Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Editorials & Other Articles

yurbud

(39,405 posts)

1. or government's bipartisan track record of manipulating intel in favor of military action means...

Reply to bananas (Original post)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 12:23 PM

Apr 2017

there is little reason to believe much more than that people might have died in Syria and chemical weapons might have been involved--and that more people in Syria will definitely die as a result of that story being told.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

4 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The Chemical-Weapons Attack In Syria: Is There a Place for Skepticism? [View all] bananas Apr 2017 OP

or government's bipartisan track record of manipulating intel in favor of military action means... yurbud Apr 2017 #1

Since we're already there Blue_Tires Apr 2017 #3

75% of the time Blue_Tires Apr 2017 #2

Yes, and shame on anyone who automatically buys the official govt narrative Fast Walker 52 Apr 2017 #4