AUDub 11,180 Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 3 minutes ago, homersapien said: So, if removing troops was a mistake, is the proper action sending more troops in? Ah, one of the classic blunders Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,431 Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 13 hours ago, Proud Tiger said: I respect your opinion but I will go with the judgement of the President. He had more input/intelligence/advice in making his decision than anyone here. Note in the link the Russians were notified in advance of the attack. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/04/06/syria-missile-strikes-trump-says-action-in-vital-national-security-interest.html Yeah, it's really easy to support the use of military force in the beginning. It's the inevitable longer term results that Americans have a problem with. Unfortunately, Americans apparently have a very short term memories. We've been here before. Recently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,431 Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 13 hours ago, Proud Tiger said: I respect your opinion but I will go with the judgement of the President. He had more input/intelligence/advice in making his decision than anyone here. Note in the link the Russians were notified in advance of the attack. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/04/06/syria-missile-strikes-trump-says-action-in-vital-national-security-interest.html Are you really proud of Trump for doing what should be obvious to an idiot? Well, on second thought, I suppose you have a point. I am a little surprised also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,431 Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 5 hours ago, PUB78 said: Bravo! The President seemed sincerely touched by these crimes against humanity. Yeah, so touched he opposes providing refuge to those same humans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strychnine 1,803 Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 11 minutes ago, homersapien said: Maybe Cruz would have been a better POTUS than I assumed. In saying "We should never give weapons to people who hate us", he is touching on something that should have been obvious to all nations that emerged from World War II. Our technology has created terrible weapons of war. When unleashed, they can create devastation in a way history has never seen. No one that possesses them has any business selling or giving them to a nation or people that lacks the development to build their own. Much of the modern world's evil has been protected and sustained by advanced weapons that were sold to leaders or nations that should have never had them to begin with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proud Tiger 4,261 Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 Here is a little more history re. the subject topic. More lies by Susan Rice. http://www.weeklystandard.com/in-january-susan-rice-assured-npr-the-obama-admin-removed-chemical-weapons-from-syria/article/2007548 http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/04/07/susan-rice-obama-colleagues-take-heat-for-past-claims-on-syria-chemical-weapons-purge.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icanthearyou 4,463 Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 2 hours ago, Proud Tiger said: Here is a little more history re. the subject topic. More lies by Susan Rice. http://www.weeklystandard.com/in-january-susan-rice-assured-npr-the-obama-admin-removed-chemical-weapons-from-syria/article/2007548 http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/04/07/susan-rice-obama-colleagues-take-heat-for-past-claims-on-syria-chemical-weapons-purge.html I don't believe she was lying. I believe she was foolish enough to trust the Russians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strychnine 1,803 Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 4 minutes ago, icanthearyou said: I don't believe she was lying. I believe she was foolish enough to trust the Russians. Which is understandable, as the Russians have no reason to want Syria to retain (or use) chemical weapons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icanthearyou 4,463 Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 5 minutes ago, Strychnine said: Which is understandable, as the Russians have no reason to want Syria to retain (or use) chemical weapons. Not sure about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbird 60,580 Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 So, those asking, "what's next", what do You think is the appropriate next step? I'm not sure and am genuinely wondering what y'all think should be done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,431 Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 3 hours ago, Proud Tiger said: Here is a little more history re. the subject topic. More lies by Susan Rice. http://www.weeklystandard.com/in-january-susan-rice-assured-npr-the-obama-admin-removed-chemical-weapons-from-syria/article/2007548 http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/04/07/susan-rice-obama-colleagues-take-heat-for-past-claims-on-syria-chemical-weapons-purge.html Can you please quote the "lies" in those pieces? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunInRed 16,477 Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 Well, that certainly showed them … Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,431 Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 6 minutes ago, bigbird said: So, those asking, "what's next", what do You think is the appropriate next step? I'm not sure and am genuinely wondering what y'all think should be done. I have no idea. But someone needs to support the proposition that chemical and nuclear weapons are off limits, so I support what was done. Obama's not backing up his "red line" statement was a huge mistake IMO. But short of another attempt at nation-forming, I don't see how further intervention on our part could have a positive end. Is there any faction we could help take power that wouldn't result in blow-back? I doubt it. But if you really wanted to be amoral, cold-blooded, and machivallian about it, we might take out Assad and then watch the Russians deal with the resulting problem of retaining their influence (and bases) in the aftermath. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,431 Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 1 minute ago, RunInRed said: Well, that certainly showed them … Hit it again. Harder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strychnine 1,803 Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 1 hour ago, icanthearyou said: Not sure about that. Assad ordering the use of chemical weapons does nothing to further Russian goals. It makes their role in defending Assad a more untenable position. The previous balance was perfect for Russian interests in Syria, and Assad. Our coalition was attacking ISIS, but not the Assad regime or Syrian military, and the Russians were attacking the rebels. This was most likely to produce an eventual Assad regime victory, and it appeared we were willing to accept the continued rule of the devil we know, instead of whatever might emerge from the power vacuum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proud Tiger 4,261 Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 1 hour ago, RunInRed said: Well, that certainly showed them … It was stated in advance that there was no intent to cause significant damage to the AP since the Russian planes also use it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proud Tiger 4,261 Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 The 72 hour evolution leading to the decision to strike. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/04/07/syria-strikes-story-behind-trumps-72-hour-evolution.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUUSN 823 Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 War is hard. Agence France-Presse (AFP) quoted a “key figure” in the Army of Islam, or Jaysh al-Islam, as saying, “Hitting one airbase is not enough, there are 26 airbases that target civilians.” The AFP article just identified Jaysh al-Islam as a rebel group and didn’t point out that the organization seeks to replace the Assad regime with a government ruled by Sharia law. MSNBC also reported that the rebels Ahrar al-Sham “welcome US intervention through surgical strikes that would deter regime capabilities to kill civilians.” The U.S. considers Ahrar al-Sham one of the most effective rebel groups in Syria, according to a report from Stanford University. The group also worked with ISIS until 2014, is sympathetic with Al-Qaeda, and seeks to create an Islamic state in Syria. Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/07/radical-islamists-cheer-trump-administrations-missile-strike/#ixzz4dbhFnU6l Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUUSN 823 Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,126 Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 9 hours ago, Bigbens42 said: The Rock is not a documentary! The real shocker in that movie was to find out that John Patrick Mason was actually the real James Bond ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icanthearyou 4,463 Posted April 8, 2017 Share Posted April 8, 2017 11 hours ago, PUB78 said: It is said that he was "born again". If so, then his mind and heart have been changed. He does seems somewhat of a different person than in the campaign. When was it said? By whom? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icanthearyou 4,463 Posted April 8, 2017 Share Posted April 8, 2017 2 hours ago, Strychnine said: Assad ordering the use of chemical weapons does nothing to further Russian goals. It makes their role in defending Assad a more untenable position. The previous balance was perfect for Russian interests in Syria, and Assad. Our coalition was attacking ISIS, but not the Assad regime or Syrian military, and the Russians were attacking the rebels. This was most likely to produce an eventual Assad regime victory, and it appeared we were willing to accept the continued rule of the devil we know, instead of whatever might emerge from the power vacuum. While I have heard that theory and, understand the logic, there is some speculation that the Russians actually played a part in the attack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunInRed 16,477 Posted April 8, 2017 Share Posted April 8, 2017 Before the attack, Russia got advance warning. Syria got advance warning. Both of them pulled forces out of the area and Russia turned off missile defense so that the US could attack … concrete. Was this anything but an $80 million fireworks show? You be the judge ... How far in advance did the Russians know shots were on the way? The BBC reports Russian vehicles left the base a day before the attack. Also ... Quote Syrian military officials appeared to anticipate Thursday's night raid on Syria's Shayrat airbase, evacuating personnel and moving equipment ahead of the strike, according to an eyewitness to the strike. http://abcnews.go.com/International/eyewitness-syrian-military-anticipated-us-raid/story?id=46641107 Oh Donald ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunInRed 16,477 Posted April 8, 2017 Share Posted April 8, 2017 3 hours ago, bigbird said: So, those asking, "what's next", what do You think is the appropriate next step? I'm not sure and am genuinely wondering what y'all think should be done. That's like asking the casual observer who just watch a clown kick a beehive, what should we do now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PUB78 1,362 Posted April 8, 2017 Share Posted April 8, 2017 1 hour ago, icanthearyou said: When was it said? By whom? By Jerry Falwell, Jr and James Dodson several months back. Before the election I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.