Trump says "big price to pay" for Syria chemical attack

[BuriramSam]

1 minute ago, Hummin said:

John Mc Cain is not impressed by Trump last statement about leaving Syria, and blaiming him for the last gas attack, and letting Assad speed up his attacks. 

 

Seems likely Usa just attacked back on their airforces just hours ago? 

I don't find John McCain nor most any other Republicrats impressive. I'm also not convinced any gas attack took place. One can't be cynical enough with US politics of the last several decades.

[Hummin]

3 minutes ago, BuriramSam said:

I don't find John McCain nor most any other Republicrats impressive. I'm also not convinced any gas attack took place. One can't be cynical enough with US politics of the last several decades.

It have always been like that, the fight for its tribe and existence over resources and land. We are conquers as species, and not smart enough to keep status q! Always more, and always a new war to controll and gain power. 

[BuriramSam]

Just now, Hummin said:

It have always been like that, the fight for its tribe and existence over resources and land. We are conquers as species, and not smart enough to keep status q! Always more, and always a new war to controll and gain power. 

BAM! the bottom line!

 

Oh, I would add I also blame perpetrators for actions first and foremost, as you probably do. What a shame or politicians don't think the same way.

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, maximillian said:

Starts with an "I" ?    Is it Italy, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Iran, Iceland, Ireland, Isfahan... ?

More like Israel at the behest of Israel. This will be interesting!

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, geriatrickid said:

Your wealth came about because the USA poured billions into the rebuilding of Germany, because Canada and other Commonwealth nations despite their heavy losses provided charity and aid, because Commonwealth  nations allowed in millions of European refugees over the following decades. Need I remind you that much of Europe's  security came at the expense of the USA who picked up much of the cost of  NATO. There was no need for Canada to have kept its military bases in Europe until the 1980's. 

 

Very big difference compared to how the arab and muslim world has responded to the war in  SYria. One doesn't see Indonesia or Malaysia offering significant aid. Not much from Brunei either and on and on it goes.

 

Your European wealth also came about because Europe looted billions from its former colonies. Need I remind you that the Portuguese stripped everything they could when they left Africa. The Germans and Belgians stole the wealth of Africa and left nothing except pain in return. The USA hasn't stolen anything from Syria.

 

Yet

[Andaman Al]

If these chemical weapons are seen as being so horrible (which they truly are!) then why do the USA, Brits, French, Russians and Chinese have them? Why do these nations sell them? Why do they sell the technology in how to make them? Why do the permanent members of the UN security council still have these weapons and then go up in arms every time someone might use them?

 

The US and UK were happy providing Hussein with chemical weapons capabilities until it did not suit them anymore. Then we have all this faux outrage when someone else may have sold the technology to Syria.

 

Any organisation or nation that uses chemical weapons should see the leaders tried and jailed for war crimes.

 

Why would Assad use chemical weapons when Trump has just announced he will be pulling all the US troops out of Syria? Using chemical weapons would likely ensure a US retaliation and US troop presence not only remaining but increasing. It makes NO sense. Assad has almost achieved the wiping out of the last of the 'rebels', why would he use chemical weapons now?  He has the resources and the boots on the ground to take out the remaining rebels which is his goal, 3 days, 3 weeks, 3 months it doesn't matter, he would achieve it. Assad and Russia definitely do not want the US in Syria, however there are many other interested groups that do. So who 'dunnit' ?. I have no doubt that chemicals were used, the question is by whom. It is nothing to do with Iran and Assad wants the US to go home so the questions should be who has most to gain by a chemical weapons attack at such a critical point when the end game is in sight? Follow the money and the self interest.

 

The interesting bit of psychology playing out here is that Trump lies every time he opens his mouth and the result is that many many people including heads of state would no longer trust him as far as they can throw him.

 

One thing is for sure, whoever did it has succeeded because this situation is only going to get a lot messier in the following days. Every permutation is bad.

[Guest]

Russia says it was Israel who carried out the attacks on Syrian airbase 

 

 

[Morch]

3 minutes ago, Andaman Al said:

If these chemical weapons are seen as being so horrible (which they truly are!) then why do the USA, Brits, French, Russians and Chinese have them? Why do these nations sell them? Why do they sell the technology in how to make them? Why do the permanent members of the UN security council still have these weapons and then go up in arms every time someone might use them?

 

The US and UK were happy providing Hussein with chemical weapons capabilities until it did not suit them anymore. Then we have all this faux outrage when someone else may have sold the technology to Syria.

 

Any organisation or nation that uses chemical weapons should see the leaders tried and jailed for war crimes.

 

Why would Assad use chemical weapons when Trump has just announced he will be pulling all the US troops out of Syria? Using chemical weapons would likely ensure a US retaliation and US troop presence not only remaining but increasing. It makes NO sense. Assad has almost achieved the wiping out of the last of the 'rebels', why would he use chemical weapons now?  He has the resources and the boots on the ground to take out the remaining rebels which is his goal, 3 days, 3 weeks, 3 months it doesn't matter, he would achieve it. Assad and Russia definitely do not want the US in Syria, however there are many other interested groups that do. So who 'dunnit' ?. I have no doubt that chemicals were used, the question is by whom. It is nothing to do with Iran and Assad wants the US to go home so the questions should be who has most to gain by a chemical weapons attack at such a critical point when the end game is in sight? Follow the money and the self interest.

 

The interesting bit of psychology playing out here is that Trump lies every time he opens his mouth and the result is that many many people including heads of state would no longer trust him as far as they can throw him.

 

One thing is for sure, whoever did it has succeeded because this situation is only going to get a lot messier in the following days. Every permutation is bad.

 

The moralizing preamble would be a tad more credible if you'd skip the usual focus on the US and the UK. It would also be helpful to recall which country routinely blocks UN resolutions and investigations related to this matter in the context of Syria. Guess that some can't be satisfied. If there was not outrage expressed, then  there's be scathing commentary offered about to this effect. Also, quite a bit of these things can be manufactured locally, especially if a country is hellbent on having them. A whole lot of dual use ingredients there.

 

As for the usual expectations and assertions that everything to do with international relations follow an a logical path, and that the logic applied by all parties be similar - no real explanation as why this should be so. Assad's logic and considerations may not conform to yours or mine. Making sense is relevant inasmuch as it refers to your point of view, and that's about it. Let's see - sending a message to the opposition (which isn't quite wiped out as claimed), poking a finger at Trump's eye (yes, provocation is sometimes a chosen path), putting Trump (and the US) in yet another situation where he may need to flip flop, a sense of impunity following recent success and US announced withdrawal.

 

As for Russia not wanting the US in Syria - wouldn't be so sure of that. The US presence serves to keep Turkey at bay some, at the price of increasing the rift between the two, to Russia's advantage. With the US out, Russia would need to deal with the conflicting interests of Syria and Turkey.

 

Could be the rebels (though reports on delivery method may contradict this). They certainly have motive. Capability is another matter.

[Morch]

48 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Yet

 

Yawn.

[serialK]

The russians/syrians probably hit a chemical storage facility.

 

It gives that vile pig trump an excuse to deflect some his own problems with his faux outrage.....

[Morch]

2 minutes ago, serialK said:

The russians/syrians probably hit a chemical storage facility.

 

It gives that vile pig trump an excuse to deflect some his own problems with his faux outrage.....

 

You're probably making this up.

[Morch]

21 minutes ago, oilinki said:

Russia says it was Israel who carried out the attacks on Syrian airbase 

 

 

 

Syria says suspected U.S. missiles fired at air base; Washington denies strike

https://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/1032900-syria says-suspected-us-missiles-fired-at-air-base-washington-denies-strike/

[Khun Han]

Russia was concluding final negotiations for the surrender and safe passage of rebels and their families out of Douma when this incident took place, an evacuation which is now ongoing. This incident aint Syria or Russia, it's somebody who doesn't want a status quo peace in Syria.

[stevenl]

4 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

Russia was concluding final negotiations for the surrender and safe passage of rebels and their families out of Douma when this incident took place, an evacuation which is now ongoing. This incident aint Syria or Russia, it's somebody who doesn't want a status quo peace in Syria.

I think they do want peace, but Israel doesn't want Iran next door on another side.

[Andaman Al]

4 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

Russia was concluding final negotiations for the surrender and safe passage of rebels and their families out of Douma when this incident took place, an evacuation which is now ongoing. This incident aint Syria or Russia, it's somebody who doesn't want a status quo peace in Syria.

Unfortunately what you say is highly likely and even more unfortunately it will not be spun that way by other Governments with other interests. There are definitely parties that do not want peace to return to Syria - not yet anyway.

[Enoon]

8 hours ago, Topdoc said:

This alleged new 'chemical attack' in Syria reminds us of a series of similar events last year. We are told to believe that every time the U.S. pulls back from the war, the Syrian government responds with a new 'chemical attack' that forces the US to stay.

 

And all this hot on the heels of the hyped up 'chemical attack' on the Skripals.

 

 

 

Nobody needs to make up stories about Syrian atrocities and brutality.

 

The al-Assad dynasty has a long history of terrorising its own people.

 

It sees itself as the heir to the "absolutist" tradition of the Assyrian kings of ancient times (whose unmatched reputation for violent, savage and extreme repression is well-documented and uncontested).

 

It does not hesitate to employ the most destructive and barbaric methods.

 

That it how it how father and son have maintained its "totality" since 1971.

 

The "Kims" of the Middle East.

 

Al-Assad family

 

 

Edited April 9, 2018 by Enoon

[bristolboy]

The Guardian has an article in which the Russian claim the missiles were fired from Israeli jets inside Lebanon. 8 missiles fired, 5 intercepted. Israel had no comment.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/apr/09/syrian-airbase-near-homs-hit-by-air-strikes-state-tv-says

 

[Morch]

Just now, bristolboy said:

The Guardian has an article in which the Russian claim the missiles were fired from Israeli jets inside Lebanon. 8 missiles fired, 5 intercepted. Israel had no comment.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/apr/09/syrian-airbase-near-homs-hit-by-air-strikes-state-tv-says

 

 

This isn't the same attack as the OP is about.

[Rimmer]

Some off topic posts have been removed

[Morch]

1 hour ago, Khun Han said:

Russia was concluding final negotiations for the surrender and safe passage of rebels and their families out of Douma when this incident took place, an evacuation which is now ongoing. This incident aint Syria or Russia, it's somebody who doesn't want a status quo peace in Syria.

 

There was an agreement, achieved in March, which mostly dealt with civilians from neighboring towns. That evacuation is mostly done with. Douma was not part of this agreement, though, and remained under rebel forces control. That "final" bit you're on, was signed  the day following the chemical attack. So, in effect, an opposite effect to that which some on here claim. 

 

[BuaBS]

6 hours ago, geriatrickid said:

9 hours ago, BuaBS said:

We were warned in alt media 2 -3 weeks ago , that the US was planning a chemical attack . This is no news .I hope Russia will strike back HARD to any "big price" the US are going to send to Syria.

Who is this "alt news source" Is this like the bogus news stories planted in Facebook by the Russian agents? I think most people have caught on to the  fake stories planted by Russian agents.

I can give you the links to the articles (I have them bookmarked), but they would be deleted just like my original post.

Another "conspiracy theory" that became fact on Saturday .

[cantata]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

This isn't the same attack as the OP is about.

I think he was referring to the alleged retaliatory attack.

[Morch]

6 minutes ago, cantata said:

I think he was referring to the alleged retaliatory attack.

 

Doubt it's "retaliatory". The target doesn't have much to do with the chemical attack. Anyway, there's a parallel topic dealing with that.

[IAMHERE]

Trump says "big price to pay" for Syria chemical attack

Sure there is, last time didn't Trump spend millions of dollars worth of cruise missiles to blow up an empty Syrian field?  There are some sheep, goats, and stray dogs that better watch out in Syria.

[SOTIRIOS]

....another travesty....

 

...only the invading forces have anything to gain by such atrocities...

 

...and the sensational media campaigns that follow....

 

...same with the slew of 'anonymous hacks'.....etc...

 

 

[Morch]

1 hour ago, IAMHERE said:

Trump says "big price to pay" for Syria chemical attack

Sure there is, last time didn't Trump spend millions of dollars worth of cruise missiles to blow up an empty Syrian field?  There are some sheep, goats, and stray dogs that better watch out in Syria.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Shayrat_missile_strike#Casualties

 

Not spectacular, but hardly as dismal as presented above.

[Andaman Al]

It really is becoming a distinct possibility that we could go to war and millions could die because of one of Trumps twitter melt downs. And Trump supporters said Hillary would take us in to a Nuclear war, almost funny now if the situation was not so tragic.

 

Quote

Trump Must Back Up Syria Tough Talk or 'Look Weak,' Sen. Lindsey Graham Says

Not only could we go to war over an errant comment in a tweet but it does not help matters when we have a senior Senator egging Trump on to strike.

 

Quote

President Donald Trump must follow through on his threat of a “big price to pay” after a suspected chemical attack in Syria, or risk losing credibility in dealings with North Korea and other U.S. adversaries, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham said.

 

“If it becomes a tweet without meaning, then he has hurt himself in North Korea,” Graham, a member of the Armed Services Committee who has often criticized the president, said on ABC News’s “This Week” on Sunday. “If he doesn’t follow through and live up to that tweet, he’s going to look weak in the eyes of Russia and Iran. So this is a defining moment, Mr. President.”

Apparently Lyndsey turned and stared into the camera whilst saying the above so that it was a personal message to Trump.

 

Nice to see cool heads prevail when millions of lives are at risk.

 

http://fortune.com/2018/04/08/lindsey-graham-trump-syria-talk/

[Morch]

7 minutes ago, Andaman Al said:

It really is becoming a distinct possibility that we could go to war and millions could die because of one of Trumps twitter melt downs. And Trump supporters said Hillary would take us in to a Nuclear war, almost funny now if the situation was not so tragic.

 

Not only could we go to war over an errant comment in a tweet but it does not help matters when we have a senior Senator egging Trump on to strike.

 

Apparently Lyndsey turned and stared into the camera whilst saying the above so that it was a personal message to Trump.

 

Nice to see cool heads prevail when millions of lives are at risk.

 

http://fortune.com/2018/04/08/lindsey-graham-trump-syria-talk/

 

But then one reflects on Trump's oh so many daft tweets, flip flops and his ability to deny/ignore reality. I think he can manage the feat of reconstructing things (in his own mind, and to his base's satisfaction) in a way which will preserve his fragile ego.  

 

What, in real terms, can the US do about it? Another barrage of Tomahawks? More sanctions? Not pull out of Syria?

 

People saying we're going to war ought to make such statements clearer - war with whom? How? Over what? And will the other side just go along with this? One thing to assume Trump is daft, doubt anyone thinks the same of Putin.

[JemJem]

I am not buying this 'Syrian-regime chemical attack' thing. Well, maybe I should say that I am giving it a very little chance.

 

It is more likely that American or Israeli or Turkish secret services (and their proxies) are behind this. The aim, of course, is to get the US (or the NATO forces overall) to attack the Syrian regime in a significant manner; possibly more so than the attack last year.

 

I am not a fan of Assad, but his regime shouldn't be allowed to be destroyed or even weakened. In Syria, there is, even now, a large number of Sunni extremists ready to commit massacres against the non-Sunni people there. Not just the non-Sunnis of course; in such a scenario, Kurds and even Assad-supporting Sunnis would also be at a major risk.

Edited April 9, 2018 by JemJem

[rosst]

22 hours ago, Odysseus123 said:

Yep.

 

Splendid timing.A world run by spin doctors and propaganda agencies thinly disguised as "think tanks" and "foundations" is an absolute scream, isn't it?

I like most people on this forum are towards the end of our lives and we look at our legacy to history and we wonder what we as individuals have done wrong to create this toxic monster that is being controlled by the wealthy elite and compliant Governments. 

I find it difficult to sift any truth or any right in this world. 

Even our major religions are seriously compromised. 

Our biggest loss is honesty in the media, I am unable to believe any news source any more.