BruceVC

Bro, that's all been dealt with. Assad has been shelling that area of Damascus on and off for the past year, and attacking pretty much consistently for the last month. There's nothing special about it being shelled, that's what happens to rebel held areas- why does the US bomb stuff? Must be to cover up [something], can't be because they think there enemies are there. He has no reason to use chemical weapons, when he's winning, when there are weapons inspectors in the country (who were only staying a matter of days, prior to this), when he doesn't want western intervention since that's the only way the rebels can win, when he supposedly used them a few miles away from the inspectors rather than Aleppo, Homs, Deraa or somewhere else hundred of miles away and when there are absolutely essential and crucial government held areas nearby for the gas to drift into on a wind change or get effected if you have a misfire or a rocket goes haywire. It makes no sense, if you were going to launch a gas attack, when you're already winning, you launch it when there aren't inspectors nearby or even in the country, in isolated areas where it is difficult to get information out of, there's no chance of an own goal, and which have as much plausible deniability as possible. If Assad were really so cretinously stupid as to use weapons now and in the way he allegedly did the argument would be irrelevant as he would have already lost due to moving his troops to the Med to defend against a possible attack from the Carthaginians under their despotic pairing of world renowned gourmand Hannibal and Dido, warbling her greatest hits as she comes. Every single thing about the attack is nothing short of moronic, if it were the government doing it. Oh, and for 'conspiracy' theorists, someone bombed Syria's anti ship missile emplacements at the beginning of July. Exactly why Israel would do that was never explained since Hezbollah actually has decent ASMs already (and sunk an Israeli ship with one in 2006). Mighty convenient if you were planning on firing some tomahawks off ships though. Sorry Zor but I don't operate in the world of conspiracy theories, I dwell in the world of facts. But I concede you make some good points but if Assad is innocent why has he been so reluctant to get the UN inspectors to the sites of the attacks. The reality is that if the rebels have used Chemical Weapons the support for them will be immediately reduced from the rest of the world. He should be doing everything in his power to assist the UN, but he's not he is hampering there efforts? His actions create major flaws in your logic. Alright, let's bomb him them. Well said, but lets not be so belligerent. Military action is needed to implement effective regime change in Syria but the question is " what type of military action" Its not as simple as saying "lets bomb them" but you are on the right track

Bro, that's all been dealt with. Assad has been shelling that area of Damascus on and off for the past year, and attacking pretty much consistently for the last month. There's nothing special about it being shelled, that's what happens to rebel held areas- why does the US bomb stuff? Must be to cover up [something], can't be because they think there enemies are there. He has no reason to use chemical weapons, when he's winning, when there are weapons inspectors in the country (who were only staying a matter of days, prior to this), when he doesn't want western intervention since that's the only way the rebels can win, when he supposedly used them a few miles away from the inspectors rather than Aleppo, Homs, Deraa or somewhere else hundred of miles away and when there are absolutely essential and crucial government held areas nearby for the gas to drift into on a wind change or get effected if you have a misfire or a rocket goes haywire. It makes no sense, if you were going to launch a gas attack, when you're already winning, you launch it when there aren't inspectors nearby or even in the country, in isolated areas where it is difficult to get information out of, there's no chance of an own goal, and which have as much plausible deniability as possible. If Assad were really so cretinously stupid as to use weapons now and in the way he allegedly did the argument would be irrelevant as he would have already lost due to moving his troops to the Med to defend against a possible attack from the Carthaginians under their despotic pairing of world renowned gourmand Hannibal and Dido, warbling her greatest hits as she comes. Every single thing about the attack is nothing short of moronic, if it were the government doing it. Oh, and for 'conspiracy' theorists, someone bombed Syria's anti ship missile emplacements at the beginning of July. Exactly why Israel would do that was never explained since Hezbollah actually has decent ASMs already (and sunk an Israeli ship with one in 2006). Mighty convenient if you were planning on firing some tomahawks off ships though. Sorry Zor but I don't operate in the world of conspiracy theories, I dwell in the world of facts. But I concede you make some good points but if Assad is innocent why has he been so reluctant to get the UN inspectors to the sites of the attacks. The reality is that if the rebels have used Chemical Weapons the support for them will be immediately reduced from the rest of the world. He should be doing everything in his power to assist the UN, but he's not he is hampering there efforts? His actions create major flaws in your logic 1) I am sorry they are in that situation but nothing that we do at a national level will change one thing about it. If they are not being killed by the army, they will be killed by the rebels. By helping one side or the other we are only choosing who will kill them. 2) Exactly why I get so enraged when our current president does everything in his power to sabotage domestic energy production. And he does. GB that's not technically true, there is something you can do. There is this American social initiative to "adopt a Syrian family" You could do that and take in a family of Syrian refugees? In fact you could probably do better than that and adopt a gay Syrian family as you have mentioned that you don't know any gay people. Now before you think about the reasons to say " I can't for reason x " you need to believe in life its better to give than to receive. Plus won't it be satisfying to know you are helping people less fortunate than you? Of course you need to consider what Stef and Tommy may think but they shouldn't be too hard to convince ?

Thanks. And here I was afraid of being categorized as some kind of stereotypical doomsday prepper nut. (Which I'm not) If you need any help with your survival backpack just ask me, I'm happy to help. One thing I highly recommend, -I would even call it the single most important item in my backpack- is this survival book: I have one copy of it in my backpack and it contains survival techniques in all kinds of terrains and situations, first aid skills, how to hunt, skin animals and prepare meat, the dangers of parasites, psychology in dangerous situations, ...its an extremely comprehensive survival book. Even when you are not THAT interested in that kind of subject its still a great read because of the sheer amount useful information in it. Woldan do you think you could survive in the wilderness by yourself? What I mean is could you set snares, make yourself some sort of shelter, hunt, identify what berries you can eat and so on?

Ah thanks for all the tips around Rice guys, I got some good tips

No need to worry about any serious cyber-attacks on the USA. You have Prism and other programs to defend you

Man, noone is going to risk their contracts for homos, animal rights or other hippie idiocy. It's not a matter of nuclear weapons or army size. Only jingoistic and idealistic people would think that US will start a war with China to free Taiwan. And cynical i am. I think that homosexuality is a deviation, like pedophilia or zoophilia. Only difference with other diseases is that we could not yet determine the cure. That is my opinion and "you are wrong!" or "a lot of celebrities said homos are okay!" will not change it as I came to it after listening to both pro and cons arguments. So I just enjoy funny discussion where I can mock people about some sensitive subjects. And by the way - people started objecting that "racism" only after it declared war upon them. Not before that. I assume you know some gay people, how do you treat them when you meet them, do you say to there faces you think there sexual orientation is a physical affliction? I am not going to try to change your mind by explaining why homosexuality is not a disease as you clearly won't listen to reason. I would like you to present one credible link though that explains that homosexuality is a sickness and can be treated, just one? Finally why would you get enjoyment from mocking people about topics they believe in, does this seem like the rational and reasonable thinking of a normal person?

That's subjective, I happen to disagree

Good point, I should have mentioned Larian Studio's and Macbeth So that makes 3 prominent development companies

That's exactly my point, there are many things we can do as ordinary citizens to show our dissatisfaction with the policies of another country. And sometimes it may be as simple as boycotting there goods if you feel strongly enough about a particular social injustice. Sometimes that's all you can do but you still make a stand

you are just too accustomed that everyone around you is a tolerant and all-caring. As for government - China purged ****load of mislim Uyghurs during their 2009 uprising. There was an outrage, a lot of "how could they!" "everyone should sever all diplomatic ties with China!" and similar naive statements. In the end, China ignored all complaints and accusations. Nobody cares, no one cancelled any important business contracts and China is as appealing to investment as before. But you can stick with that belief that "likes", meetings and declarations of support can change anything. Cultist you seem very cynical about what ordinary people can or can't do. You need to make a stand around your opinion on what matters in life especially on social issues like bigotry. It doesn't matter if you personally can't implement specific social changes in a certain country. That's not the point. I live in a country where racism use to be a law and changes only came because people around the world objected to it and said it wasn't acceptable. Your opinion does matter and can have an impact, it just may take time

So we have one member who works for Bioware and one member who works for CDPR. Now we just need a member who works for Bethesda and we will really be styling

I could do that, I ended up using a Peri-Peri sauce that did add flavour but I was looking at a more elegant solution to infuse flavour while the rice is cooking.

QFT, well said. Once again you have made some reasonable and logical points that I challenge anyone to dispute

You seem to enjoy defending them and the cold hostility of Russia seems more suited to your temperament than the sickening politeness of Canada. Malc he has raised a good point, the cold weather of Russia would make you feel right at home?

You have raised a good point and similar laws exist in certain African countries. I was wondering if anyone would bring this up But until those countries try to host an international sports event this social issue won't be discussed and highlighted. That's the main reason Russia is in the spotlight, they have only recently passed these new laws that discriminate against gay people and they are hosting the Winter Olympics next year But trust me the 2022 FIFA world cup is in Qatar and there will be massive debates around certain laws they have implemented

What do you guys do to spice up your rice? I enjoyed my dinner but the rice was lacking in flavour

Why are you so butthurt about some homos being killed and beaten up on the other side of the planet? This seems like a pretty lazy troll attempt. I mean there is no way Cultist wrote this and thought, yeah, this doesn't make me sound like a terrible person. Agreed, I doubt anyone would intentionally make themselves sound so ignorant and bigoted to ask a question "why care about equality and human rights in other parts of the world" @ Cultist The Russian government does care. They don't like negative publicity as they are trying to position Russia as a viable destination for many international events. They have also stated that there will be no discrimination against any gay athletes.

No That's unfair, outdated and not relevant to how the USA implements foreign policy decisions or military intervention anymore

But why would they need to bomb areas that had already been decimated by the Chemical attack? Its not like there are rebels there anymore fighting back. Trust me on this one the Assad regime is behind the usage of Chemical weapons . The question I want to know is " what is Canada planning to do or say about it" ?

This shouldn't be a surprise Malc, the Assad regime has been trying everything in its power to stop the UN inspectors getting the evidence that they used Chemical weapons. And you know it'd be them and not the various 'rebels' how ? Malc, ,Malc , Malc ....when are you just going to accept I am never wrong when it comes to political debates? The reason that its almost 100 % likely that its the Assad regime behind the Chemical attacks is how they have been behaving since the attack last week Wednesday. Firstly they have been bombing the sites of the attacks for the last few days. Why would you do this unless you wanted to hide evidence. Secondly they have been restricting the UN inspectors from going to the sites. Today they finally had to allow access. If you think of the consequences of either side using any kind of WMD surly if the Assad forces were innocent they would have escorted the UN inspectors there last week immediately after the attack to prove they had nothing to do with it. This would have gained them credibility in there campaign against the rebels who they claim are terrorists. There guilt is obvious by there delaying tactics

This shouldn't be a surprise Malc, the Assad regime has been trying everything in its power to stop the UN inspectors getting the evidence that they used Chemical weapons.

Ah Walsie he caught you out there France and many other countries did indeed sit out the Iraq war But that shouldn't be surprising, despite what people like Oby think most countries can't be forced to participate in wars or invasion just because country x says you must help us. They have to feel its in there national interest to do so. Most of the time this is what determines military involvement, strategic national interest and that's how intervention should occur. That's normal. So why shouldn't the West sit out the Syrian conflict? There are several reasons but for me the main ones are The loss of life in Syria as this interminable conflict drags on. 100,000 or more people have been killed. Millions of people displaced and huge parts of Syria have been destroyed. What about the moral obligation to stop this civil war? The West is aligned with the Sunni dominated countries in the Middle East like Saudi Arabia and Qatar. They want the Assad governments brutal suppression of the rebels to be stopped. The West should help its allies Iran is strongly supporting Assad, they have committed resources and manpower to keep him in power. The West can reduce both the power and influence of Iran by defeating Assad. This can only be a good thing as I believe Iran is a threat to stability in the region Finally the use of Chemical weapons is an unquestionable line that Assad has crossed. Apart from all the other reasons just the fact that Assad has used these weapons should be a strong signal he needs to be removed from power. What next will he use if he is allowed to stay in power ? Biological....

That cracked me up. But the idea makes sense, Russia is such a friendly place where they treat foreigners and people that are different to them really well. It would make sense and Russia has loads of land that they doing nothing with?

Yum, BBQ pulled pork sandwiched sounds delicious I'm having Turkey steak with Rice for supper tonight

That's a good point. I never thought about that. There would have to be some sort of ground force to ensure the WMD don't fall into the wrong hands. This does make it more complicated NATO never played a part in the invasion of Iraq, it was a coalition of willing countries led by the USA.