies also trying to sell Congress on authorizing a military strike against Syria. Among the most prominent: strong backers of Israel.

Casino magnate and top GOP contributor Sheldon Adelson surprised many recently by offering to help President Obama get a resolution passed on Syria. And Capitol Hill was blanketed this week by some 300 lobbyists with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC.

Another classic example of "the tail wagging the dog"

It was probably the same for the Iraq war.

[give her dixie]

Unbelievable that it may seem, but the Syrian foreign minister just re-iterated that the reason Syria had chemical weapons in the first place was as a deterrent to Israels nuclear arsenal in the region.

Chicken and egg scenario, but Israel has had its fair share of lunatic leaders even if they're (sort of) democratically elected.

Declaring the religious leaders in Iran insane is pure Orientalism.
Who says Israel is led by people who are strategically competent ?

Meanwhile

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2013/09/12/221723043/pro-israel-lobby-finds-longtime-supporters-defect-on-syria

The Obama administration is getting assistance from outside allies also trying to sell Congress on authorizing a military strike against Syria. Among the most prominent: strong backers of Israel.

Casino magnate and top GOP contributor Sheldon Adelson surprised many recently by offering to help President Obama get a resolution passed on Syria. And Capitol Hill was blanketed this week by some 300 lobbyists with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC.

Another classic example of "the tail wagging the dog"

It was probably the same for the Iraq war.

Indeed it was, and Tony Blair admitted the following at the Chilcot Inquiry regarding that famous visit to Texas where in meeting with Bush at his ranch, where they carefully planned their illegal invasion of Iraq:

"As I recall that discussion, it was less to do with specifics about what we were going to do on Iraq or, indeed, the Middle East, because the Israel issue was a big, big issue at the time. I think, in fact, I remember, actually, there may have been conversations that we had even with Israelis, the two of us, whilst we were there. So that was a major part of all this."

[give her dixie]

I see John Kerry is heading straight to his real bosses in Tel Aviv to update Netanyahu on Syria deal.
No doubt Iran will be next in the crosshairs......

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/1.546948

[Mike Sheehy]

I see John Kerry is heading straight to his real bosses in Tel Aviv to update Netanyahu on Syria deal.
No doubt Iran will be next in the crosshairs......

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/1.546948

what is your point ? Given the history of genocide against jews are they not entitled to be briefed on the status of any imminent threats of chemical warfare against them ?