search results matching tag: syria

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (167)     Sift Talk (13)     Blogs (11)     Comments (459)   

eric3579 (Member Profile)

Drone Footage Of Syrian Base After Recent Tomahawk Strike

newtboy says...

Well, bombing planes is not humanitarian, it's retaliatory. Humanitarian would be offering the citizens medical help, food, and protection, things we aren't doing in Syria. (Before you say this is protection, note the airport was operating the day after the missiles hit them).

It's only tit for tat if Assad actually gassed his people, which is still in question. Remember, there's a propaganda war happening there too, where both sides are liars and the 'truth' is hidden in a field of lies. Initial appearances are more often than not just propaganda.

It does send a message, that Trump is reactionary and inpatient and won't wait around for proof before acting unilaterally....and unconstitutionally. Attacking another sovereign nation clearly, unequivocally REQUIRES congressional approval by law, he didn't even seek it, much less get it. Don't ignore that, address it please.

EDIT: Another good question to ask, did this cost as much or more for us to bomb as it destroyed? Tomahawks are expensive, about $1.4 million each + the cost to deploy them (at least another $100 million +-), and 30 year old planes, a cafeteria, and above ground gas tanks, not so much....the Russians claim only $9 million in damage with fresh video evidence that they probably aren't far off with that estimate. That's a terrible return on investment coming from the deal maker in chief.

bobknight33 said:

First of all I do not think America should have any involvement there except for humanitarian reasons.

This counter strike a tit for tat jab at Assad in Syria.

More importantly it sends a message to the world that there is a new sheriff in town. One that may not capitulate and falter if action is needed.

On the down side is that America still does not know how Trump will react to a real crisis.

This Assad strike was a measured response. I just hope all future responses will be as such.

Syria's war: Who is fighting and why [Updated]

enoch says...

@MilkmanDan

i do not want to speak for eric,so i will just explain why i downvoted.

this video attempts to explain the syrian crisis,with almost zero critical examination.the video practically regurgitates the current american political narrative and never mentions the conflicts of information.

let me explain:

1.the video states this all started due to the arab spring,but totally fails to mention that the MAIN reason for the continued conflict is not arab spring,but the fact the both qatar and saudi arabia have been pushing syria to allow them to build a pipeline through syria in order for those countries to sell oil and gas to europe.

which would be in direct competition with russia,which is the main provider of oil and gas to europe.

2.this video claims..twice..that assad has used chemical weapons against his own people.while convenient for a western power which may,or may not,wish to engage militarily.there was no evidence in 2013,and there is no evidence this time (mainly due to time.i mean come on,TWO days? and BOOM.assad did it,nothing to see here.move along).

the only journalist in 2013 that challenged the narrative was seymor hersh.who was ridiculed and chastised,and ultimately vindicated in 2014 by the UN securities commission,that assad was not the perpetrator,but rather the al qeada off shoot el nosra.

which was barely covered,if at all,in american corporate media.

it is also important to mention that the assad regime,in full compliance with the UN,handed over all materials that could be used in chemical warfare.i.e:sarin gas.

3.while the video DOES mention it,it does so in a very slick way,and if you are not following this situation,you will miss it.

america IS supporting and funding "rebels",but pay attention to who those rebels are:they are the offshoot of al qeada,el nosra.

so in effect,america sis funding and supporting al qeada to fight against the assad regime.

i will give you time to allow that to sink in a moment.

these are only a few of the glaring inconsistencies in this video,but i will agree that the situation in syria is complicated,but the reasons for that complication are not being mentioned in this video..at all.

and one final thing to chew about before i go,because i think it is an important aspect to ponder,and as of right now,thats all it really is:speculation.

assad was set to meet with a UN peace council in a week to discuss possible diplomatic solutions.add to this that trump had just recently (last week) backed off obama's "red line" approach,and stated quite clearly that america is ONLY interested in dealing with ISIS,and had NO interest in dealing with assad.

question:

why would assad,with only a week to go before peace negotiations,commit politicial suicide by gassing his own people?

who benefits from this attack?

because it sure is not assad.

we all know the situation in syria is dire,complicated and grotesque,but the current narrative being fed to americans simply does NOT add up.

2+2 does not = 5

and this video does nothing to clear that up,it simply regurgitates american corporate media's narrative.

and i refuse to upvote that.

Drone Footage Of Syrian Base After Recent Tomahawk Strike

bobknight33 says...

First of all I do not think America should have any involvement there except for humanitarian reasons.

This counter strike a tit for tat jab at Assad in Syria.

More importantly it sends a message to the world that there is a new sheriff in town. One that may not capitulate and falter if action is needed.

On the down side is that America still does not know how Trump will react to a real crisis.

This Assad strike was a measured response. I just hope all future responses will be as such.

corporate media tool gets taken to school about syria

enoch says...

@newtboy
that's what you took away from this?
jimmy dore is akin to glenn beck and alex jones?

ok,not gonna judge.

i thought the real take away,in my opinion,was a journalist was taken to task for being lazy and uncritically accepting the current corporate media narrative,and gets a thrashing from an independent journalist from canada.a polite and soft spoken thrashing,but a thrashing just the same.

eve bartlett has been doing some amazing work in regards to syria,and exposing the lies and manipulations of corporate media.

jimmy dore is a comedian,i am just a loser nobody who comments on the internet,but we all come to our own conclusions.

and i no longer give corporate media any authority,because of their utter and complete failure to inform.

i question any and everything that they attempt to spin as "truth".

From Spy to President: The Rise of Vladimir Putin

vil says...

Both "the west" and Putin are up to no good in the middle east, that is easily an ugly draw. Watch Turkey implode next.

Read up on "Russia's ally in Syria" if your stomach is up to it.
But then if you support Putin in any way you are probably used to that kind of stuff.

That said US foreign policy is... hard to understand sometimes.

Oh and debts on state level dont work the way you imply, but i understand the propaganda viewpoint. Russians have been trying to be economically independent from "the west" for a hundred years now. Maybe if they tried to be responsible partners it would be better for everyone.

And Im not saying the west should or indeed can do something about Putin. All I meant was that Russia is enemy No. 1 in rhetoric only. Not that important at all.

Spacedog79 said:

What do the west do? You mean apart from waging war across the middle east and trying to oust Russia's ally in Syria on trumped up charges?

From Spy to President: The Rise of Vladimir Putin

Spacedog79 says...

What do the west do? You mean apart from waging war across the middle east and trying to oust Russia's ally in Syria on trumped up charges?

vil said:

Russia is having a hard time trying to remain enemy #1.

Putin is doing everything just to retain power. He is the one who needs an enemy, also he needs some way to explain why people in the west are better off than his own subjects, to keep them loyal.

Putin needs to be the enemy of the west but is having a hard time being relevant. I mean what atrocities would he need to perpetrate for the west to properly take notice?

All the west does is talk (and some economic sanctions).

Jim Jefferies tells Piers Morgan to Fuck Off

newtboy says...

As I said, I did not mean the only argument. I should have been more clear. At least I can admit it.

Ha!!! Muphry was spot on. Mea culpa.
"Donald J Trump is calling for a complete and total shutdown of Muslims coming to the United States....."
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=viDffWUjcBA

Close enough, or do I need to find a video of him saying the words "Muslim ban"? From what I'm reading, any videos or statements he made with those words have been removed from his websites, so may be hard to find.

As I've said before, not banning ALL Muslims (yet) does not hide the clear intent any better than the targeted banning of Israelis hid the Jewish ban for some other countries.
Trump publicly stated that Christians from the "banned" countries, including Syria, would essentially be exempt and given preferential treatment, another legal indicator the ban is targeted at Muslims, not nationalities. I'll look to see if I can find a link to that.
http://time.com/4652367/donald-trump-refugee-policy-christians/

Obama never halted immigration from them, he implemented stringent vetting, but didn't revoke any visas like Trump, and extreme vetting has been the norm for years, it's not some new Trump idea requiring a travel ban until he figures out what's happening.

Saying he (Jim) didn't make an argument, when his argument is actually one of those offered in court against the ban, defends Trump's position, therefore him, intentionally or not.

harlequinn said:

Yes, how about that, "the argument followed". (I've got a screen shot of that. It's now my wallpaper. Lol. Jk).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muphry's_law (I've done it before - and no doubt I'll do it again).

"Is that somehow above your comprehension level, so not coherent to you?" Yes, that's it. Clearly it's above my "comprehension level". Lol. So, have you got a clip showing Trump calling it a Muslim ban. Because I googled it and couldn't find one. Is there evidence that Muslim's are banned from the USA? I can't see any. I googled it but apparently the majority of Muslims in the world have no travel ban (it was a geographic ban, not a religious one). Apparently the Obama administration had already designated travel conditions on those seven countries and this is an extension of those conditions. http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2017/feb/07/reince-priebus/were-7-nations-identified-donald-trumps-travel-ban/

I don't dispute that the list is not well thought out (by either administration). I don't dispute that the majority religion affected is Islam. I do dispute that it is singularly a Muslim ban, because it's not. It bans everyone from those nations. If you want to dispute this fact, then please provide some evidence. Jim Jefferies got it wrong.

Where did I defend anyone? I called out Jefferies. I can't see any words where I defend anyone.

I didn't support or vote for anyone. I'm not an American citizen. I'm looking from the outside in - and that gives me a good perspective.

Donald Trump will never be President of the United States

bobknight33 says...

Ukraine was a NATO arrangement. That is a tough one. Probably not directly attack but use UN sanctions.

Syria line in the sand issue... If Trump was president at the time I think he would have acted in some sort.

Today Syria with Russia on its side. Hornets nest. But It wold be Boss to fly daily humanitarian flights and tell Syria / Russia not F with these flights or else ...

newtboy said:

I actually agree with these two, and I was quite disappointed about both, but do you honestly believe Trump will stand up to Putin in similar circumstances?

Governor of Washington Slams Trumps over Muslim Ban

enoch says...

so i have been watching this argument over the "ban" all over my facebook.people really like their little "memes" that offer no real criticism,nor any context,they simply display that persons particular bias.the discussion over this "ban" was not my issue.my issue was with the utter lack of depth of understanding.the evident laziness of those who got up on their little soapbox and sanctimoniously,and self-righteously moralized over a situation that they maybe..maaaybe..spent a total of five minutes on.

until finally my head exploded,and i went into hulk-mode.this was my rant,that i now share with you all:

jesus fucking christ...am i reading these comments correctly?

ok,lets put a little clarity into the mix,shall we?

first of all its not actually a "ban" but an extension to vette refugees further.

sounds reasonable right?

but what is NOT mentioned is that the majority of these refugees have already BEEN vetted,and the process has taken up to two years already.

so stop wetting your pants over brown people who happen to be muslim.

secondly,
let us take a look at the countries whose refugees are being "banned".

notice anything?

each and every one of those countries the american military is deployed in.the CIA has been fighting a proxy war in syria for five fucking YEARS.obama expanded operations into:sudan,somolia,yemen,syria and jordan (another proxy war executed by our radical saudi arabia buddies,who just happen to hate america and promote the most radical of muslim interpretations:wahhabism.they spend BILLIONS of their oil money to open madrasas across the region to light the match of radical islam)

so we,along with russia,turkey and other nations,are bombing the SHIT out of these countries,therefore creating the refugee crisis in the first place,and then we turn around an slap a "ban" on them.

oh,i'm sorry,not really a ban,just an extension to vette them further,because god knows we need more than two years to find out if someone is radicalized.

hypocrisy much america?

thirdly,
and this should make us all VERY nervous,but corporate media has YET to address this little turd nugget.a federal court slapped an injunction on this "ban",because it was not done through the proper channels,but rather through executive order.

and DHS ignored the injunction.
IGNORED it,because who needs "checks and balances" right?
who needs an institution,which was put in place to uphold the law and to restrict a sitting president from over-stepping his authority?
right?

and the fact that the DHS,which is under the DoD,outright ignored a direct order from a federal judge to cease and desist,because trump had overstepped his authority by attempting to use executive orders to circumvent the law.,and this was just an injunction,which really just means "stop!until we further review"...the DHS ignored the injunction.

lets ignore the fact that trump gutted the very agency that would have been the first to challenge his executive order "banning" these refugees.trump literally gutted all the high ranking officials at the state dept.

his press secretary said,and this is fucking laughable..they resigned..ALL of them?
all of them just stood up and resigned?

so it came down to a judge to hold trump accountable,which he did by injunction and an entire dept ignored that federal judges ruling.

now let us look at the countries left off that list.

notice anything?

well well well...would you look at that.
not only do they all purchase large amounts of weapons and military apparatus from us.not only do have they have large reserves of oil that our american companies make a shit ton of money from,but lookie here..trump has business in every singly one of those countries.

coincidence?

oh,and lets not overlook the fact that by executive order trump opened the door to have steve bannon on the national security council!
an unqualified,and with zero experience white nationalist is now on the national security council.

this is unprecedented!

but who cares right?
who needs those protocols,or checks and balances right?

trump is slowly creating his own tiny cabal of extreme loyalists and you people are wetting your pants over some brown people who lost everything,and have spent TWO FUCKING YEARS to find refuge?

this isnt the behavior of a president.
this is the behavior of a king.

yes,other presidents have implemented bans.
this is not a new thing.
what IS new,and some of you nimrods are either willingly,or unwittingly ignoring,is that THOSE bans were in direct response to the US being threatened by a particular group,and THOSE bans had the approval of congress..not a fucking piece of paper that king trump signed.

does america need to reform it's immigration policies?
yes,most certainly.

do we need to have an system in place to help assimilate refugees from syria beyond vetting?

of course,all we have to do is look at germany and see what happens when you allow refugees into your country without proper preparation and a system in place to see just how horrible it can get.

does this mean that every muslim refugee is somehow a terrorist?

well,just look at dearborn michigan.the largest muslim community in america and tell me how many terrorist came from that city? how many muslims were radicalized in dearborn?

is radicalized islam a problem?
yes,of course,who would deny this?

but the causes of radicalization are well understood,and have been well documented,and it is NOT only muslims who engage in terrorism.

really folks,before you start making declarations of certitude without having even the most basic knowledge how our government functions,you need to shut the fuck up.

and for FUCK sakes pick up a book once in awhile,and stop being a gaggle of fucking bed wetters.
jesus...you little fags piss yourselves every time a muslim is even mentioned in conversation.

oh,and before one of you tough guys even think about talking shit to me.
1.i am ex military.so go fuck yourself.
2.my JOB is to debunk bullshit stories and research politics and offer analysis.

so you better think twice before you go off half cocked,because my comment hurt your wittle feewings.your comments are ignorant and they are so lacking in the basic understanding of how this government operates that the only feeling you should having right now is:SHAME.

*edit:this is not directed towards anyone in particular here,but this single focus on trumps ill-thought "ban",and how he did so in such a broad,and general wave of a pen stroke that affected even those HAD gone through the process to get their green cards,visas etc etc is simply buying into the corporate narrative.

and then NOT consider the implications of a gutted state department,the loss of the attorney general and the defiant,disobedience of the DHS in regards to a federal judges injunction.

is unforgivable in it's ignorance.

the implications ALONE should make us all worried.
very very worried.
because it appears trump is reshaping our government into his own little fiefdom of loyalists,willing to defy the everyday governmental operations of checks and balances.

trump is consolidating and concentrating his power by creating his own little cabal of loyalists.that motherfucker has ALREADY put his candidacy on the ballot for 2020.now accepting donations to the highest bidder! feel free to purchase your own piece of the american presidency!

on sale NOW! so act fast! positions are limited!
*prices may vary according to your status and where you reside on the class scale.poor people can simply fuck off.

i realize this speculation on my part,
and i could be wrong.
god..please let me be wrong.

Liberal Redneck - Muslim Ban

Mordhaus says...

2011 actually, although they didn't broadcast it, call it a ban, and it was limited to Syria only at the time.

Fairbs said:

and he banned innocent Muslims from coming into the country when? don't try to deflect the molester in chiefs raping of the ideals this country was founded on with a phony argument

Donald Trump will never be President of the United States

bobknight33 says...

Syria line in the sand? Obama pussed out.
Russian invasion of Ukraine. We were obligated to defend them. Obama pussed out.
Obama apology tour.
Obama has lowered our standing in the world.
Obama not securing our boarder.
Obama allowing sanctuary cities.
Yes Obama did destroy out standing and American values.


Trump is still in the beginning and time will tell. That being said His first 2 week were right on in making America first.
Trump starting his promise:
To build the wall.
Stricter controls on who enters America,
A good pick of Supreme Court nominee.
Started the process to dismantle the Un-Affordable Care Act.

I am a Cruze guy but he lost out. Will Trump fail Time will tell.
Stupid, fumbling at times sure but he is not dumb. Is he learning the political ropes sure.

He did beat out 16 professional politicians at their own game and then beat the opposite party. You have to hand him some smarts..

He won by listening to American heartland.

Drachen_Jager said:

I think the issue here is that John Oliver overestimated the intelligence and compassion of Americans.

If he'd spent more time hanging around @bobknight33 perhaps he'd have seem Trump coming.

Still waiting on a response, btw, Bob, I'll rephrase so you don't have to dig through my other comments. You once said Obama would destroy the United States; What specific examples can you point to which support that claim? By what metric was the US worse off at the end of his presidency?

Likewise, you claim Trump will be great for the country. What metrics can you point to which you believe will improve under his reign? Let's get some numbers down now so we can track his progress.

Lastly, when (and I do mean when) Trump fails utterly, will you admit you were wrong about him? What exactly would have to happen for you to admit you were wrong about Obama or Trump?

USA and russian relations at a "most dangerous moment"

newtboy says...

Yes, I agree, Assad would be replaced tomorrow if he went against Putin, but he won't. He knows who butters his bread.

I don't think a targeted assassination was what Obama meant when he drew his red line in the sand over Assad gassing civilians. I expected, say, a no fly zone or US bombings of Assad's troops and headquarters, assisting the rebels without arming them. Agreed, that would be NO guarantee that another despot or worse wouldn't fill the void in power.
Perhaps the 'democratic" alternative would be separating Syria into 2 or more countries with local rule? That seems like it would have been better in Iraq than what happened.
Best would be if we could just stay out altogether and let them sort it out themselves, but that seems an impossibility for numerous reasons.

vil said:

@enoch
I did my best :-) I honestly feel threatened by this attitude of feeding the bear crumbs and pretending he is a friend. Also cant help liking Abby, so very disappointed.

@newtboy
For russia Assad is a (replaceable) puppet, bolstering Assad is just using that puppet for their own needs. ISIS is a threat because it directly supports terrorist groups within Russia. Sending in their air force and that coal powered smoking joke of an aircraft carrier was a military excercise with minimal losses and huge political and home security gains. Expensive though.

One cant just send in a task force to take out a dictator simply because one believes it would be the right thing to do. Countries generally have a limitless supply of local mafioso would-be dictators or religious leaders which the local population prefers to foreign rule. Religion and politics are just a thin veil for local tribal wars. In spite of Syria being a fairly civilised country before the current events I doubt there was ever a "democratic" alternative to Assad. Sometimes you just get lucky and the dictator decides he wants democracy (South Korea, Chile, Gorbatchev inadvertently).

F**k the whole middle east actually IMHO, twice. The Kurds never get any love from anyone and they´ve survived in the middle of this crazy shitstorm for millenia. Yet they will never have a country of their own. Even "Palestinians" created only in the last few decades appear to be closer to that goal. Not fair at all.

USA and russian relations at a "most dangerous moment"

vil says...

@enoch
I did my best :-) I honestly feel threatened by this attitude of feeding the bear crumbs and pretending he is a friend. Also cant help liking Abby, so very disappointed.

@newtboy
For russia Assad is a (replaceable) puppet, bolstering Assad is just using that puppet for their own needs. ISIS is a threat because it directly supports terrorist groups within Russia. Sending in their air force and that coal powered smoking joke of an aircraft carrier was a military excercise with minimal losses and huge political and home security gains. Expensive though.

One cant just send in a task force to take out a dictator simply because one believes it would be the right thing to do. Countries generally have a limitless supply of local mafioso would-be dictators or religious leaders which the local population prefers to foreign rule. Religion and politics are just a thin veil for local tribal wars. In spite of Syria being a fairly civilised country before the current events I doubt there was ever a "democratic" alternative to Assad. Sometimes you just get lucky and the dictator decides he wants democracy (South Korea, Chile, Gorbatchev inadvertently).

F**k the whole middle east actually IMHO, twice. The Kurds never get any love from anyone and they´ve survived in the middle of this crazy shitstorm for millenia. Yet they will never have a country of their own. Even "Palestinians" created only in the last few decades appear to be closer to that goal. Not fair at all.

Donald Trump's refugee ban, explained

newtboy says...

Would that fly with you if Obama had said that to Christians that had completed the immigration process, or already immigrated but were on business outside the US? Just go somewhere else, you scare us. You would not accept it.

You do get that many people now 'banned' already lived here, right?
You do understand that those refugees already accepted went through an invasive 18-24 month vetting process while living in refugee camps with no jobs or schools, right?
You do understand that some who've completed that process and were accepted because they put their lives and their families lives in danger by working for America in, lets say Syria, are now denied permanently and their lives are now in danger from retaliation, right?
You do understand that those already accepted would have sold their homes and assets in their home countries, left their jobs, and in some cases purchased property in the US, right ?

If this were done by Obama, or to white Christians, you would be frothing at the mouth. Just wait until Canada bans white right wingers because you guys have now proven to be terrorists and lets see how you react. I seriously doubt it will be with calm patience and an 'oh well, we can just go elsewhere' attitude.

bobknight33 said:

There are approximate 180 countries to pick from.

For the next 120 days, pick another.

Stop the sky is falling and there is no whee else to go.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon