RT logic there. Just because someone opposes Assad and supports a military response to his thuggish misrule that doesn't mean they're ISIS sympathisers. I've seen pro-Russia trolls trot out this repeatedly on Twitter against anyone who posts videos of Assad barrel bomb. FFS it's gotten so bad you have lunatics going on Netflix to "review" the White Helmets documentary as "Jihadist/Soros funded propaganda".
CNBC: US military has launched more than 50 missiles aimed at Syria: NBC News
- Thread starter mackaveli
- Start date
- Status
RT logic there. Just because someone opposes Assad and supports a military response to his thuggish misrule that doesn't mean they're ISIS sympathisers. I've seen pro-Russia trolls trot out this repeatedly on Twitter against anyone who posts videos of Assad barrel bomb. FFS it's gotten so bad you have lunatics going on Netflix to "review" the White Helmets documentary as "Jihadist/Soros funded propaganda".
rokkerkory
Member
Why were russians at the base? wth
Human are notoriously bad at dealing with coincidences.
They need to get all the false flag articles off the front page before they can praise Trump for this decisive action.
Just saw this
BlackGhost
Banned
They'll dodge the question when asked about it
Impeccable
Member
None of this is black ans white or even comparable. Labels in politics continue to be a joke, mass brush strokes and an inability to think outside the political lines people limit themselves to will continue to rot democracies.
Frustrated_me
Member
Why? Russians have been in Syria for over 2 years now. Why wouldn't they be there?
A whole .3 %. Stop the presses.
Neverthelesser
Member
rocketskates
Member
Especially the ones at airbases
Obama asked for congressional approval to intervene in Syria and didn't receive it.
What do you think he should've done?
I don't believe they were (?)
Russia was just informed
unless some new info just came out or sommit
1. This should have required approval. It does not fall under the 2001 AUMF since there's no connection to al Qaeda/ISIS, and there was no direct threat to the US from Assad's chemical weapons.
2. In an alternate universe where he had approval, what we've seen so far would probably qualify as a reasonable retaliation to Assad's actions, if we managed to avoid escalating any further.
3. I do not for a second trust Trump to avoid escalating this. This is one of those situations where I'd have very different takes on Obama and Trump doing the same thing, because one is prudent and trustworthy and the other isn't.
Also, continued use of the alt-right dogwhistle "civilized nations" in his remarks is super troubling.
2. In an alternate universe where he had approval, what we've seen so far would probably qualify as a reasonable retaliation to Assad's actions, if we managed to avoid escalating any further.
3. I do not for a second trust Trump to avoid escalating this. This is one of those situations where I'd have very different takes on Obama and Trump doing the same thing, because one is prudent and trustworthy and the other isn't.
Also, continued use of the alt-right dogwhistle "civilized nations" in his remarks is super troubling.
TheRealTalker
Banned
I hate Trump for a bunch of things but the dude actually put Obama's red line statement for chemical weapons to use
I still hate Trump though
I still hate Trump though
People are more concerned with Trump literally flip flopping his position in 24 hours. How this was the same man that greenlit a botched Yemen raid.
People are concerned with escalation and have no faith in Trump to act in a nuanced manner.
But go ahead and make a snarky ass comment while people are concerned with the prospects of potentially being at war with ANOTHER country in the middle east and what implications that has globally.
Also Obama isn't President anymore. Trump is. I'd rather focus on the now.
No liberals were ever calling for unilateral action against the Assad regime though
hmm
NoFaceNico
Member
Why do I have this horrible feeling that dumbass is going to think "welp! It worked for Syria, let's try the same with North Korea! Send in the cruise missiles!!!"
Of course not, silly.
Welcome to realpolitik.
Ousting Assad without a bulletproof plan for his succession would literally mean handing the keys of the middle east to ISIS-type groups for the upcoming decades. You can't let your emotions have the best of you. There's no good solution. In an ideal world Assad would be dealt with at the same time as ISIS/Al qaeda but sadly that doesn't appear to be possible.
I mean, you had one state walk back their accusation (http://www.nbcnews.com/id/7634313/n...africa/t/cias-final-report-no-wmd-found-iraq/) and the other did not.
That isn't how sarin works. It had to have been delivered missiles or air strike with an advanced detonation mechanism so it releases on impact without burning up. If it was just regular bombs or missiles hitting stored sarin, which wouldn't have even been mixed properly for lethality in storage, it would just burn up.
You're a propagandist as far as I'm concerned for even suggesting it wasn't Assad.
Do you have any proof whatsoever that ISIL somehow has an advanced chemical weapons program? Or that they even seized Syrian chem weapons?
I think this needs to be done, so good for Trump and others backing it. It's about time something is done about that monster.
Now with that said, please answer me this. Just why did Assad drop the chemical weapons on the village in the first place? Is there a reason, no matter how twisted, other than to "make a statement"?
Now with that said, please answer me this. Just why did Assad drop the chemical weapons on the village in the first place? Is there a reason, no matter how twisted, other than to "make a statement"?
Seductivpancakes
Member
Flip his table and launch attacks anyway duh.
spiderman123
Member
Wait russians were in the base or came after the base blew up. B/c that changes shit.
This wasn't his plan. This was formulated as an appropriate proportional response by his military advisors.
Very different scenario that would spell disaster for SK
And the fumes would probably be toxic.
I'm not sure when everyone became an expert on how sarin would react to being hit in a raid.
benjipwns
Banned
This kind of defeatism is undermining American morale.
Mainly to see whether Trump would respond, apparently.
Yep not sure how people are not getting this .
Every single thing Trump does is a fuck up.
bonesmccoy
Banned
Maybe the chemical attack was done using those missing WMDs the Americans invaded and destroyed Iraq over?
Turbo Killer
Member
So they gave a heads to the Russians at the base, and in turn the Russians gave a heads up to the Syrians?
They were at the base and the US warned them ahead of time to GTFO.
King Tubby
Member
Basically this. If we have to choose between ISIS or Assad, I pick Assad. He's only attacking his own people.
If we try to pick a third way by ousting Assad and fucking Donald Trump is in charge of the rebuild...I think I still rather have Assad, because holy fuck. The Bush administration was utterly incompetent and corrupt in trying to rebuild Iraq. How bad do you think Trump would fuck it up?
Simply untrue, and the very same argument Assad himself has made. "It's either me or the Jihadists". It's not a binary choice!
The red line shit was one of the few things I was ever upset with Obama over.
That was such a fuck up and Trump ends up looking better at the moment because of it, Obama should never have used that line if he knew he didn't want to respond.
JHoNNy1OoO
Member
Can you point to me any "similar" instance of Obama bombing a Syrian military asset? Because even Trump himself(through tweets of course) was extremely happy that Obama never took that bait.
Attacking ISIS held areas in Syria and even arming/training rebels is not even in the same ballpark as launching missiles at Syrian Goverment occupied assets.
NoFaceNico
Member
yeah... that'll stop him.
TheRealTalker
Banned
- Status