Trump unleashes military strikes against Assad airbase in Syria

[craigt3365]

34 minutes ago, rockingrobin said:

If you blow up sarin you destroy it, begs the question why did the US avoid the chemical weapon storage facilities at the airbase

Maybe they did?  With no assets on the ground to properly verify the damage, it would be hard to tell what happened.  Other than images from satellites.  Even then, the info may not be released, it may have come from another location, etc, etc, etc.  Terrible war.

[ilostmypassword]

  18 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

At least Assad's ambitions are confined to Syria.

6 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Tell the Europeans this, they are the ones dealing with the massive refugee crisis.  Hardly contained to Syria.

 

It was Assad's ambitons I was referring to. Not the results of this war. And tell me, how will the installation of an ISIS or Al Qaeda government put a stop to refugees? Actually, it might. Since they tend to slaughter people trying to leave areas they control.

[craigt3365]

Just now, ilostmypassword said:

  18 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

At least Assad's ambitions are confined to Syria.

 

It was Assad's ambitons I was referring to. Not the results of this war. And tell me, how will the installation of an ISIS or Al Qaeda government put a stop to refugees? Actually, it might. Since they tend to slaughter people trying to leave areas they control.

It's his "ambitions" that are causing the refugee crisis.  And the war! LOL

 

Who's pushing for ISIS to be installed?  Other than ISIS? LOL

 

I do believe every civilized nation is against ISIS.

[ilostmypassword]

Just now, craigt3365 said:

It's his "ambitions" that are causing the refugee crisis.  And the war! LOL

 

Who's pushing for ISIS to be installed?  Other than ISIS? LOL

 

I do believe every civilized nation is against ISIS.

You don't have to push. Just topple Assad and it's a done deal. Although maybe it will be Al qaeda that comes out on top instead of Isis. Hooray!

[thaibeachlovers]

3 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

It's his "ambitions" that are causing the refugee crisis.  And the war! LOL

 

Who's pushing for ISIS to be installed?  Other than ISIS? LOL

 

I do believe every civilized nation is against ISIS.

Irrelevant. The US got rid of Russia in Afghanistan by providing surface to air missiles for the Afghan resistance, and the Taliban took over. I'm sure every civilized nation was against the Taliban, but none did anything about them till 9/11.

[craigt3365]

4 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

You don't have to push. Just topple Assad and it's a done deal. Although maybe it will be Al qaeda that comes out on top instead of Isis. Hooray!

So you've got a crystal ball that tells you once Assad is gone ISIS will be in charge?  Great!  Can you also predict the stock market? LOL

[thaibeachlovers]

1 minute ago, craigt3365 said:

So you've got a crystal ball that tells you once Assad is gone ISIS will be in charge?  Great!  Can you also predict the stock market? LOL

It may not be IS, but no one needs a crystal ball to see that it will become a Libyan style chaos if Assad goes.

There are no good alternatives to Assad.

[craigt3365]

Just now, thaibeachlovers said:

Irrelevant. The US got rid of Russia in Afghanistan by providing surface to air missiles for the Afghan resistance, and the Taliban took over. I'm sure every civilized nation was against the Taliban, but none did anything about them till 9/11.

Perhaps because the Taliban weren't responsible for 9/11? LOL 

 

Good reading for you:

http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/difference-between-taliban-and-al-qaeda/

[ilostmypassword]

4 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

So you've got a crystal ball that tells you once Assad is gone ISIS will be in charge?  Great!  Can you also predict the stock market? LOL

Given that there is no serious military opposition to Assad apart from ISIS and Al-Qaeda linked groups, yes, I can predict it. If the Pittsburgh Steelers go up against a high school football team, would it be too much to predict a victory? Comparing predicting Wall Street's fluctuations which depend on all sorts of irrational factors vs the hard facts on the ground in Syria is desperate and ridiculous.

Edited April 12, 2017 by ilostmypassword

[craigt3365]

6 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

It may not be IS, but no one needs a crystal ball to see that it will become a Libyan style chaos if Assad goes.

There are no good alternatives to Assad.

There may well be very good alternatives to Assad.  Who knows until he's gone.  For now, he's a mass murderer.  He needs to be put in jail.

[craigt3365]

7 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Given that there is no serious military opposition to Assad apart from ISIS and Al-Qaeda linked groups, yes, I can predict it. If the Pittsburgh Steelers go up against a high school football team, would it be too much to predict a victory? Comparing predicting Wall Street's fluctuations which depend on all sorts of irrational factors vs the hard facts on the ground in Syria is desperate and ridiculous.

If Russia and Iran left, Assad would collapse like a deck of cards.  Perhaps the opposition can put something together.  Who knows.  But worth a try.  Better than having a known mass murder in control.  I sure hope you can see this...

[ilostmypassword]

Just now, craigt3365 said:

If Russia and Iran left, Assad would collapse like a deck of cards.  Perhaps the opposition can put something together.  Who knows.  But worth a try.  Better than having a known mass murder in control.  I sure hope you can see this...

"Perhaps the opposition can put something together" You're right. The odds are overwhelming that the opposition will put something together. The opposition being Sunni fanatics. You're the one who pointed out that what "moderate" opposition there was had defected to the extremists.  Hoist by your own petard, much?

[ddavidovsky]

43 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

He is a brutal dictator after all. 

This is where you are going wrong, repeatedly.

To you, Assad is pure evil.

To you, it seems, the rebels are pure goodness.

You will deny taking the latter position. Good: some progress.

 

Try this: Assad is defending a substantial part of the Syrian population (how large? the Anti-Assad western media won't give us the figures and the Syrians themselves probably don't have the figures) against a rag-tag bunch of opportunist war-mongerers with extremist tendencies who started a sectarian civil war in order to bring down both him and the relatively progressive system he has helped bring about, which certainly displays a higher level of social organisation than the rebels would be able to provide.

 

In any case there is no evidence to suggest the rebels have any ability to run the country any better, or even at all. They have no coordination and no leader - they are riddled with bitterness and partly radicalised. If they came to power they would behave with equal (I suspect greater) brutality against the Shias, because this is at root an unsolvable Sunni-Shia conflict. Without Assad to keep the lid on the place, it will certainly lapse into a hornet's nest of sectarian conflict with no foreseeable end - there is enough sociological evidence of this effect in Iraq and Libya.

 

We know Assad has shown brutality - don't be shocked or surprised. He has had to to protect his people, because other people are trying to destroy him. He's not pure goodness either - but he's currently necessary for stability. For the sake of their wives and children, the rebels should put up with him. He won't live forever.

[attrayant]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

has anyone provided a motive for Assad to order a gas attack? I can't think of any, but as I said before, I can think of many for the opposition to do so.

 

This question keeps being asked and it doesn't get us anywhere.  You may as well ask why he fired on peaceful Arab Spring demonstrators in 2011.  Why did he order the previous gas attack in 2013?  There is no shortage of world leaders these days who do things that seem to make no sense at all, don't benefit from them at all and even backfire and harm their own political position.  

 

Just give up the "it doesn't make any sense" argument because, well, it doesn't make any sense in the politics of war.

[craigt3365]

1 minute ago, ddavidovsky said:

This is where you are going wrong, repeatedly.

To you, Assad is pure evil.

To you, it seems, the rebels are pure goodness.

You will deny taking the latter position. Good: some progress.

 

Try this: Assad is defending a substantial part of the Syrian population (how large? the Anti-Assad western media won't give us the figures and the Syrians themselves probably don't have the figures) against a rag-tag bunch of opportunist war-mongerers with extremist tendencies who started a sectarian civil war in order to bring down both him and the relatively progressive system he has helped bring about, which certainly displays a higher level of social organisation than the rebels would be able to provide.

 

In any case there is no evidence to suggest the rebels have any ability to run the country any better, or even at all. They have no coordination and no leader - they are riddled with bitterness and partly radicalised. If they came to power they would behave with equal (I suspect greater) brutality against the Shias, because this is at root an unsolvable Sunni-Shia conflict. Without Assad to keep the lid on the place, it will certainly lapse into a hornet's nest of sectarian conflict with no foreseeable end - there is enough sociological evidence of this effect in Iraq and Libya.

 

We know Assad has shown brutality - don't be shocked or surprised. He has had to to protect his people, because other people are trying to destroy him. He's not pure goodness either - but he's currently necessary for stability. For the sake of their wives and children, the rebels should put up with him. He won't live forever.

And this is where you are going wrong repeatedly.

To you Assad is not evil.

You assume western media is not reporting facts. 

You assume the opposition is rag-tag.

 

The opposition is very well organized:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Coalition_for_Syrian_Revolutionary_and_Opposition_Forces#International_recognition

 

Take a peek at how many countries recognize it as the sole legitimate representative of Syria and it's people.  Many!  They are far from rag-tag war-mongers as you say.  You seem to forget what started this mess.

 

To say Assad is trying to protect his people is one of the most ridiculous comments I've seen in a long time.  How many has he killed so far?  He's the reason Syria isn't stable.  For the sake of women and children in Syria, he needs to go.  He's already killed too many.

 

[ilostmypassword]

52 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

The opposition is very well organized:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Coalition_for_Syrian_Revolutionary_and_Opposition_Forces#International_recognition

 

Take a peek at how many countries recognize it as the sole legitimate representative of Syria and it's people.  Many!  They are far from rag-tag war-mongers as you say.  You seem to forget what started this mess.

 

Yes, it's very well organized in the sense that a theatrically successful farce is also very well recognized. But in fact, it has no power and no country has recognized it since 2012 when it became fully apparent that it was an empty, if very well organized shell. Its designated military wing is the Free Syrian Army which isn't up to much.

Edited April 12, 2017 by ilostmypassword

[ilostmypassword]

46 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

 

To say Assad is trying to protect his people is one of the most ridiculous comments I've seen in a long time.  How many has he killed so far?  He's the reason Syria isn't stable.  For the sake of women and children in Syria, he needs to go.  He's already killed too many.

 

It is a ridiculous comment.  As is "For the sake of the women and children in Syria he needs to go".  Yes Isis and Al Qaeda have massively demonstrated their concern for women in the past and no doubt will continue to do so in the future. As for "He's already killed too many" ..so I guess in the interest of fair play you want to give the opposition a chance to do the same. Given their past form, it's a sure thing that they will.

[craigt3365]

15 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Yes, it's very well organized in the sense that a theatrically successful farce is also very well recognized. But in fact, it has no power and no country has recognized it since 2012 when it became fully apparent that it was an empty, if very well organized shell. Its designated military wing is the Free Syrian Army which isn't up to much.

A theatrically successful farce that's been recognized by several dozen countries?  Seems you are missing a bit.

[craigt3365]

13 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

It is a ridiculous comment.  As is "For the sake of the women and children in Syria he needs to go".  Yes Isis and Al Qaeda have massively demonstrated their concern for women in the past and no doubt will continue to do so in the future. As for "He's already killed too many" ..so I guess in the interest of fair play you want to give the opposition a chance to do the same. Given their past form, it's a sure thing that they will.

Never said ISIS was good to women and children.  Just said that Assad is not either.  Hopefully, you'll agree with that.  Facts prove it.

 

How do you know what the opposition will do?  You've no idea.  Nor does anybody else.

[ilostmypassword]

1 hour ago, craigt3365 said:

Never said ISIS was good to women and children.  Just said that Assad is not either.  Hopefully, you'll agree with that.  Facts prove it.

 

How do you know what the opposition will do?  You've no idea.  Nor does anybody else.

How do I know what the opposition will do? In this case the opposition is ISIS and Al-Nusra, an all Qaeda offshoot.  You think it's reasonable to assume  or hope that they will be tolerant and not bloodthirty? There's a huge amount of evidence against you.

[craigt3365]

18 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

How do I know what the opposition will do? In this case the opposition is ISIS and Al-Nusra, an all Qaeda offshoot.  You think it's reasonable to assume  or hope that they will be tolerant and not bloodthirty? There's a huge amount of evidence against you.

Did you read that link from Wiki on who the National Coalition is?  They are NOT ISIS. Jeez.  Research stuff before you post, you're looking silly.  From that link:

Quote

The main aims of the National Coalition are replacing the Bashar al-Assad government and "its symbols and pillars of support", "dismantling the security services", unifying and supporting the Free Syrian Army, refusing dialogue and negotiation with the al-Assad government, and "holding accountable those responsible for killing Syrians, destroying [Syria], and displacing [Syrians]".^[13]

 

How can anybody, other than staunch Assad supporters, argue with this? 

[stevenl]

4 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

I don't think the intelligence services have released all the info yet.  Some stuff coming out today, but it's just leaks.  Takes time to compile it all, make sure it's accurate, etc.  Unlike Russia media who dismiss it immediately with no investigations.

 

IS is brutal and has used gas before.  Luckily, it's not easy to use.  Assad has used chlorine gas many times in the recent past.  Many times.  It's not classified as a banned substance like sarin.

 

Take a look at the list of chemical attacks here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_chemical_weapons_in_the_Syrian_Civil_War

 

People want proof, but it's impossible as Syria won't allow outsiders in to investigate.  For good reasons.  And killed one journalist who was doing research.  Kinda hard to prove things in an environment like this:

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/war-reporter-marie-colvin-was-tracked-targeted-and-killed-by-assads-forces-family-says/2016/07/09/62968844-453a-11e6-88d0-6adee48be8bc_story.html?utm_term=.de394692339b

 

So now you confirm that Syria killed one journalist, based on claims from the family.

 

Sorry, I thought you better than that.

[craigt3365]

33 minutes ago, stevenl said:

So now you confirm that Syria killed one journalist, based on claims from the family.

 

Sorry, I thought you better than that.

I'm surprised you've never read about this.  It's been widely reported, and widely verified.  Plenty of sources to read about this. 

 

So you are saying the Syrian forces didn't kill her?

[stevenl]

1 minute ago, craigt3365 said:

I'm surprised you've never read about this.  It's been widely reported, and widely verified.  Plenty of sources to read about this. 

 

So you are saying the Syrian forces didn't kill her?

Don't distord my answer please.

 

The family claims she was targeted, you support that claim. I say a family's claim is hardly evidence.

[craigt3365]

50 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Don't distord my answer please.

 

The family claims she was targeted, you support that claim. I say a family's claim is hardly evidence.

You didn't answer my question.  Who killed her?

 

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/02/26/world/syria-marie-colvin/

Quote

 

The day before she was killed, Colvin had given media interviews to networks like ITN and CNN about the ongoing clashes in Homs, and about a child who was killed in the city.

.......

The siege of Baba Amr, where 28,000 civilians are "hiding, being shelled, defenseless," Colvin reported, has become a flashpoint of the country's bloody year of violence.

......

"There are no military targets here," Colvin reported, refuting Syria claims that its forces are only hunting terrorists.

 

"It's a complete and utter lie," she said of the government's response. "The Syrian Army is basically shelling a city of cold, starving civilians."

 

A day later, Colvin and Ochlik were killed.

 

 

Hmmm...let me guess.  But yes, since the Syria hasn't admitted they did the shelling, it must have been somebody else.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_journalists_killed_during_the_Syrian_Civil_War
 

[ilostmypassword]

2 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

Did you read that link from Wiki on who the National Coalition is?  They are NOT ISIS. Jeez.  Research stuff before you post, you're looking silly.  From that link:

 

How can anybody, other than staunch Assad supporters, argue with this? 

Because the national coalition has no power. It has virtually no  armed forces in the fight. As for recognition, first off you'll notice that alot of the nations recognizing it are Sunni muslim nations.They're not real fond of Alawites. Especially Alawites ruling over their Sunni brethren..  In addition, you'll note that after 2013 no new nations have recognized them at  because it became clear that they are fundamentally toothless. Do a news search in google for them. They are irrelevant.

[onthesoi]

5 hours ago, attrayant said:

 

This question keeps being asked and it doesn't get us anywhere.  You may as well ask why he fired on peaceful Arab Spring demonstrators in 2011. 

 

You can't tell the difference between when Syrians first started taking to the streets and now when civil war is practically over and everything is going Assad's way? Really?

 

Let me spell it out for you.

In 2011, Assad's motive for firing on protesters was to quickly smother the early stages of an uprising.

In 2017, Assad has no motive to use chemical weapons.

Edited April 12, 2017 by onthesoi

[ilostmypassword]

4 minutes ago, onthesoi said:

 

You can't tell the difference between when Syrians first started taking to the streets and now when civil war is practically over and everything is going Assad's way? Really?

t

Let me spell it out for you.

In 2011, Assad's motive for firing on protesters was to quickly smother the early stages of an uprising.

In 2017, Assad has no motive to use chemical weapons.

Well, it may be that once Tillerson and Haley indicated that ISIS was the top priority in Syria, he felt that he could use chemical weapons with impunity. It's really important to resist overestimating the perspicacity of the ruling class.

[thaibeachlovers]

5 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

Never said ISIS was good to women and children.  Just said that Assad is not either.  Hopefully, you'll agree with that.  Facts prove it.

 

How do you know what the opposition will do?  You've no idea.  Nor does anybody else.

Yes we do. The Kurds are the only ones to be trusted, and Turkey will do everything in its power to prevent them winning.

[thaihome]

Interesting read by the Brookings Institution on the Free Syrian Army  and it's ups and downs and current (Nov 2016) in civil war. 

TH

https://www.google.co.th/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.brookings.edu/research/the-free-syrian-army-a-decentralized-insurgent-brand/&ved=0ahUKEwjCg8eP2Z7TAhVLr48KHeBNB8IQFggYMAA&usg=AFQjCNG3FXxUF5VOeEAy6XJ6kfz2dlT8wg&sig2=ULHwHtJZ8Ybq88BpBfrb-w