Jump to content

Trump unleashes military strikes against Assad airbase in Syria


webfact

Recommended Posts

What bothers me most about this is it does not appear to be part of any long term (or even short term) strategy or policy. It seems  to me that Trump ordered the strikes simply because when faced with similar circumstances several years ago, Obama did not order retaliatory actions.  

 

As has been commented on by many, when Obama was contemplating actions, Trump took the public position against such actions and saying prior congressional approval was needed. A completely opposite position that he had yesterday when ordering the strikes.

 

In fact this whole action appears to be an emotional reaction to video clips of babies being washed in attempt to remove the gas and the lack of action by Obama in the past. They are horrible videos, but I  seriously worry that foriegn policy is being made on an such an emotional level.

 

That is why Obama, at the end of the day, did not order strikes once he rose above the emotions and realized they would not accomplish anything good for US foriegn policy. Nothing as changed that objective analysis since then.

TH 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 575
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

1 hour ago, LannaGuy said:

some Syria facts:

so what 'mess' did Assad start?


• Syrian women have the same rights as men to study, health and education.
• Syria women are not forced to wear the burqa. Sharia (Islamic law) is unconstitutional.
• Syria – only Arab country with a secular constitution – does not tolerate Islamic extremist movements.
• Roughly 10% of the Syrian population belongs to one of the many Christian denominations, all fully integrated in     Syrian political and social life.
• Syria has banned genetically modified (GMO) seeds, stating his decision was made in order “to preserve human health,”
• Syria has an opening to Western society and culture like no other Arab country.
• Its media and universities openly debate the global power elite’s influence in things. This means that they fully grasp the fact that real power in the West lies not in the White House but rather with the complex and powerful grid of elite think-tanks and central banks.
• Throughout history there have been five popes of Syrian origin. Religious tolerance is unique in the area.
• Prior to the current civil war, Syria was one of the only peaceful countries in the area, having avoided major wars or internal conflicts.
• Syria was the only country that admitted Iraqi refugees without any social, political or religious discrimination.
• Syria clearly and unequivocally opposes Zionism and the Israel government.
• Following a massive oil find in Syria’s Golan Heights, occupied by Israel since 1967, Netanyahu recently asked Obama to recognize its annexation of the territory. To consolidate its hold, plans are afoot to quadruple Israeli settler numbers to 100,000.
• Syria is one of the only countries in the Middle East without debts to the International Monetary Fund (Pre-invasion Libya & Iran the only others.)
• Syria is the only Mediterranean country which remains the owner of its oil company, with an oil reserve of 2,500 million barrels, the operation of which has avoided privatization and is reserved exclusively for state-owned enterprises.

 

Copy pasting an list of propaganda arguments doing the runs on social media is not much of an argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump is just another puppet president.  The big bankers and weapons manufacturers (Boeing,  etc.) want more and more and bigger and bigger wars.  Trump is not going to rock that boat.  

 

He is now exhibiting that he is just as trigger-happy as the witch, Killary, would have been.  In spite of his promises to his constituents that he would rather make peace with the Russians, he is now poking the bear much harder than Obomber ever dared to.  

 

The globalists and neocons want their world war III, and Trump is obviously not going to interfere with their plans.  :ph34r:

 

http://www.activistpost.com/2017/04/u-s-launches-tomahawk-missiles-against-syrian-government.html

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Copy pasting an list of propaganda arguments doing the runs on social media is not much of an argument.

Better argument than yours. Facts are Facts copy and pasting makes no difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, boomerangutang said:

                    Another angle:   Syrian rebels, and others who hate Assad (there are many factions, not least the Israelis and Saudis) ......could clandestinely poison Syrians.   They all know how seriously poisoning is viewed, particularly by westerners.  So, a mass poisoning in a non-Assad-held territory would trigger serious US/western military response - against Assad's troops.

Very good point... Trump's action is naive and quite irresponsible.  What's next? North Korea?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Nip said:

Better argument than yours. Facts are Facts copy and pasting makes no difference.

 

They are not facts, though, but propaganda. And copy pasting information without sourcing is both against forum rules and serves to hide the affiliation of the sources used.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, friendofthai said:

I don't see any difference between Bush aggression in Iraq and Trump`s aggression in Syria.
In Iraq we first saw dogmatic conclusions in the US media resources that Iraq have Weapons of Mass destruction. These conclusions were made in press prior to any investigation. After that we saw Colin Powell demonstrating Washing powder in UN to demonstrate the "Weapons of Mass destruction" "found" in Iraq. After that US started the war. And finally US perform the investigation and find out that Iraq does not have Weapons of Mass destruction.
Today we see the same in Syria. Dogmatic conclusions in the US media resources prior to any investigation. US spokeswoman in UN demonstrating doubtful pictures. After that US start the war. And we all know what will be in the future - the investigation will be made. And the investigation will show us the same thing as in Iraq - that Syrian government does not have Weapons of Mass destruction.

 

Conflating between chemical and nuclear weapons is cute. Saddam's Iraq did have chemical weapons and made use of them. So did Assad's Syria.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Already flip-flopping on his word, I am not surprised. He is a mere elitist puppet as is Hillary, the world stage is a fun one to observe is it not. Keep fighting Israel's war Donald you cuck 

Edited by JustNo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, sujoop said:


This was fine back then but NOW with the worst approval rating in similar term presidential history, PLUS the press etc all over Russia/Whitehouse complicit ties (too much heat not good for Trump or Putin), this sudden blow-up & strike provides instant relief to BOTH problems. Trump gets a ratings spike, heats off Putin/Trump ties and Spicer can suddenly say: 'WHAT Russia connection? Did you not see the news'???
 

Two questions:

1) Why didn't Russia use it's defences to interfere with the U.S. pre-warned  missile strike on 'their' shared Syrian base?
2) Since the Syrian/Russian controlled Shayrat Airbase is also reportedly the origin of the chemical attack, how did Russia NOT know?

The real agenda and goals here are both obvious and odious. Putin/Russian ties to Trump need to be thoroughly and independently investigated before it's too late (may already be).

 

 

 

I think the Russian control over Assad's actions is not full-proof. Not on the micro-management level. And this wouldn't be the first such attack to be carried out by Assad's forces during the Russian military intervention in Syria. In all probability, there's also some measure of plausible deniability exercised.

 

As for Russia not interfering with the US attack, some considerations and thoughts: Technically, easier said than done. Intercepting 50 missiles is no small feat. If the Russian had tried, and failed, there's be both loss of face, they'd be further portrayed as supporting Assad's use of chemical weapons and most importantly, would risk increased tensions (or even direct confrontation) with the US. All said and done, these do no serve the Russian interests in Syria.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Given they have probably been expecting such an attack since Obama's "line in the sand", it might have done little real damage, depending on how deep they are buried. If done properly, only the deep penetration bombs would do much damage.

It was an AIRBASE.  Aircraft tend to takeoff and land at ground level...

 

Glad we've moved on from ridiculous, meaningless, pathetic "lines in the sand" (and inept statesmen who draw them).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As usual, our politicians are contradicting themselves all over the place....

 

[Many Republicans may find themselves in an awkward spot Friday as they justify their support for Trump's missile strike after suggesting similar actions by the Obama administration would be unconstitutional.

Stalwart Trump ally Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), along with more than 100 colleagues, signed a 2013 letter that sharply warned Obama against a unilateral attack. "Engaging our military in Syria when no direct threat to the United States exists and without prior congressional authorization would violate the separation of powers that is clearly delineated in the Constitution," they wrote.

Other GOP signatories included Rep. Lynn Jenkins of Kansas, who applauded Trump as "decisive," and Rep. Joe Wilson of South Carolina, who commended Trump for his "swift action." A slew of other Republicans who praised Trump — including Don Young of Alaska, Martha Roby of Alabama, Roger Williams of Texas — opposed or leaned heavily against Obama's request to authorize the use of force in Syria while heaping praise on Trump Thursday night.]

 

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/04/trump-syria-congress-reaction-republicans-democrats-236975?lo=ap_a1

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Trump decides to hit Syria with 59 missiles while meeting with Xi Jinping.


Sort of like Margaret Thatcher attacking the Falklands or Reagan attacking Grenada.

 

Hoping to improve his approval ratings at home, trying to appear to be at odds with Putin while convincing the Chinese to do something about North Korea or else they should expect something bizarre from the loose cannon in the Oval Office.

Actually sort of politically smart although possibly leading to unanticipated results. As loony as The Donald is, Kim Jong Un and Bashar al-Assad may actually be loonier and neither the Russians nor the Chinese will respond well to being bullied.

Interesting times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Morch said:

<snip>

 

As for Russia not interfering with the US attack, some considerations and thoughts: Technically, easier said than done. Intercepting 50 missiles is no small feat. If the Russian had tried, and failed, there's be both loss of face, they'd be further portrayed as supporting Assad's use of chemical weapons and most importantly, would risk increased tensions (or even direct confrontation) with the US. All said and done, these do no serve the Russian interests in Syria.

 

It would also be politically a very bad sign. Interfering would be a direct confrontation between Russia and the USA, and I think neither wants that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, boomerangutang said:

I would not want to be a Syrian soldier charged to stand guarding a Syrian military air field.

For that matter, I pity any Syrian soldier anywhere.  What a crappy job - to be required to follow orders given by a madman who would kill his own people.

      Syrian  soldiers ,  should   destroy Assad ,  the  mad mass Murderer  .

        

Edited by elliss
Link to comment
Share on other sites

the timing of the chemical attack and of Trump's cruise missile attack is certainly troubling.

 

more troubling was his "you will see" comment, like he already had a plan for a missile attack ready in his drawer.

 

and then all this makes him appear as a statesman, standing up to Putin and Russia, while being embattled at home with his trumpcare and accusations of being in bed with Russia...

 

very handy !

 

 

and then other major leaders such as Merkel and Hollande said Assad was responsible for what's coming to him...

 

experts are still arguing about which gas was used and the UN wants to launch an investigation, but the world leaders already know who perpetrated the attack. HOW ?

 

did they get intel from the people who said Iraq has WMD ?

 

 

and somehow I can't shake off the thought that 4 dead at the "completely destroyed" Syrian airbase is a rather low bodycount for complete destruction.

 

I'm completely puzzled.

 

could the gas attack have been ordered by Russia to have exactly the consequences it has now?

Edited by manarak
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

News reports are saying the US followed the planes from the time they took off until they landed.  Saw the strikes.  And then bombed those airbases.  About time.

 

So the US has formally declared war on Syria then?

 

I seriously doubt any side can be believed anymore. But there certainly has and will be false flag operations as well as spooks from many nations stirring up things and not always seemingly to help their own side. Add to that the ISIS phenomenon, the Turks and Kurds, and Israel loitering,  and it is and likely to be for a long time a mess.

 

Why did it all start? How did the US and some Western allies get involved in the first place?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, balo said:

I wonder if Putin regrets he helped Trump to win the election ?

 

 

I wonder if the USA regrets creating ISIS and helping establish so many "governments" around the world?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LannaGuy said:

some Syria facts:

so what 'mess' did Assad start?


• Syrian women have the same rights as men to study, health and education.
• Syria women are not forced to wear the burqa. Sharia (Islamic law) is unconstitutional.
• Syria – only Arab country with a secular constitution – does not tolerate Islamic extremist movements.
• Roughly 10% of the Syrian population belongs to one of the many Christian denominations, all fully integrated in     Syrian political and social life.
• Syria has banned genetically modified (GMO) seeds, stating his decision was made in order “to preserve human health,”
• Syria has an opening to Western society and culture like no other Arab country.
• Its media and universities openly debate the global power elite’s influence in things. This means that they fully grasp the fact that real power in the West lies not in the White House but rather with the complex and powerful grid of elite think-tanks and central banks.
• Throughout history there have been five popes of Syrian origin. Religious tolerance is unique in the area.
• Prior to the current civil war, Syria was one of the only peaceful countries in the area, having avoided major wars or internal conflicts.
• Syria was the only country that admitted Iraqi refugees without any social, political or religious discrimination.
• Syria clearly and unequivocally opposes Zionism and the Israel government.
• Following a massive oil find in Syria’s Golan Heights, occupied by Israel since 1967, Netanyahu recently asked Obama to recognize its annexation of the territory. To consolidate its hold, plans are afoot to quadruple Israeli settler numbers to 100,000.
• Syria is one of the only countries in the Middle East without debts to the International Monetary Fund (Pre-invasion Libya & Iran the only others.)
• Syria is the only Mediterranean country which remains the owner of its oil company, with an oil reserve of 2,500 million barrels, the operation of which has avoided privatization and is reserved exclusively for state-owned enterprises.

Agreed that Syria has a great history.  Sadly, Assad changed directions after protests during the Arab Spring.  Impossible to support him now.  He's just a mass murder who's time will come.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

No dispute that that is horrible, but one must know who to take the fight too, and that is by no means clear so far, I believe. Entirely possible it was done by IS, or as I think the Russians said, caused when a rebel gas depot was hit by non gas weapons.

Obama back tracked on his threat to "do something" before, but he made the right decision, IMO.

I dare say gold rallied quite well today 555

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LannaGuy said:

no sense in your analysis as he's been pushing ISIS to brink of extinction and was about to start fresh peace talks - think about it?

You are aware of Assad's previous support for ISIS?  And his purchase of oil from them?

 

http://www.businessinsider.com/isis-selling-oil-to-biggest-enemy-2015-11

Quote

ISIS is selling oil to the Syrian regime

 

 

https://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n07/peter-neumann/suspects-into-collaborators

Quote

In the years that preceded the uprising, Assad and his intelligence services took the view that jihad could be nurtured and manipulated to serve the Syrian government’s aims. It was then that foreign jihadists first entered the country and helped to build the structures and supply lines that are now being used to fight the government. To that extent Assad is fighting an enemy he helped to create.

 

Assad's army is in tatters.  It's Iran doing the heavy lifting on the front lines, with Russia doing the bombing.  How about everybody just leave Syria?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

So the US has formally declared war on Syria then?

 

I seriously doubt any side can be believed anymore. But there certainly has and will be false flag operations as well as spooks from many nations stirring up things and not always seemingly to help their own side. Add to that the ISIS phenomenon, the Turks and Kurds, and Israel loitering,  and it is and likely to be for a long time a mess.

 

Why did it all start? How did the US and some Western allies get involved in the first place?

It started because Europe wants to buy gas from Qatar. For that to happen a pipeline needs to run through Syria and Turkey.  Russia doesn't want to lose the clientele, so tells Assad to not allow the pipeline. Europe, Turkey, UAE and US agree to get rid of Assad, and a civil war is the result. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

..and now they are saying that the Syrian aircraft attacked an arms depot containing chemical weapons and its destruction released the material. SO they didn't drop chemical weapons. The ones to blame are those who supplied the weapons. Talk about a mess!!

 

Breaking News Update: President Donald J. Trump says the airstrikes conducted in Syria were in the `vital national security interest' of the United States, and ...

 

What a load of bullshit. Don't they even read their own crap? You don't 'seek to end bloodshed and slaughter' by firing 40 missiles at someone!!!! ...and as for "the airstrikes conducted in Syria were in the `vital national security interest' of the United States" what a load of.... as if the US is right next door to Syria. The USA is the biggest threat to world peace since WW2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, mrmicbkktxl said:

In 2013 also everybody thought Assad was using chemical weapons,but he didn't.Instead Al Nusra front and Turkish secret service did.Obama was smart enough not to bomb.Assad at that time.I guess this time it will be probably the same,but difference is,Trump is an idiot who is trying the get some plus points at home after all his failure in the past weeks.I very hope the Russians keep calm,if not that could be the beginning of the last worldwar

It's well known and documented Assad has used chemical weapons before.  Al Nusra and Turkish secret service don't operate war aircraft in Syria. LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole scenario is strange- Assad was basically out of the woods as Trump and Company indicated they were not interested in regime change and Assad had to know this. I find it hard to believe that he then ordered a chemical attack. He had to know Trump would respond. Now all of a sudden the onus is on potential war rather than looking into Trump's connection to Russia.

I do not trust Trump and his minions . Syria needs to negotiate an end to this carnage and Russia and America need to establish safe zones. As an American, i would prefer the US stay out of Syria except for air support and some well placed Special Forces.

Russia can have the place. Let them drai their foreign money reseerves and place their soldiers in harms way. America has done enough- too many waurs and interventions. The only problem is that with Trump in power- even his domestic agenda is like a war on some people in America.

The best regime change would be if Trump was ousted as President.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's well known and documented Assad has used chemical weapons before.  Al Nusra and Turkish secret service don't operate war aircraft in Syria. LOL


For advanced :

Was the deadly chemical composition used in Idlib (1) a liquid substance or (2) a solid explosive admixture ?

If liquid, it should be sprayed by helicopters.

If solid explosive admixture (powder) it should be dropped in a shell with a few hundreds of dispersing small bomblets.

If used by aircraft, the little bomblets couldn't cause the huge crater impacts seen on the many video footages circulating on the internet.

The main shells don't vanish and the little bomblets leave some metal material on the spot.

I'm actually waiting to see any of these corroborative evidence sooner or later. And in the worst case, never.




Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, godblessemall said:

..and now they are saying that the Syrian aircraft attacked an arms depot containing chemical weapons and its destruction released the material. SO they didn't drop chemical weapons. The ones to blame are those who supplied the weapons. Talk about a mess!!

 

Breaking News Update: President Donald J. Trump says the airstrikes conducted in Syria were in the `vital national security interest' of the United States, and ...

 

What a load of bullshit. Don't they even read their own crap? You don't 'seek to end bloodshed and slaughter' by firing 40 missiles at someone!!!! ...and as for "the airstrikes conducted in Syria were in the `vital national security interest' of the United States" what a load of.... as if the US is right next door to Syria. The USA is the biggest threat to world peace since WW2.

Please show a credible link that says Syrian aircraft only attacked an arms depot.  A link with solid evidence only, please.  And credible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Thorgal said:

 


For advanced :

Was the deadly chemical composition used in Idlib (1) a liquid substance or (2) a solid explosive admixture ?

If liquid, it should be sprayed by helicopters.

If solid explosive admixture (powder) it should be dropped in a shell with a few hundreds of dispersing small bomblets.

If used by aircraft, the little bomblets couldn't cause the huge crater impacts seen on the many video footages circulating on the internet.

The main shells don't vanish and the little bomblets leave some metal material on the spot.

I'm actually waiting to see any of these corroborative evidence sooner or later. And in the worst case, never.




Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

I've love to see  evidence also.  But I'm not going to follow conspiracy theories either.  So far, it's being said by world leaders that Assad did this.  That's all we have to go with for now.  Conspiracy theories aside.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.









  • Topics

  • Latest posts...

    1. 55

      Top 10 troubles you will find during retirement in Thailand

    2. 169

      All the Blood pressure medications

    3. 109

      Hitler’s AI Translated Speeches Go Viral on TikTok in Troubling Trend

    4. 25

      Ellen DeGeneres, a shameless return to standup that's unfunny

    5. 54

      What did your parents die of?

    6. 109

      Hitler’s AI Translated Speeches Go Viral on TikTok in Troubling Trend

    7. 23

      Can you use a walkie Talkie bought on lazada in thailand

    8. 109

      Hitler’s AI Translated Speeches Go Viral on TikTok in Troubling Trend

    9. 51

      We can't say we weren't warned

    10. 109

      Hitler’s AI Translated Speeches Go Viral on TikTok in Troubling Trend

    11. 2

      Pizza the action: Foreign man wreaks havoc at Phuket pizzeria

    12. 10

      Help on "Retirement Visa"

    13. 30

      UK frozen pension returning to UK and going overseas again at a later date!

    14. 61

      Harris holds 7-point lead over Trump in national survey

×
×
  • Create New...
""