[Bulaba Khan Jones]

What is Rich trying to say? Something about "I lost the poll and now I'm crying about it" or something?

[Beren]

Your ilk lost the poll.

Bragging about winning a PoFo poll. Really?

Also, it would be hard for me to name 25 people hanging around here.

[skinster]

I wasn't bragging, that was a response to Rugoz.

But now that you mentioned it, your ilk did lose the poll and lost baaaaaaaadly.

[Beren]

I wasn't bragging, that was a response to Rugoz.

But now that you mentioned it, your ilk did lose the poll and lost baaaaaaaadly.

Sure it was.

I lost nothing, and PoFo has always been like that, I wonder whether who expected anything else. And what is your ilk, by the way? Childish?

How old are you? I'm really curious.

[skinster]

You sound upset.

[Beren]

You sound upset.

This place has become a joke.

[skinster]

There, there.

[Beren]

What generation are you? Millennial or what?

[skinster]

[Beren]

Do you also like Snapchat?

[Rich]

What is Rich trying to say? Something about "I lost the poll and now I'm crying about it" or something?

No I voted for the leading option: "It definitely was not the Assad regime". I don't believe for one moment it was the Assad regime, but if it was, the regime would have my 100% support. I'd like to see sanctions against Assad lifted.

But although I'm very pleased to see Assad's gains, and I one hundred percent support the intervention of Russia, I do believe the majority of Syrians wanted regime change. However I believe Assad had the majority support of Syrian Infidels (in which I include the Alawites, despite the ruling by Iranian clerics).

[Atlantis]

I don't believe for one moment it was the Assad regime,

Then why is it that the Russians had to prevent a UN investigation into the chemical weapons attacks? Where there is smoke there is fire.

But although I'm very pleased to see Assad's gains, and I one hundred percent support the intervention of Russia, I do believe the majority of Syrians wanted regime change. However I believe Assad had the majority support of Syrian Infidels (in which I include the Alawites, despite the ruling by Iranian clerics).

I have always thought that a secular authoritarian ruler is better than the lunatics of Islamist rebels. However, the degree of repression the Assad regime has to resort to to stay in power will deprive the regime of any legitimacy for ruling the country in the future.

I think the rebels probably used chemical weapons (I think there were some stories about Turkey supplying the components to the rebels) to trigger the famous red line; however, I would be very surprised if the Assad regime hadn't also used chemical weapons.

[Heisenberg]

"No smoke without fire" is a fucking terrible way to conduct foreign policy. It's exactly what got us into the Iraq war.

It's good to know that western liberals have learned precisely nothing from the last 20 years.

[skinster]

I do believe the majority of Syrians wanted regime change. However I believe Assad had the majority support of Syrian Infidels (in which I include the Alawites, despite the ruling by Iranian clerics).

Citation needed for "majority of Syrians wanted regime change"

Also, wtf is a "Syrian Infidel"?

[quote="Atlantis"]Then why is it that the Russians had to prevent a UN investigation into the chemical weapons attacks?
/quote]

Russia vetoed against (further) sanctions on Syria because a) Syria is its ally and b) it claimed there was no evidence for the Syrian government gassing its own people, and the "no evidence" thing is still a thing, unless you can show otherwise.

[Bulaba Khan Jones]

We won the battle for poll results production! At long last, it's all over! We surpassed our quota by well over 100%! All across PoFo spontaneous demonstrations in favor of Assad, the Angel of Syria have broken out with the happy chants of, "We love Bashar! We love Bashar!"

[Decky]

Mike is crying into his capachino that Assad slaughtered ISIS preventing Hillary's jihad friends from killing more.

[Bulaba Khan Jones]

One has to ask: who is it Assad is "slaughtering?" In war, civilians are always unfortunately the victims, no matter what. Even the blameless Soviet forces liberating Europe from the horrors of fascism couldn't avoid causing civilian casualties. The US caused many thousands of civilians to die in Iraq and Afghanistan simply from military actions, and that's not even counting the loss of life during the breakdown of civil order, loss of infrastructure, and the resulting shortages of water, food, and medical supplies.

In Syria, it is no different. And who exactly is being sent off to interrogation centers run by the Syrian government? Islamist terrorists. Only a hypocritical or naive liberal would possibly cry about head-chopping, child-raping/-enslaving terrorists being "tortured to death" in Syrian government-run prisons while the CIA runs torture centers out of MENA nations, while our allies like Saudi Arabia do even worse, and while Western-backed terrorists in Syria do far worse than the Syrian government ever does.

I guess I'm just not stupid enough to be swayed by Western propaganda and neoliberal crocodile tears.

[Decky]

There should be statues of Assad in every city on earth. He has done more to make the world a safer place than crocked Hillary. She is just another far right neo-con millionaire. Supporting her is like supporting Bush II in every single way.

[Atlantis]

Russia vetoed against (further) sanctions on Syria because a) Syria is its ally and b) it claimed there was no evidence for the Syrian government gassing its own people, and the "no evidence" thing is still a thing, unless you can show otherwise.

The point is that Russia could have vindicated Assad by allowing an UN investigation that would come to the conclusion that there really is no evidence. As it is, the only conclusion can be that the Russians and Assad do have something to hide.

One has to ask: who is it Assad is "slaughtering?"

5 million Syrian refugees (including women and children) aren't all "head-chopping, child-raping/-enslaving terrorists" as you put it. They could have moved to Damascus-controlled areas if they had felt save under the Assad regime.

[Sivad]

The US caused many thousands of civilians to die in Iraq and Afghanistan simply from military actions, and that's not even counting the loss of life during the breakdown of civil order, loss of infrastructure, and the resulting shortages of water, food, and medical supplies.

The US deliberately destabilized Iraq and radicalized the Iraqi Sunnis in order to create a chaos that would spill over into the wider region. Whatever Assad's crimes may be they're nowhere near as monstrous as the enormities carried out by US planners.

As Isis closes in on Baghdad - find out how US funded torture centres helped fuel the sectarian war in Iraq.