Gutless. The stench of appeasement

[NorthWestPerm2Contr]

Can you not see the difference in causalities from battles in the civil war and dropping chemical weapons on civilians killing hundreds of children in one incident?

Your stupid if you think Assad is targeting children....

[NorthWestPerm2Contr]

What it's certainly not about, for the US, is some imaginary 'red-line' being crossed when chemical weapons are used.

It's about "...what is in the best interests of the United States".

...(the president) "believes that there are core interests at stake for the United States".

Source

At least Obama is being honest about it. He kind of admits it actually has nothing to do with Chemical weapons.....

[EternalOptimist]

Isn't there quite a bit of hypocrisy going on here?
The US was the first country to routinely use chemical weapons (in Vietnam and Cambodia)- villages were routinely shelled with napalm and areas sprayed with agent orange.

US use of chemical weapons

US use of chemical weapons part 2

Not to mention the use of nuclear Weapons in Japan.

So the idea that WMD should not be used in warfare seems to be retrospective one

Although I might agree with you a bit on this issue, it's no excuse to start spouting bollocks.
Chemicals were used routinely in WWI, and the Italians used them in Abyssinia.

Napalm is an incendiary and agent orange is a defoliant. All horrible stuff, but not designed to turn your innards into liquid and come poring out of your eye sockets , like nerve agent does.(From one tiny pinhead dose on the skin)

There is a reason why this stuff is considered a 'dirty' weapon. And for some of the others here, it is considered a 'dirty' weapon even if it used on combatants.

[jimjamuk]

No doubt if any evidence appears that Assads gang did do it then I dont see why another vote wont be drummed up and passed through. I think it will paint us in a better light this way as we have waved the democracy banner and not looked like we were chomping at the bit to join the US at the first opportunity.

Funny how the press report this sort of stuff - theres plenty of genocide going on in the world that arguably we should step in a put a stop to - its about time those other 1st world countries stepped up and did something about them

[sasguru]

Although I might agree with you a bit on this issue, it's no excuse to start spouting bollocks.
Chemicals were used routinely in WWI, and the Italians used them in Abyssinia.

Napalm is an incendiary and agent orange is a defoliant. All horrible stuff, but not designed to turn your innards into liquid and come poring out of your eye sockets , like nerve agent does.(From one tiny pinhead dose on the skin)

There is a reason why this stuff is considered a 'dirty' weapon. And for some of the others here, it is considered a 'dirty' weapon even if it used on combatants.

A bit rich from the bollux-spouter extraordinaire.
Have you considered you may be too thick to have a logical argument?
Are chemical weapons that much worse than being nuked or being grilled to death in a firestorm?*
Cretin.

*As doodab has noted in another post, chemical weapons could be engineered to be quick and painless.

[EternalOptimist]

A bit rich from the bollux-spouter extraordinaire.
Have you considered you may be too thick to have a logical argument?
Are chemical weapons that much worse than being nuked or being grilled to death in a firestorm?
Cretin.

If you are going to die, it doesnt really matter much, so long as it is quick.

But most people hit in combat do not die. Death rates have actually been coming down fast, since the start of the industrial revolution and there are loads of reasons for that.

Your question would be better framed as 'What type of horrible weapon would prefer to survive?'

I think nerve agent is one I would like to give a miss

[Mich the Tester]

No doubt if any evidence appears that Assads gang did do it then I dont see why another vote wont be drummed up and passed through. I think it will paint us in a better light this way as we have waved the democracy banner and not looked like we were chomping at the bit to join the US at the first opportunity.

Funny how the press report this sort of stuff - theres plenty of genocide going on in the world that arguably we should step in a put a stop to - its about time those other 1st world countries stepped up and did something about them

Actually, I'm not convinced that in Iraq it was B Liar who followed GW Baboon. I think it might have been the other way around, seeing as I wouldn't credit Bush with the intelligence to influence Blair.

[sasguru]

If you are going to die, it doesnt really matter much, so long as it is quick.

But most people hit in combat do not die. Death rates have actually been coming down fast, since the start of the industrial revolution and there are loads of reasons for that.

Your question would be better framed as 'What type of horrible weapon would prefer to survive?'

I think nerve agent is one I would like to give a miss

Oh I don't know, I would maybe prefer nerve agent rather than the slow, painful lingering death of radiation poisoning as experienced by thousands in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Or the horrendous pain of surviving 3rd degree burns only to die in agony a few weeks later

[doodab]

Oh I don't know, I would maybe prefer nerve agent rather than the slow, painful lingering death of radiation poisoning as experienced by thousands in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Or the horrendous pain of surviving 3rd degree burns only to die in agony a few weeks later

I reckon a massive heart attack bought on by a chemically induced orgasm so intense the body rips itself apart would be my preferred way to go. I shall start experimenting on mice tomorrow.

[quackhandle]

There's usually an angle for the Yanks to get involved, namely oil (Irag/Libya) drugs (Afghan), does Syria have any oil?

qh