PDA

View Full Version : Syria's Chemical Weapons



NJCardFan
08-30-2013, 02:04 PM
Food for thought: What are the chances that what he is using are the weapons that Saddam Hussein had smuggled out of Iraq at the start of the Iraq War?

noonwitch
08-30-2013, 02:27 PM
I guess that depends on what kind of shelf life the chemicals have.

Molon Labe
08-30-2013, 02:28 PM
Food for thought: What are the chances that what he is using are the weapons that Saddam Hussein had smuggled out of Iraq at the start of the Iraq War?

Lots of conflicting intelligence on whether he ever did so. In addition, there is mounting evidence that the Saudi's supplied the rebels (Syrians In Ghouta Claim Saudi-Supplied Rebels Behind Chemical Attack)with the Chemicals to stage this attack. Or possibly Al Nasra front (http://benswann.com/what-the-media-isnt-telling-you-about-the-syrian-chemical-attack/), who it appears has access to some labs to make the stuff.
The only "confirmation" of chemicals is coming from the Obama administration.
The videos of the chemical attacks are also troubling as none of the first responders are in any type of protective clothing. You would not likely try to treat chemical casualties and not become one yourself. Pouring water in someone's eyes is not goint to cut it.

Rockntractor
08-30-2013, 02:35 PM
I guess that depends on what kind of shelf life the chemicals have.
You have to use them pretty quick or they turn to poison, there is a warning on bottom , best if used by

djones520
08-30-2013, 04:29 PM
I guess that depends on what kind of shelf life the chemicals have.

Sarin itself only lasts for a few weeks while created. Its components are usually stored, and then mixed when it seems it's time to use the gas.

Odysseus
08-30-2013, 04:33 PM
Lots of conflicting intelligence on whether he ever did so. In addition, there is mounting evidence that the Saudi's supplied the rebels (Syrians In Ghouta Claim Saudi-Supplied Rebels Behind Chemical Attack)with the Chemicals to stage this attack. Or possibly Al Nasra front (http://benswann.com/what-the-media-isnt-telling-you-about-the-syrian-chemical-attack/), who it appears has access to some labs to make the stuff.
The only "confirmation" of chemicals is coming from the Obama administration.
The videos of the chemical attacks are also troubling as none of the first responders are in any type of protective clothing. You would not likely try to treat chemical casualties and not become one yourself. Pouring water in someone's eyes is not goint to cut it.

Ben Swann again? Really?

Sarin is relatively easy to make, but difficult to deply. Unless the al Nusra Front has field artillery pieces with chemical warheads, which is the delivery system that was used, then the odds are that it was Assad that used them.

Also, the source that stated that Saddam's WMD stockpiles were shipped to Syria was the Chief of Staff of the IDF, Gen Yaalon (http://www.nysun.com/foreign/saddams-wmd-moved-to-syria-an-israeli-says/24480/). In addition, there is precedent. During the first Gulf War, Saddam sent his air force into Iran to prevent massive losses; he had a history of shipping high-value weapons to safe havens, and Yaalon is a credible source. This was further corroborated by former Iraqi general Georges Sada, who claimed that Saddam had ordered all of his stockpiles to be moved to Syria in 2002 in advance of the arrival of weapon inspectors. Sada claimed that Iraqi relief operations for the June 4 Zeyzoun Dam disaster in Syria were used as a pretext for the air convoys.

Whether we engage Syria or not, we should take action based on the best intel available, not the ravings of a Paulestinian reporter who has been shilling for Assad.

Molon Labe
08-30-2013, 04:58 PM
Ben Swann again? Really?

Sarin is relatively easy to make, but difficult to deply. Unless the al Nusra Front has field artillery pieces with chemical warheads, which is the delivery system that was used, then the odds are that it was Assad that used them.

Also, the source that stated that Saddam's WMD stockpiles were shipped to Syria was the Chief of Staff of the IDF, Gen Yaalon (http://www.nysun.com/foreign/saddams-wmd-moved-to-syria-an-israeli-says/24480/). In addition, there is precedent. During the first Gulf War, Saddam sent his air force into Iran to prevent massive losses; he had a history of shipping high-value weapons to safe havens, and Yaalon is a credible source. This was further corroborated by former Iraqi general Georges Sada, who claimed that Saddam had ordered all of his stockpiles to be moved to Syria in 2002 in advance of the arrival of weapon inspectors. Sada claimed that Iraqi relief operations for the June 4 Zeyzoun Dam disaster in Syria were used as a pretext for the air convoys.

Whether we engage Syria or not, we should take action based on the best intel available, not the ravings of a Paulestinian reporter who has been shilling for Assad.

Attacking the messenger again. :rolleyes:

Prove it or be quiet.

patriot45
08-30-2013, 05:27 PM
You have to use them pretty quick or they turn to poison, there is a warning on bottom , best if used by

We need to get Stephen King to give us the recipe for The Dome! That is awesome! Dome the mid-east!

Odysseus
08-30-2013, 06:10 PM
Attacking the messenger again. :rolleyes:

Prove it or be quiet.

Prove what, that Swann's a shill for Assad? You already proved that with your first post with one of his videos, where he presented an Alawite as a neutral observer of the Assad regime. Remember? No? Click here: http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/showthread.php?55363-The-truth-on-Syrian-Rebels&p=555351&viewfull=1#post555351 His "witness" eventually admitted that he was an Alawite, which means that he's part of Assad's clan. Swann didn't pick up on that, which means that he's either hopelessly ignorant of the facts in Syria, or he's a shill for Assad. I'll accept either answer, but neither of them gives him any credibility.

Or do you want me to prove that Saddam's WMDs are in Syria? Sorry, but the best that I can do is attribute the open source information, which I've done, but given that the open sources are pretty reliable, I'm willing to go along with them.

Prove that the Assad regime was the source of the WMD attack? Again, the delivery system was heavy artillery. Assad has it, the rebels don't; they have small arms and not much of that. Therefore, the odds are that the regime used the WMD. Now, if somebody credible provides proof that the rebels did it, then I'll revisit the issue, but that hasn't happened yet.

As for being quiet, sorry, but I just checked my rating scheme and you aren't in my chain of command, so I'll decline your order.

Arroyo_Doble
08-30-2013, 06:15 PM
Why is it so difficult to believe that the Syrian regime used chemical weapons?

Molon Labe
08-30-2013, 06:32 PM
Why is it so difficult to believe that the Syrian regime used chemical weapons?

Ask yourself who it benefits.

Molon Labe
08-30-2013, 06:43 PM
Prove what, that Swann's a shill for Assad? You already proved that with your first post with one of his videos, where he presented an Alawite as a neutral observer of the Assad regime. Remember? No? Click here: http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/showthread.php?55363-The-truth-on-Syrian-Rebels&p=555351&viewfull=1#post555351 His "witness" eventually admitted that he was an Alawite, which means that he's part of Assad's clan. Swann didn't pick up on that, which means that he's either hopelessly ignorant of the facts in Syria, or he's a shill for Assad. I'll accept either answer, but neither of them gives him any credibility.

Or do you want me to prove that Saddam's WMDs are in Syria? Sorry, but the best that I can do is attribute the open source information, which I've done, but given that the open sources are pretty reliable, I'm willing to go along with them.

Prove that the Assad regime was the source of the WMD attack? Again, the delivery system was heavy artillery. Assad has it, the rebels don't; they have small arms and not much of that. Therefore, the odds are that the regime used the WMD. Now, if somebody credible provides proof that the rebels did it, then I'll revisit the issue, but that hasn't happened yet.

As for being quiet, sorry, but I just checked my rating scheme and you aren't in my chain of command, so I'll decline your order.

Sorry Ody....but the military doesn't have any "evidence" that's better than the open source information on either Saddam's chemical slight of hand into Syria or what's occurring now. Either that or their not sharing it. Their problem is people think it's bullshit. If so they would have come out and said so.....just like they did with the Colin Powell fiasco.

You think somehow you are the only one on this board to had previous experience with need to know intelligence. For cripes sake, John Kerry is stumbling bumbling his way through this with "vague" bullshit. So if the intelligence is out there, I'm pretty confidant a regular staff officer hasn't been made privy to that Top Secret info.

It's a different world today with the advent of free information being shared in real time by people who are actually there. Welcome to the the new age.

You believe what you wish to believe but your MO is to attack the guy putting out the information instead of attacking the premise. You lose that way. Swann's evidence is as credible as the shill your pushing. And he's one of the best investigative journalists out there. Put up you info or shut up as they say is good advice. This administration has no clothes with this tripe.

ReinMan
08-30-2013, 06:49 PM
Sarin itself only lasts for a few weeks while created. Its components are usually stored, and then mixed when it seems it's time to use the gas.

Sarin is usually deployed as a binary munition. The two stable precursor components are stored in compartments in the warhead separated by a partition that's destroyed by the acceleration of being fired (as in a shell) or released (as in a bomb). Rotation on route to target mixes the precursors and the chemical reaction creates the final product.

Then a bursting charge aerosolizes the chemical at the target.

Most of the nasty nerve agents (Sarin, VX, Tabun, etc.) are just as dangerous on the skin as they are inhaled.

VX is particularly nasty: a single atomized droplet absorbed through the skin can cause death in 15 min or so...

Makes me chuckle when I see people fitting gas masks, and drilling to put them on while wearing shorts and a t-shirt....

Molon Labe
08-30-2013, 06:59 PM
Sarin is usually deployed as a binary munition. The two stable precursor components are stored in compartments in the warhead separated by a partition that's destroyed by the acceleration of being fired (as in a shell) or released (as in a bomb). Rotation on route to target mixes the precursors and the chemical reaction creates the final product.

Then a bursting charge aerosolizes the chemical at the target.

Most of the nasty nerve agents (Sarin, VX, Tabun, etc.) are just as dangerous on the skin as they are inhaled.

VX is particularly nasty: a single atomized droplet absorbed through the skin can cause death in 15 min or so...

Makes me chuckle when I see people fitting gas masks, and drilling to put them on while wearing shorts and a t-shirt....

which is why everyone's bs detector should be going off when viewing the administrations Numero uno evidence which is the great Videos (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2GPTqxf8rE&bpctr=1377901743) of the attack.....presented by the Islamic propaganda machine.

Odysseus
08-30-2013, 07:10 PM
Ask yourself who it benefits.

Iran, obviously. Assad doesn't act without Iranian approval. Ask yourself why Iran would want Assad to use chemical weapons, and you have the answer. Iran gets to use Assad as a canary in the WMD coal mine to test US resolve. A weak response shows that they can continue their nuclear program with nothing to fear from us. If we do react decisively, the Iran knows that they have to reevaluate their strategy, but it costs them little to find out. That's their strategic thinking. Assad's position is more tactical. He has a shortage of manpower, which is why he is using fighters from Hezbollah and Iran. The opposition outnumbers his forces but lacks the weapons to take him down, but as more of his conscripts defect with their weapons, that balance is likely to change. Assad's choices are to commit his dwindling forces in attrition battles, or to try to use the superior weapons at his disposal, which includes a massive WMD stockpile, to reduce the rebels' numbers. He learned this from his father, who used massed artillery to destroy the city of Hama during a previous Muslim Brotherhood insurgency. The downside is the threat of US action, but he has calculated that Obama will do nothing, or at least nothing significant. Assad knows that the Russians and Chinese will block any action at the UN, and that our NATO allies are not going to get involved in another of Obama's pointless mini-wars after seeing how Libya turned out. So, Assad's calculation is whether the risk of a highly unlikely unilateral, decisive US action outweighs the almost certain benefits of culling his enemies with a nerve gas strike. He clearly guessed that Obama will not act, at least not effectively.

Oh, and remember one other thing, which is that Obama doesn't want to bomb Syria. Bombing Syria means that his reset policies have failed. Obama has painted himself into a corner with tough rhetoric that he n't prepared to back up, hence all of the hemming and hawing over whether or not this strike constitutes a red line (as opposed to scarlet or cadmium, or whether the line is actually a line, or more of a curve, etc.,). He may order a therapeutic air strike, whose sole purpose is to make him look tough, while not altering the situation on the ground, and claim that he has protected the lives of Syrians, but everyone this side of MSNBC will see through this. And, the downside of that is that it plays to Assad as well, as he can claim to have survived the wrath of the US, which only strengthens his hand. Unless Obama actually commits to a serious use of force to weaken Assad's hold on power, which is unlikely, then Assad benefits from his use of WMDs, and Iran sees that they can continue their nuclear program without fear of any action by by the US.

Whether or not you think bombing Syria makes sense (and I don't), that is the cost benefit analysis that motivated Assad and the Iranian mullahs.

Molon Labe
08-30-2013, 07:14 PM
Ben Swann again? Really?

Also, the source that stated that Saddam's WMD stockpiles were shipped to Syria was the Chief of Staff of the IDF, Gen Yaalon (http://www.nysun.com/foreign/saddams-wmd-moved-to-syria-an-israeli-says/24480/). In addition, there is precedent. During the first Gulf War, Saddam sent his air force into Iran to prevent massive losses; he had a history of shipping high-value weapons to safe havens, and Yaalon is a credible source. This was further corroborated by former Iraqi general Georges Sada, who claimed that Saddam had ordered all of his stockpiles to be moved to Syria in 2002 in advance of the arrival of weapon inspectors. Sada claimed that Iraqi relief operations for the June 4 Zeyzoun Dam disaster in Syria were used as a pretext for the air convoys..

Let me make perfectly clear that I don't dispute this as a possibility. All I'm saying is that I don't really know, but the evidence that Saddam moved them (http://americasright.com/2010/10/25/wikileaks-docs-bush-right-on-wmd/)is a highly probable.

Molon Labe
08-30-2013, 07:50 PM
Hey...imagine some common sense coming off the Bill O'Reilly show.
Exactly what I've been saying.


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

Not from O'Reilly mind you. :friendly_wink:

Sonnabend
08-30-2013, 08:47 PM
Why is it so difficult to believe that the Syrian regime used chemical weapons?

It isnt. Did he get them from Saddam....I dont know. Maybe. Maybe he sent them precursors.

DumbAss Tanker
08-30-2013, 11:20 PM
VX is actually extremely stable and lasts for many, many years if stored in airtight, opaque containers. As Ody correctly notes, it is a somewhat more difficult matter to get it to aerosolize, usually requiring either an explosive burster charge or a sprayer (The latter not being used militarily due to the obvious problems with it). It's not actually a gas, but a liquid that has to be turned into an aerosol (A mist of fine droplets) to be delivered. GB, the nonpersistent equivalent, behaves more like a gas, which is of course why it isn't persistent.

Rockntractor
08-30-2013, 11:38 PM
VX is actually extremely stable and lasts for many, many years if stored in airtight, opaque containers.

I think they have Tupperware.

DumbAss Tanker
08-31-2013, 01:30 AM
I think they have Tupperware.

Mason jars would do just fine, and since it isn't colorless, it won't even get mixed up with the 'shine.

djones520
08-31-2013, 01:49 AM
It isnt. Did he get them from Saddam....I dont know. Maybe. Maybe he sent them precursors.

On another forum we've got one of your nationals screaming about how our Intelligence can't be trusted for a damn over this because of Iraq. I'm leaving that topic alone, but it's interesting to see some of the other worlds take on all of this.

Sonnabend
08-31-2013, 04:51 AM
On another forum we've got one of your nationals screaming about how our Intelligence can't be trusted for a damn over this because of Iraq. I'm leaving that topic alone, but it's interesting to see some of the other worlds take on all of this.

One of the reasons we sent the Sheehag back to you with our best wishes :biggrin-new:

We have enough amateur nutters here without importing the professionals.

I'd ask what the other forum is, but I can take an educated guess. Stick to whats on CU, thanks.

Odysseus
09-10-2013, 12:10 PM
http://c0.nrostatic.com/sites/default/files/styles/nro_media_large_splash/public/syriaps_35.jpg?itok=PcG012Si

Molon Labe
09-10-2013, 02:24 PM
http://c0.nrostatic.com/sites/default/files/styles/nro_media_large_splash/public/syriaps_35.jpg?itok=PcG012Si

err....it's looking more and more like it was the rebels (Al-Qaeda) who had and used them.

This is more oppropriate.

http://www.barenakedislam.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/obama-finance-terrorists.jpg

Molon Labe
09-10-2013, 03:01 PM
Thread needs retitle. Al Qaeda rebels chemical weapons.

http://investmentwatchblog.com/fox-news-syrian-rebel-admits-using-chemical-weapons/

NJCardFan
09-10-2013, 05:22 PM
err....it's looking more and more like it was the rebels (Al-Qaeda) who had and used them.

This is more oppropriate.

http://www.barenakedislam.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/obama-finance-terrorists.jpg
Remember this the next time you stay home instead of voting for the lesser of 2 evils.

DumbAss Tanker
09-10-2013, 06:32 PM
Remember this the next time you stay home instead of voting for the lesser of 2 evils.

There are many 'mainstream' (cough) Republicans that would have screwed the pooch just as thoroughly, if in somewhat different ways, including Juan McLame. At least it's Democrat who get to go down in the annals of cluelessness this time.

Molon Labe
09-10-2013, 09:58 PM
Remember this the next time you stay home instead of voting for the lesser of 2 evils.

Oh..you believe the New England Junior varsity libtard Romney would have done differently? Nope...he'd be right there with McCain, Kerry and that idiot Lindsey Graham.

No thanks. Why don't you actually get involved in your caucus/convention procedure or whatever your state POTUS certifying role is so you can stop believing in the false power of the vote to "change" things by all the idiots who come out in November.

Molon Labe
09-10-2013, 10:00 PM
There are many 'mainstream' (cough) Republicans that would have screwed the pooch just as thoroughly, if in somewhat different ways, including Juan McLame. At least it's Democrat who get to go down in the annals of cluelessness this time.

I think I tried to make that point ad nauseum in 08' and 12' to no avail. If this were a Republican you wouldn't be seeing the right wing taking a massive sea change from the left to further right as it has the last 6 years. The best way to have set back conservatives was for one of the last two imbeciles they put up to have won the election.

Retread
09-10-2013, 10:10 PM
i accept no excuse and there are no reasons. Abandoning your duty to vote is abandoning your country.

DumbAss Tanker
09-10-2013, 11:44 PM
Well, if Christie is the candidate in 2016, I guess I'll just have to learn to live with your disapproval. Somehow.

Rockntractor
09-10-2013, 11:53 PM
Well, if Christie is the candidate in 2016, I guess I'll just have to learn to live with your disapproval. Somehow.

Ain't hapnin.

Molon Labe
09-12-2013, 09:07 AM
i accept no excuse and there are no reasons. Abandoning your duty to vote is abandoning your country.

:rolleyes:
.....and I feel the same way about those of you who believe that your greatest act of citizenship is to walk to the polls one day in November and pull a lever.

BTW: Some really bomb diddily wise people agree with you.


Voting is the most precious right of every citizen, and we have a moral obligation to ensure the integrity of our voting process. Hillary Clinton


Nobody will ever deprive the American people of the right to vote except the American people themselves and the only way they could do this is by not voting. Franklin D. Roosevelt


Real Patriots resist abuses of government power over the individual BEFORE they worry about their vote. That's a 365 day a year job.



If voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal. - Emma Goldman

Odysseus
09-12-2013, 01:37 PM
Thread needs retitle. Al Qaeda rebels chemical weapons.

http://investmentwatchblog.com/fox-news-syrian-rebel-admits-using-chemical-weapons/


err....it's looking more and more like it was the rebels (Al-Qaeda) who had and used them.

This is more oppropriate.

http://www.barenakedislam.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/obama-finance-terrorists.jpg

For the reasons that I stated previously, it is highly unlikely that the al Nusra Front managed to deploy chemical weapons. They lack the artillery, for one thing. For another, it's not logical for them to assume that Obama would act on their behalf against Iran and Assad. In Libya, Obama took out Qaddafi, who was pretty much neutered. In Egypt, he undermined a pro-American regime to support the Brotherhood. In Iran, he ignored the anti-government protestors to support the mullahs. In each case, Obama has sided with the most anti-American faction available. The Syrian rebels couldn't assume that Obama would order an attack based on a limited attack, when the deaths of over 100,000 people didn't move him to act previously. In


There are many 'mainstream' (cough) Republicans that would have screwed the pooch just as thoroughly, if in somewhat different ways, including Juan McLame. At least it's Democrat who get to go down in the annals of cluelessness this time.

This is true, but there are some who wouldn't have. At the very least, most Republicans at least have a semblance of a clue where national security is concerned.


Oh..you believe the New England Junior varsity libtard Romney would have done differently? Nope...he'd be right there with McCain, Kerry and that idiot Lindsey Graham.

No thanks. Why don't you actually get involved in your caucus/convention procedure or whatever your state POTUS certifying role is so you can stop believing in the false power of the vote to "change" things by all the idiots who come out in November.

http://theaxemen.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/ayecarumbaoj3.jpg?w=230&h=300

Retread
09-13-2013, 12:30 AM
:rolleyes:
.....and I feel the same way about those of you who believe that your greatest act of citizenship is to walk to the polls one day in November and pull a lever.

BTW: Some really bomb diddily wise people agree with you.






Real Patriots resist abuses of government power over the individual BEFORE they worry about their vote. That's a 365 day a year job.


I go back a little further for my references.

"Let each citizen remember at the moment he is offering his vote that he is not making a present or a compliment to please an individual--or at least that he ought not so to do; but that he is executing one of the most solemn trusts in human society for which he is accountable to God and his country. "
Samuel Adams

"Now more than ever the people are responsible for the character of their Congress. If that body be ignorant, reckless, and corrupt, it is because the people tolerate ignorance, recklessness, and corruption."
James Garfield

"A share in the sovereignty of the state, which is exercised by the citizens at large, in voting at elections is one of the most important rights of the subject, and in a republic ought to stand foremost in the estimation of the law. "
Alexander Hamilton,

"Should things go wrong at any time, the people will set them to rights by the peaceable exercise of their elective rights. "
Thomas Jefferson,

"The elective franchise, if guarded as the ark of our safety, will peaceably dissipate all combinations to subvert a Constitution, dictated by the wisdom, and resting on the will of the people. "
Thomas Jefferson,

"The rational and peacable instrument of reform, the suffrage of the people. "
Thomas Jefferson,

"Impress upon children the truth that the exercise of the elective franchise is a social duty of as solemn a nature as man can be called to perform; that a man may not innocently trifle with his vote; that every elector is a trustee as well for others as himself and that every measure he supports has an important bearing on the interests of others as well as on his own. "
Daniel Webster

Molon Labe
09-13-2013, 08:44 AM
I go back a little further for my references.

"Let each citizen remember at the moment he is offering his vote that he is not making a present or a compliment to please an individual--or at least that he ought not so to do; but that he is executing one of the most solemn trusts in human society for which he is accountable to God and his country. "
Samuel Adams

"Now more than ever the people are responsible for the character of their Congress. If that body be ignorant, reckless, and corrupt, it is because the people tolerate ignorance, recklessness, and corruption."
James Garfield

"A share in the sovereignty of the state, which is exercised by the citizens at large, in voting at elections is one of the most important rights of the subject, and in a republic ought to stand foremost in the estimation of the law. "
Alexander Hamilton,

"Should things go wrong at any time, the people will set them to rights by the peaceable exercise of their elective rights. "
Thomas Jefferson,

"The elective franchise, if guarded as the ark of our safety, will peaceably dissipate all combinations to subvert a Constitution, dictated by the wisdom, and resting on the will of the people. "
Thomas Jefferson,

"The rational and peacable instrument of reform, the suffrage of the people. "
Thomas Jefferson,

"Impress upon children the truth that the exercise of the elective franchise is a social duty of as solemn a nature as man can be called to perform; that a man may not innocently trifle with his vote; that every elector is a trustee as well for others as himself and that every measure he supports has an important bearing on the interests of others as well as on his own. "
Daniel Webster


Yeah Those are great quotes. Do you also have the ones where they said you should sit in your house watching NFL football and playing Angry Birds and watching Fox and CNN the other 364 days of the year?

Odysseus
09-13-2013, 09:26 AM
Yeah Those are great quotes. Do you also have the ones where they said you should sit in your house watching NFL football and playing Angry Birds and watching Fox and CNN the other 364 days of the year?

Those tend to come from Joe Biden.

Seriously, though, what do you propose in addition to or in lieu of voting, and how much of it have you actually done?

Molon Labe
09-13-2013, 11:20 AM
Those tend to come from Joe Biden.

Seriously, though, what do you propose in addition to or in lieu of voting, and how much of it have you actually done?

The system operates 24/7. So being educated and actually being a part of the system more than 1 day a year is paramount.

For one thing, you can do what the tea parties did during many state caucuses in 2012. One of the key reasons Romney wasn't a shoe in in those early caucus states was because citizens didn't sit on their duff and took over several of the leadership positions. People came out in support of those persons and knew the GOPs own rules and beat them at their own game. Many states and localities are in better position for 2014 and 2016 because of more and more citizen participation at the local level.

I've said time and time again that I spend many weeks during the year being involved with other events. Attending local party meetings and actually asserting influence....as a private citizen of course.

I realize there are certain limitations one such as yourself can do in the military and I'm sure you are aware of those and can't exactly engage in certain activities. but Army Command Policy and DODDIR 1344.10 leave alot of room for person's to help in the process in what capacity they are allowed. Military person's have been "key" to what has occurred with regards to Syria as of late.

But actually for some people it's probably best if they think that voting is paramount and where change actually begins........so please forget what I said and just keep on doing what you all are doing while we get things back in order in the GOP. It might be better if some of you just stayed uninvolved. :friendly_wink:

Retread
09-13-2013, 12:35 PM
Being retired means I can and do get involved on almost a daily basis. And I make sure no election goes by without casting a vote - since 1966. It may be a write in in lieu of the idiots on the ballot but I will file a ballot each and every time. And I have NEVER pulled a party ticket. I check out every candidate for every position and either pick one or decide on who should have been running AND VOTE!!!!!

Molon Labe
09-14-2013, 05:11 PM
Being retired means I can and do get involved on almost a daily basis. And I make sure no election goes by without casting a vote - since 1966. It may be a write in in lieu of the idiots on the ballot but I will file a ballot each and every time. And I have NEVER pulled a party ticket. I check out every candidate for every position and either pick one or decide on who should have been running AND VOTE!!!!!

Great that you are involved. Then you must understand how downright corrupt most local and state level GOP leadership is and the lengths they go to get what them and their cronies want.

txradioguy
09-14-2013, 06:10 PM
http://theaxemen.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/ayecarumbaoj3.jpg?w=230&h=300

Lube and UnReb are like the A & B side of the same broken record.

Retread
09-14-2013, 11:55 PM
Great that you are involved. Then you must understand how downright corrupt most local and state level GOP leadership is and the lengths they go to get what them and their cronies want.

Doesn't keep me from voting in EVERY election - unlike the dropouts "It's my way or I'm taking my ball and go home" crowd.

Molon Labe
09-16-2013, 11:21 AM
Lube and UnReb are like the A & B side of the same broken record.

Better than being the ass end of the political process. :biggrin-new:

txradioguy
09-16-2013, 11:28 AM
Originally Posted by Molon Labe
Great that you are involved. Then you must understand how downright corrupt most local and state level GOP leadership is and the lengths they go to get what them and their cronies want.


This is the nonesense jibberish of a coward.

NJCardFan
09-16-2013, 11:51 AM
Yeah Those are great quotes. Do you also have the ones where they said you should sit in your house watching NFL football and playing Angry Birds and watching Fox and CNN the other 364 days of the year?

Your and people like you who decided to stay home gave us 4 more years of Obama. While one can speculate on what type of administration Romney may have given us, we already saw what Obama and his cast of clowns but you guys decided to get butt hurt that your god wasn't nominated and threw tantrums and stayed home. Please explain to me how this was a logical move on your part. Also, if the Paul's are such Libertarians, why don't they declare themselves as such instead of being a part of a party you consider corrupt just so they can get elected.

Retread
09-16-2013, 08:24 PM
Better than being the ass end of the political process. :biggrin-new:

You'd know about that......

Molon Labe
09-17-2013, 11:52 AM
Your and people like you who decided to stay home gave us 4 more years of Obama. While one can speculate on what type of administration Romney may have given us, we already saw what Obama and his cast of clowns but you guys decided to get butt hurt that your god wasn't nominated and threw tantrums and stayed home. Please explain to me how this was a logical move on your part. Also, if the Paul's are such Libertarians, why don't they declare themselves as such instead of being a part of a party you consider corrupt just so they can get elected.

See...you see it as a defeat, but it's really a victory for conservatives. Had Romnoid won, you all would have gone back to happy nappy time like the rest of America did when Bush was president. So I'm not "butt hurt". I'm kinda winning and guys like you are kinda losing.

You have a very short attention span. Things were much different in the GOP prior to W. Bush.
Recommend you read you some Russell Kirk, Barry Goldwater and Robert Taft.......

You keep on telling yourself that Libertarian principles are incongruent with modern conservatism, but guess who's really in charge right now. It isn't the Necons.... It's the Conservatives who were voted in on the backs of the Tea Party movement. So get on board or go find a home as a Democrat.

Oh and I'm not the one that "gave" you Obama. You can thank left tard republicans like McCain, Graham and Romney for being the puke Republicrats that they are. When you nominate someone diametrically oppossed to the tenets of conservatism, you tend to turn people off. Get it?

Over 80 million eligible voters did not cast a ballot in 12'. Maybe you should have tried harder to convince some of them to vote for that dipshit. So I can't give you something I didn't have any business in creating. Basic Common sense.

Odysseus
09-17-2013, 01:09 PM
And yet another thread that has nothing to do with Romney vs Obama gets hijacked into one of these "who is more conservative" pissing contests. Thanks, Molon. Really. :rolleyes:

Meanwhile, getting back to the OP (you know, the one where Syria's chemical weapons are being discussed), it turns out that the Russian deal with permit Assad to spend up to a year cataloging his WMD arsenal (apparently the Syrians don't inventory their equipment very often) before the first inspections, while the Russians will be providing SAMs and reactors to Iran, increasing the speed with which they acquire nuclear weapons, and increasing the risk to any pilots involved in taking them down.

Anybody want to discuss that, or would Molon like to just invite everyone into the men's room with a ruler so that we can settle this dick size issue once and for all?

txradioguy
09-17-2013, 02:15 PM
And yet another thread that has nothing to do with Romney vs Obama gets hijacked into one of these "who is more conservative" pissing contests. Thanks, Molon. Really. :rolleyes:

Meanwhile, getting back to the OP (you know, the one where Syria's chemical weapons are being discussed), it turns out that the Russian deal with permit Assad to spend up to a year cataloging his WMD arsenal (apparently the Syrians don't inventory their equipment very often) before the first inspections, while the Russians will be providing SAMs and reactors to Iran, increasing the speed with which they acquire nuclear weapons, and increasing the risk to any pilots involved in taking them down.

Anybody want to discuss that, or would Molon like to just invite everyone into the men's room with a ruler so that we can settle this dick size issue once and for all?

What do you think the odds are those chemical weapons were in Iraq before they wound up in Assad's ammo bunkers?



Sent from my Z10 using Tapatalk 2

Eupher
09-17-2013, 02:39 PM
What do you think the odds are those chemical weapons were in Iraq before they wound up in Assad's ammo bunkers?


I would not place any wagers on that question.

Molon Labe
09-17-2013, 03:27 PM
And yet another thread that has nothing to do with Romney vs Obama gets hijacked into one of these "who is more conservative" pissing contests. Thanks, Molon. Really. :rolleyes:




:rolleyes:
Let's go back and look at where the breakdown happened Oh objective one.

start with post #27 and get back with me.

speaking of dick sizes.....I'm not the one broadcasting my rank on a forum

txradioguy
09-17-2013, 03:54 PM
I would not place any wagers on that question.

It would be nice if we could get one of our guys in on the inspection team to compare serial numbers on the munitions to the ones documented to have belonged to Saddam.

NJCardFan
09-17-2013, 04:21 PM
:rolleyes:
Let's go back and look at where the breakdown happened Oh objective one.

start with post #27 and get back with me.

speaking of dick sizes.....I'm not the one broadcasting my rank on a forum

Sure you are. We're all aware of what a contemptuous asshole you are and a cry baby at that.

Molon Labe
09-18-2013, 08:17 AM
Sure you are. We're all aware of what a contemptuous asshole you are and a cry baby at that.

Dude...Did you just hijack this again? Where's Ody when you need him?


Gosh.....Somebody has to do it. To show contempt for the fake conservatives in the GOP and call them out and hold them accountable. I mean, guys like you won't do it. For cripes sake you keep on voting for them. :biggrin-new:

Odysseus
09-18-2013, 09:14 AM
What do you think the odds are those chemical weapons were in Iraq before they wound up in Assad's ammo bunkers?



Sent from my Z10 using Tapatalk 2

Extremely likely, given what we know about the convoys and air transport between Iraq and Syria during the run up to the invasion.


:rolleyes:
Let's go back and look at where the breakdown happened Oh objective one.

start with post #27 and get back with me.

speaking of dick sizes.....I'm not the one broadcasting my rank on a forum

It's not about who started it. Every time that you get into a thread, it turns into a pissing contest over who is and isn't a real conservative. You've used Syria to bitch about McCain's patriotism, which, as far as I am concerned, has never been in doubt (his judgment, yes, but not his patriotism). You're becoming as bad as Mike168 or whatever his name was. Give it a rest, will you?

NJCardFan
09-18-2013, 12:50 PM
Dude...Did you just hijack this again? Where's Ody when you need him?


Gosh.....Somebody has to do it. To show contempt for the fake conservatives in the GOP and call them out and hold them accountable. I mean, guys like you won't do it. For cripes sake you keep on voting for them. :biggrin-new:

I truly believe you have mental problems. You come on here, as Ody said, hijack the thread in some idiotic debate about who's conservative dick is bigger, then you accuse others of hijacking the thread. Do yourself a favor. Double your dosage and make an appointment to see your shrink.

Articulate_Ape
09-18-2013, 12:59 PM
Extremely likely, given what we know about the convoys and air transport between Iraq and Syria during the run up to the invasion.

I agree.

DumbAss Tanker
09-18-2013, 02:01 PM
You've used Syria to bitch about McCain's patriotism, which, as far as I am concerned, has never been in doubt (his judgment, yes, but not his patriotism).

Precisely. And that's all that really needs to be said about McCain in this thread, and it's been said, so let's move on.