Poll: Syrian Chemical Weapon Attack

Would you support a military strike on Syria without a UN Security Council resolution?


  • Total voters
    828
  • Poll closed .
why does middle east problems always end up being a western problem? why can't the oil rich arab nations help each other out?

then again I'm sure western countries would rather keep them divided and weak

Because the uber-rich in gulf nations are to busy driving round knightsbridge in cars like this to give a flying ****.


This guy had a 4x4 with Qatari diplomatic plates and armed guards inside trailing him for protection.
 
Last edited:
Because the uber-rich in gulf nations are to busy driving round knightsbridge in cars like this to give a flying ****.


This guy had a 4x4 with Qatari diplomatic plates and armed guards inside trailing him for protection.

Is it possible to make more of a statement than this?

The statement being "I am massively over-compensating for something."
 
Is it possible to make more of a statement than this?

The statement being "I am massively over-compensating for something."
yea his lack of insurance and clearly IQ
that car = awesome
that paint job pretty ****
driving without insurance when your clearly rich as **** and having your car confiscated and put on show by scotland yard
priceless
 
Doesnt need insurance, could buy 10 of them and burn them... without bothering.

it's a legal requirement still so yes he needs it even if he could buy 10 of them he could cause a 100 car pileup on the motorway and have a lot of insurance claims against him. :D

TBH I doubt he could buy 10 of them how long is the waiting list?
 
that car = awesome
that paint job pretty ****
driving without insurance when your clearly rich as **** and having your car confiscated and put on show by scotland yard
priceless

Revving your engine when you aren't going anywhere, in the middle of town, is also a pretty douche move.

"Oh look at me! Look at my car! I'm so cool, I can rev my engine and be stuck in traffic at the same time!"
 
A few websites are reporting a new attack. This time gas was used. Straight away they are blaming Government. They sure go their evidence it was the Government who used the gas very quickly. If Assad has used gas then that would be one of the dumbest moves ever in war history. Why would Assad used gas at such a time? It just doesn't make sense. Assad will be up to speed as to how the western media are covering Syria. He knows to use chemical weapons will only increase the shouts to attack Syria and bring the date they are going to be attacked nearer. This smells of a false flag.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/sy...abun-neighborhood-2013-09-06?siteid=bulletrss
 
if assad wanted to gas anyone he might as well do the biggest gas attack he can and quickly gas all the rebels and terrorists knowing boots will never be on the ground and the us would nolonger have a rebel force to remove him.

lol at one of the comments
You're citing Bloomberg who is in turn citing Al-Arabiya who is in turn citing "unnamed activists", and the story is mysteriously absent from both the Al-Arabiya website and their Twitter feed (which has been busy posting stories about reporters sneezing on TV in the meantime)

I bet if enough of us from ocuk made twitter accounts with islamic sounding names and made a bunch of spam tweets with the hastag #syriagasattack
we could hit atleast a handful of news websites :D

we could scrape some images together as well and sneak ocuk meme's from the photoshop threads into them
 
Last edited:
If there is any truth in this statement Obama is going to be given a hard time from congress.

Quote

"A poll commissioned by the BBC and ABC News suggested more than one-third of Congress members were undecided whether or not to back military action - and a majority of those who had made a decision said they would vote against the president"

Source

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23999066
 
Depends if you want a democracy.

55/45 is a clear margin. Democracy is just a process though it's not s magic wand that always creates nice outcomes, good and bad can both occur under a democracy too.

if we had democracy Britain would have been against it at the summit...

people say one thing
pm does what he wants anyway.

why is his opinion above parliaments and the peoples?
 
Back
Top Bottom