Comments by "irresistablejewel" (@irresistablejewel) on "Tucker: Would war against Assad make US safer?" video.

  1. I'm shocked! ... I find that I'm in total agreement with Tucker Carlson here; I believe he has given an accurate assessment of the current situation; that his proposed amendment is worth serious consideration and yes this (gas) story does seem rather familiar. Previously it was "intervention to save civilian life" that was the reason for war, but there were such high civilian death tolls that this quickly lost credibility; now we are supposed to believe that yet another country has used a banned weapon (like Hussein allegedly did) but in this instance, that is incredibly difficult to believe. As Tucker Carlson points out: we don't know who these, so called, rebels are (I'd say some groups look a lot like ISIS, or paid mercenaries); it seems abundantly clear that after Assad of Syria, called for the assistance of Russia, these "rebels" are losing; if so, why would a side winning a conventional war use banned weapons as it would undoubtedly cause an "international incident"? I agree the narrative make little sense. So why is the West (America in particular) so keen to overthrow legitimate governments? The last (or was it the one before last?) turned Libya into a country governed under Sharia law and bombing the irrigation system in a desert country cannot be called "an intervention to save civilian life" so clearly we were not told the truth; hunt for Bin-Laden ... found him (allegedly, in Pakistan); retribution for 9/11 ... invaded the wrong country (still there) and whoever came up the idea for the EU to offer Ukraine money to join was asking for trouble. I stopped believing "the West" (whoever they are; they're certainly not me) before Gadaffi was lynched (showing the world UN "justice"); perhaps around about the time Hussein was hung (another former ally) for proposing the same thing "oil for Gold" which is not be confused with the morally reprehensible "oil for food" program (which I believe may have been one of the reasons the "Twin Towers" was such a popular target). In short: I don't believe the Western narrative any more; I don't see what those behind it hope to achieve, but whatever it is (even if it's oil) it hasn't worked (quite the reverse) ... and no; I'm not with the terrorists and no I'm not a Russian and no I'm not unpatriotic (once they fix the roads). I'm sure the ones shovelling this shit are "highly likely" to be the true enemy. I mean if even a far-right commentator has spotted this, that the narrative he often supports has broken down on this issue then you can bet your bottom dollar that other have. This has become a serious matter now; as even in the last three days it has escalated with the Russian government issuing clear statements that they will oppose Western military action against Syria, with military action. I won't deal in: speculation; fear-mongering or rumours (because it's what they want?!) ... I'd just point one thing out: the Russians dominated World chess for decades and one thing chess players rarely do is bluff. Opinions vary on President Trump, I hear (I never stop hearing) but I think we should face up to it now ... different guy same warlike American foreign policy and Western claims that they are the victim, are a dud. For once I agree with Tucker Carlson right down the line; I don't have a lot of time for opinion based journalism these days, but he hit the nail on the head (in my opinion). Well done! (Now how do we stop this?)
    1