That only seems to address the option of a military strike. What of the deployment of chemical weapons against Syrian civilians? The evidence from the UN report seems to remove any doubt to the fact that hundreds, maybe better than a thousand died in the chemical attacks on Aug. 21 alone. The evidence even further shows the trajectory from several craters point towards one of Assad's military bases. If the previous evidence had not already been sufficient, surely the conclusion can at least be made that the burden of evidence clearly suggests that Assad's forces committed the attack. That evidence as well is about as strong as it could possibly get. Even videotaped evidence of Assad's forces loading and firing said rockets would be hard to be declared more conclusive. After all, maybe it's just fake footage by America, or has been misrepresented or some other possible fault.

My trouble when speaking to the next generation is how exactly do you tell them that yes, Assad is a dictator deploying chemical weapons to maintain his hold on power, but the good and moral path is for us to not get involved with anything but words. Why? Well, because we might make the situation for Syria's civilians even worse. I just don't subscribe to the world view that ignoring in all but word such a dictatorship is the 'right thing'. When a dictator is deploying chemical weapons to hold onto power I support and advocate for the use of force against that dictator, and the absence of such by the entirety of the UN is to me a crime as well.

Hello again,

Just commented to a video and later noticed it was one of yours. Would've just commented to you instead had I noticed first. I have to say I still don't entirely understand where you come from in all this. Plainly and rightly you mistrust any American claims of humanitarian concern. However, in my view you seem to be misreading Obama's cues. If anything he's appeared very reluctant to go into Syria, as it'd be domestically very unpopular. As far as the Kissinger type pushers in America go, seeing Al Qaida sponsored rebels bleeding themselves out against Russian and Iranian backed Syrian military forces and even Hezbollah forces seems like a dream come true. I can hardly see cold hearted long game analysts in America wanting anything but to just grab popcorn and enjoy the show as their enemies mop each other up. I also see Obama's reluctant attitude as exactly what is being read by Assad and Putin in their responses and almost willful scorn for Obama's red line and apparent giddy eagerness to abandon the threats he'd tied to it. I just don't see the eagerness and enthusiasm for a march to war from America that you do. With an agreement to remove chemical weapons from the area, America is freed of the only possible concern it had about anything happening in the area. That seems evidenced by America's seemingly eager acceptance of it, and tacit recognition of Assad's control of the country out into 2014 in order to implement the agreement.

As for the angle I care about, what is your assessment of the UN inspection and their report? Unless you count them to be on the take of Western powers, or duped and stooged within the war zone where somehow America managed to influence them more than Assad I don't see any ambiguity to the findings. Samples from rockets, soil, and victims alike all tested positive for Sarin gas. The rockets found with Sarin on them had Russian engravings and the craters they could project trajectories from pointed towards a Syrian military base. I'm not sure how you reject all of that by pointing at 'counter evidence' gathered and presented solely by Syrian and Iranian sources.

Here is a link to the actual full text of the UN inspection team's report:

http://www.un.org/disarmament/content/slideshow/Secretary_General_Report_of_CW_Investigation.pdf

Their investigation was only about the use of chemical weapons, and not who may have used them. That said, they concluded they found basically irrefutable evidence of extensive deployment of Sarin gas in the region. They also were able to estimate the trajectory of some rockets based on their impact craters and the trajectories are clearly towards a Syrian military compound.

Unless you choose to believe that the UN inspections team is a pawn or puppet of the US, Assad is not being framed, he deliberately used Sarin gas on his own people.

In the summer of 85' I was in Hockley Texas and witnessed a hailstorm the likes of which I hope to never see again-Hailstones ranged in size from golf ball to conglomerates larger than a football. All roofs destroyed, all cars hammered silly, craters in the ground that needed to be filled...yer basic wrath of Jupiter-type storm.

fake crater, indeed. that's natural gas burning

Afraid its not what you might think it is
http://videosift.com/video/The-Darvanza-flaming-crater-burning-since-the-1950s

The irony is QM is caricaturing Democratic proposals to absurd extremes (tax the rich 100%!!!!), complete with an apocalyptic outcome (THE ECONOMY WILL CRATER!!!) in an attempt to discredit it, when what QM favors IS the caricature of what is reasonable about conservative ideas when it comes to policy.

I'd laugh except this kind of crap is what dominates the GOP, and I'm not sure if this past election is going to clue them in on how ridiculous this kind of thought is.

Lame.

No one has ever claimed that doing one thing will fix the financial situation of the US.

What is your point here? If it doesn't fix everything don't do it?

Bringing the top tax brackets to where they were (OH MY GOD ITS THREE PERCENT MORE!) before Bush cratered the economy, will help two entire shitloads. Taxing capital gains and other tricks as normal income will also help two shitloads more.

The math has already been done fifteen gazillion times and shows the same thing over and fucking over again. Mother of fuck, what is wrong with you people?

The list of problems nanotechnology solves grows by the day...

How does something that travels close to the speed of light land on a planet without making a small crater?

>> ^MrFisk:

VideoSift has posted movies from the beginning, and has yet to encounter a lawsuit. Let the copyright holders police themselves. Or just prohibit me from embedding them.
After all, YOU WOULDN'T STEAL A CAR
YOU WOULDN'T STEAL A HANDBAG
YOU WOULDN'T STEAL A TELEVISION
YOU WOULDN'T STEAL A DVD
DOWNLOADING PIRATED FILMS IS STEALING
STEALING IS AGAINST THE LAW
Exhibit A: http://videosift.com/video/They-Call-Me-Trinity-1970-full-movie
Exhibit B: http://videosift.com/video/Easy-Rider-full-movie
Exhibit C: http://videosift.com/video/12-Angry-Men-full-movie
Exhibit D: http://videosift.com/video/Eraserhead-Full-Movie
Ad nauseam.



WATCH IT BITCH!!?? THAT'S ONE OF MY, ER, CHOGGIE'S MOVIES!!!

Don't fuck with the full-flicks, they'll die anyhow once the original source has cratered....
Much ado about nothing??

>> ^Asmo:

Pro-tip:When the concrete craters around the person/character leaving them unharmed, 'real world physics' has fucking nothing to do with the fantasy world they exist in... = P
It's just a flashy way to arrive for someone unconcerned with stealth (because a large crater making explosions is typically hard to cover up.br>

The request was for "proper super-hero landing" not real world. I also merely admited I liked it. Something about a nano-tech reinforced belly flop from 25 stories speaks to me.

>> ^Asmo:

Pro-tip:When the concrete craters around the person/character leaving them unharmed, 'real world physics' has fucking nothing to do with the fantasy world they exist in... = P
It's just a flashy way to arrive for someone unconcerned with stealth (because a large crater making explosions is typically hard to cover up. Although in Spiderman's case, landing on 3 appendages is closer to the 8 most normal spiders would employ when jumping/landing.


Shouldn't Spiderman land on all 4 limbs then....?

Pro-tip:When the concrete craters around the person/character leaving them unharmed, 'real world physics' has fucking nothing to do with the fantasy world they exist in... = P

It's just a flashy way to arrive for someone unconcerned with stealth (because a large crater making explosions is typically hard to cover up. Although in Spiderman's case, landing on 3 appendages is closer to the 8 most normal spiders would employ when jumping/landing.

>> ^therealblankman:

Can you see the movie lights and the ghost of Stanley Kubrick in these photos? Neither can I.


I really wish someone put Pedobear hiding in a crater to mess with people.

America was innovating, inventing, testing, and producing when the rest of the Western world was literally standing still.


Well... the US did grow quickly in the 19th century as it utilized its tremendous, largely untapped natural resources, but it didn't take its "super-power" position in the world until after WWII. And then it took the position by default; Europe was a series of craters.

Now clearly the US did well post revolution (I mean, compare it to other places in the Americas with similar opportunities), but I don't think we can ascribe this to specifically American stuff. Its advantages: good organization, infrastructure ideas, lack of corruption, strong property rights, rule of law, and empowerment culture - these were all borrowed ideas. No, its prime differentiator was fantastic natural wealth. By the time America was ascendant, countries in Europe (especially Britain) had to import tremendous amounts of raw resources while in America you could - for example - just cut down a tree if you needed wood, or wander over a few more miles if you wanted land and water and minerals and (later) oil.

Don't get me wrong, there's a lot of good things about American culture and institutions. But using its economic and innovation success as proof of that is a little too convenient.