Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
abuhaydar

Another False Flag Chemical Attack In Syria

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Times the US and Israel have disagreed;

1956- The US forced Israel to withdraw when it attacked Egypt with the help of Britain and France.

1970's OPEC crisis- At the time the Shah's Iran and Israel were close allies, the Saudis and the other Arab states were not so much. The US made a deal with Saudi Arabia where if the Saudis sold all their oil in dollars, and then deposited the proceeds in US bond markets, the US would guarantee Saudi security even against Israel. 

1980's- Iran/Iraq war, when Saddam fired scud missiles at Israel, the US prevented Israel from attacking because they had more of an interest in Iraq winning that war, Israel not so much. Israel on the other hand convinced the US not to impose harsher sanctions on Iran, because they felt it would've impeded Iran and helped Iraq.

2015- The JCPOA, which the US will now probably pull-out of because of this crazy administration, but most of the US government barring a few crazy republican senators like Cruz and Cotton is against pulling out of it even though Israel wants this. 

Israel has also wanted the US to do way more than it has done in Syria to contain Iran, there's no real US willingness to do so, they've been willing to fire few missiles at Assad, train fundamentalists and arm them but nothing beyond that, 2000 special ops forces is not going to contain Iran, Israel would love the US to do more and get more directly militarily entrenched, but it simply hasn't and I really doubt it is going to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason the US has not attacked yet is because Russia and now Iran just stood up and said "try it". 

Again you all are missing the main reason the USA is in Syria. We have established that it does not care about the Syrian people nor democracy... The oil theory is really dumb. They have all the oil in the world. You are admitting that it doesn't want Iranian influence in Syria... so how does Bashar al Assad or Iranian influence in Syria harm the USA as a country? It doesn't. These pose absolutely no threat to the USA. Bashar is not going to invade North Carolina. However this is a big threat to Israel, so the USA's actions in the middle east are serving Israel.. can it be any clearer than this? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, kirtc said:

The reason the US has not attacked yet is because Russia and now Iran just stood up and said "try it". 

Again you all are missing the main reason the USA is in Syria. We have established that it does not care about the Syrian people nor democracy... The oil theory is really dumb. They have all the oil in the world. You are admitting that it doesn't want Iranian influence in Syria... so how does Bashar al Assad or Iranian influence in Syria harm the USA as a country? It doesn't. These pose absolutely no threat to the USA. Bashar is not going to invade North Carolina. However this is a big threat to Israel, so the USA's actions in the middle east are serving Israel.. can it be any clearer than this? 

You seem quite ignorant of US foreign policy.  Not a single credible person in the Pentagon believes Iran/Syria are a military threat to the US, they have published official studies admitting this much.

What the US is primarily concerned with is its sphere of influence and control.  Iran is a direct threat to US control in the middle east and has been for decades due to its loud defiance against US imperialism.  Israel is the most trust worthy ally in exerting this influence and Saudi Arabia is second so the US will goto lengths to support both these regimes.  Israel is basically the main US military base in that region.  Do Zionists have a say in US foreign policy?  Of course they do, but Israeli interest does not supersede US state/business interests, they just happen to mostly align.  As far as Syria is concerned, the US is opposed to nationalist independence, their whole foreign policy is designed to prevent it.  This is especially true if the state in question is allying with Iran/Russia. 

Edited by King

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, kirtc said:

However this is a big threat to Israel, so the USA's actions in the middle east are serving Israel.. can it be any clearer than this? 

Israel collaborates with the US to be the regional hegemon though. This alliance goes back to 1967 when Israel proved to the US that it would be an important partner in containing and crushing Arab nationalism, which was closely allied with the Soviet union. In the 6-day war Israel defeated Egypt and Syria (both very close allies of the Soviet Union), so the US increasingly saw them as a military garrison in the region that they could use to fulfill their own interest without having to commit their own troops there. Just like Iran is no threat to the US, neither was Vietnam, nor is Cuba. Look at US policy since WW2, especially in Southeast Asia and Latin America, all the countries they invaded, governments they toppled, "rebels" they backed had to do with containing the Soviet Union, because it hindered US ability to control resources all over the world. They don't necessarily need those resources, just like they don't need middle eastern oil, but being in control of it allows you to be in a position of power, where you can determine oil prices. Why did they throw Saddam out of Kuwait? Because it was feared he might attack Saudi next and the thought of the US or one of its allies not being in control of oil production, which would impact wallstreet's profits was something they could not tolerate. Why did the CIA overthrow Lumumba in the DRC? Because the DRC has a vital resource, Cobalt which is used in every electronic device, and the ability to obtain this cheaply was important, on the other hand, a leader that would not sell-out his country to a foreign corporation could not be tolerated. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

EGas attack propaganda

opinions

Evidence of False Flag

The plan to break up Syria (yellow flags)

Exposing lies about Syria

Lies of media

They don’t care about us ‘true white helmets agenda’

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@kirtc  Assad had all his chemicals surrendered to the OPCW which destroyed them aboard an off-shore ship. The UN after politically motivated delays said the first chemical attacks were done by rebels/opposition groups, who had captured chemicals from abandoned bases.

Which we already knew and posted somewhere on SC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Abbas0 said:

The strikes started in Syria officially by the US UK and France tonight 

:cry: Innaa lillahi Wa Innaa Ilayhi Raaji'oon. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Currently watching RT news - they have an interview with a doctor who has been identified in the hospital video used as 'evidence' and he refutes that it was a chemical attack.

It doesn't appear the US and allies had UN security council approval either - still trying to find more details to confirm this though and also about the chemical weapons investigation team that wasn't able to properly verify on the ground.

That would reveal it as an illegal attack according to international law and sovereignty as an act of war, based on unverified and nonfactual allegations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TheGreenWanderer said:

Currently watching RT news - they have an interview with a doctor who has been identified in the hospital video used as 'evidence' and he refutes that it was a chemical attack.

It doesn't appear the US and allies had UN security council approval either - still trying to find more details to confirm this though and also about the chemical weapons investigation team that wasn't able to properly verify on the ground.

That would reveal it as an illegal attack according to international law and sovereignty as an act of war, based on unverified and nonfactual allegations.

its all a set up from a-z the people who gave the order for the chemical attack are the same people who gave the order for the air strike 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We didn’t see  any patients with symptoms chemical’s attack hospital staff in Russian MoD video

https://youtu.be/sBmWe5FnSCc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to our sources, not western, 120-140 missiles were fired, over 70 of them were shot down. They didn't hit anything "significant" in the big picture of things. I guess the S-300 works like a charm. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...