Upload
Login or register
Anonymous comments allowed.
asd
#156 - traveltech
Reply +32
(09/02/2013) [-]
stickied
It's because chemical weapons were used, which are terrible. There's an international ban on their use and if it doesn't get enforced then other regimes won't be afraid to use them. Obama is jumping the gun, however. We do know for a fact that chemical weapons were used, but we don't know who used them yet.
#271 to #156 - traveltech
Reply 0
(09/02/2013) [-]
OH GOD I MADE A POST ON POLITICAL CONTENT




I have made a horrible mistake.
#273 to #271 - traveltech
Reply 0
(09/02/2013) [-]
AND I JUST REALIZED IT GOT STICKIED
#277 to #273 - turnonthenews [OP]
Reply 0
(09/02/2013) [-]
You're welcome.
I thought this was pretty succinct and not too inflamed like a lot of the comments here.
#263 to #156 - danster
Reply 0
(09/02/2013) [-]
My sources tell me the USA has been providing weapons to the rebels.
#267 to #263 - shaddz
Reply +1
(09/02/2013) [-]
ever seen Lord of War. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Their government is dangerous and willing to do anything so they supply the rebels so that they don't have to invade, help them solve a problem without direct involvement.
#280 to #279 - danster
Reply +2
(09/02/2013) [-]
How is their government dangerous? The US has been arming rebels so that they can commit war crimes and such, blame it on the Syrian government, and get Iran involved.
#284 to #280 - shaddz
Reply +1
(09/02/2013) [-]
I was gonna call you a tin foil hat brigade footsoldier but I have to admit, you are right. this crap has been bothering me for too long and needs to be fixed
#285 to #284 - danster
Reply 0
(09/02/2013) [-]
I don't this video has been posted before, the key reason why I hesitated to do so.

On a side note, how many of his videos did you watch?
#286 to #285 - shaddz
Reply +1
(09/02/2013) [-]
5 or 6 just now after I gave that 1 a shot (I do not bash something till I hear its side)
#283 to #280 - shaddz
0
has deleted their comment [-]
#258 to #156 - bashead
Reply 0
(09/02/2013) [-]
******* hypocrites.... Agent Orange in Vietnam that affected hundreds of thousands is ok, but in Syria it's too evil
#259 to #258 - thewowpimp
Reply +1
(09/02/2013) [-]
do you know what agent orange is?
#260 to #259 - bashead
Reply 0
(09/02/2013) [-]
chemical weapon? the thing that it wasnt meant for killing people and ended up this way isnt an excuse
#261 to #260 - thewowpimp
Reply +2
(09/02/2013) [-]
Agent orange is just a defoliant.

It killed the trees the Vietnamese were using as cover.
#294 to #261 - anon
Reply 0
(09/03/2013) [-]
That still goes under chemical warfare, which is what the ban actually is about.
#265 to #261 - gibssowas
Reply +1
(09/02/2013) [-]
That is not quite correct.
It also affected unborn childs in vietnam because a chemical called TCDD was used that caused deformation during pregnancy.

#264 to #261 - SognaVetr
Reply +1
(09/02/2013) [-]
And it's chemical composition also brought a myriad of disseases to the people living under the folliage...
#244 to #156 - ROTFLcopter **User deleted account**
Reply -3
(09/02/2013) [-]
Yeah so what if some other country is using chemical weapons? If it doesn't concern us, we don't need to bust the door in and act like we own the place. Unless we're planning on enslaving the Syrians.
#245 to #244 - sketchE
Reply +3
(09/02/2013) [-]
im going to give you a visual for a second. imagine the worlds worst cramp. in every single muscle on your body. your body continues to stiffen and your muscles continue to contract until your back breaks and you die. thats a chemical weapon
#246 to #245 - ROTFLcopter **User deleted account**
Reply -2
(09/02/2013) [-]
Ok first of all chemical weapon is a very broad term. There are many many different things that can be classified as a chemical weapon, and they do not all work the same way. So to say that what you just described is what chemical weapons are; that's more than a stretch. Maybe one certain chemical weapon works that way, but more than likely you just came up with something that sounded really unpleasant in an attempt to look smarter than me.

Also, that statement is unrelated to the point I was making anyways. I was saying that we as a country should not try to butt into everyone else's affairs, because we do not rule the world.

Plus, given my last sentence I thought it was clear that I was trying to make a joke and be light-hearted about it, but then you had to go full retard.
#247 to #246 - sketchE
Reply +3
(09/02/2013) [-]
yes that was an example of one. it wasnt a very obvious joke since you had a serious statement prior. by your standard every country in the world should turn a blind eye to everything. germany should have been allowed to conquer the western world japan should have been allowed to literally rape every chinese person out there. the rest of the world does not get an opinion on nukes. the rest of the world doesnt get an opinion on anything any country does no matter how horrible it is
#248 to #247 - ROTFLcopter **User deleted account**
Reply -2
(09/02/2013) [-]
> Not act like you're in charge of everything
> Turn a blind eye
Not always the same
#249 to #248 - sketchE
Reply +2
(09/02/2013) [-]
and how is attacking someone who puts there people through that kind of suffering acting like we own everything?
#251 to #249 - ROTFLcopter **User deleted account**
Reply -1
(09/02/2013) [-]
For the same reason that you can't beat someone up just because you don't like the way their family does things.
#266 to #251 - calibratuner
Reply +1
(09/02/2013) [-]
Well if in that family the husband is beating the **** out of the wife, and bashing his children with baseball bats, then yes you ought to go beat the **** outta him.

Anyone who can sit idly by while that is occurring cannot call themselves good people.
#268 to #266 - ROTFLcopter **User deleted account**
Reply -1
(09/02/2013) [-]
Ok well I was gonna be done commenting on this, but I changed my mind. Seeing somebody do something bad does not give you the right to do something bad too. If there is illegal/abusive behavior going on, you report it to the police, you don't try to take it into your own hands if it's none of your business. Beating someone up doesn't make you a good person either.
#272 to #268 - calibratuner
Reply 0
(09/02/2013) [-]
Okay, lets put this into a better perspective then.

Using the same scenario, if the father figure killed his children and was going to kill his wife, and you could stop it, would you? Or wait for the police to come, by which time he could have attacked again killing his wife.

Who exactly governs another state? Sanctions? Embargoes? Sending not so nice letters to the Syrian government telling them off for using the Chemical Weapons?

At least a thousand people were killed in a horrific way, and we should let someone else deal with it? In this instance, we need to force them to ******* quit it, we need to cripple them in other ways. When it comes to war, there is no such thing as right only wrong. Which wrong is better. Is it better to let the Syrian Regime continue using Chemical Weapons, or better to weaken them via airstrikes at key targets?
#252 to #251 - sketchE
Reply +1
(09/02/2013) [-]
so to put this into perspective. your comparing killing thousands of people in excrutiatingly painful ways to a parent that yells at their kids?
#254 to #252 - ROTFLcopter **User deleted account**
Reply -1
(09/02/2013) [-]
Yes. It's called an analogy, you should look it up sometime. Also, I never said anything specific about parents yelling at their kids. How to form an argument 101: don't put words into the other person's mouth. It just makes you look like a jackass.

Also, *you're.
#255 to #254 - sketchE
Reply +3
(09/02/2013) [-]
how to forma an argument 212. give specific examples to use in an analogy to alleviate any misunderstanding
bad example: using a chemical weapon is like how a family does things
good example using a chemical weapon is like a parent strapping their child to a board and dripping hydrochloric acid on their chest because they threw a tantrum

also insulting the other party is known as ad hominem. a logical fallacy used to distract from the argument by making the other side seem inferior
#256 to #255 - ROTFLcopter **User deleted account**
Reply -1
(09/02/2013) [-]
Well, that's enough internet for today. Have fun being you, I'm sure you're great at parties
#257 to #256 - sketchE
Reply 0
(09/02/2013) [-]
i dont do parties. im uncomfortable socializing with people i dont know
#243 to #156 - thatguyontheright
Reply +1
(09/02/2013) [-]
Then it is the UN's problem. No one nation should be enforcing International Law.
#240 to #156 - symustafa
Reply 0
(09/02/2013) [-]
But the lack of evidence is just.....suspicious.
#236 to #156 - anon
Reply 0
(09/02/2013) [-]
not just any chemical weapons btw , whoever used them used nerve gas which is a WMD . causing extreme suffering .
#270 to #235 - traveltech
Reply 0
(09/02/2013) [-]
Didn't know about that, but considering the date that's not even the same incident. Why didn't I hear about that back in May?
#234 to #156 - whiplasher
Reply -2
(09/02/2013) [-]
Well, there's hardly any proof that chemical weapons were used.
#231 to #156 - jokervsbatsy
Reply -1
(09/02/2013) [-]
Still, this does not justify the Usa invasion there
#233 to #231 - tehfunnyguy
Reply +2
(09/02/2013) [-]
Lol, we aren't invading. There won't be any boots on the ground unless (I don't remember what he said, something about immediate threats to our nation security?) Anyways, we are just using preemptive long range strikes in order to stop the regime. While I don't believe we should devote ourselves to this, it does have legitimacy... barely.
#219 to #156 - mca
Reply 0
(09/02/2013) [-]
A country being so critical on the use of chemical weapons when actively supporting drone usage inwarfare is a bit "meh"
#269 to #219 - traveltech
Reply +1
(09/02/2013) [-]
Alright, but mustard gas is a way more inhumane way to go than targeted drone strike
#216 to #156 - roflcopterkklol **User deleted account**
Reply -1
(09/02/2013) [-]
"I will stop violence by creating more violence"
Lol merica.
#223 to #216 - anon
Reply 0
(09/02/2013) [-]
Geneva Convention*
#220 to #216 - alegitusername
Reply +3
(09/02/2013) [-]
worked on japan... even though they were never the same afterwards
#232 to #220 - mrpavelowgrimm
Reply 0
(09/02/2013) [-]
this is my fetish I must know the source.
#222 to #220 - trollwoopnazi
Reply +1
(09/02/2013) [-]
what is happening in this image
#224 to #222 - alegitusername
Reply +2
(09/02/2013) [-]
simply put... Japan.
#218 to #216 - anon
Reply 0
(09/02/2013) [-]
as a Merican I approve of this quote