CNBC: US military has launched more than 50 missiles aimed at Syria: NBC News

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm hoping that they can prove without a shadow of a doubt that it was his planes that dropped the chemical weapons and not from a rebel held building that had chemical weapon stockpiles blow up after being hit from above. As much as Assad gets a bad rep, I still consider him a necessary evil for maintaining stability, even though evil is too strong a word relative to many other war mongering nations' leaders.

I'm Syrian, born and raised in USA, been to Syria twice, hard to hear people describe complex cultures and societies so cut and dry in the west. Everything analyzed through the lens of how Western civilization does things, even though oftentimes an unorthodox approach is necessary depending on the demographics of your region.
 
Tovarisc said:
uXOlV21.png

https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/850425431899680768
Click to expand...

Meaning, we will probably hit them again and harder.
 
Kyzer said:
Thats the big question, isn't it? If I had the answer I'd get a prize. Intervening helps by removing Assad, who is using chemical weapons. Taking responsibility for Syria afterward is obviously the crux of the issue. If you think we shouldn't intervene, how does that help? ISIS still exists, theyre still going to grow. Its not the same situation as Iraq because we actually know for a fact this guy just used WMDs right in front of our face.
Click to expand...

You keep fighting ISIL and AQ and work to undermine the legitimacy of the Assad regime. Perhaps you simultaneously fight Assad's air power.

You weaken ISIL and AQ to the point where they are not the dominant contingency of the rebel actions. Then you covertly back a coup carried out by moderate rebels and don't tell anyone.

It's a long game plan that minimizes US casualties and doesn't make you look like you are just doing an Iraq 2.0 that will just motivate further ISIL and AQ recruitment.
 
marrec said:
This is delusionally paranoid. No, progressives aren't willing to accept a traitor if he just starts a war. Yes, some on the left (including me) are okay with this missile strike, no that does not mean we're sucking Trump's dick or think he is a capable or trustworthy president.

Why do people keep presenting this false dichotomy?
Click to expand...

Ha, you're already accepting him as legitimate commander in chief making legitimate acts of war. Forgive me if I'm not too trusting of your ability.
 
Ziltoidia 9 said:
Doesn't the kinetic force of a ICBM falling from space equal some god awful amount of destruction? Like to the point you don't even need to put a bomb on it?
Click to expand...

No, ICBMs(or MIRVs actually, the whole ICBM doesn't come back down, the actual rocket mostly burns up in the atmosphere) don't weigh all that much at all, like 800 lbs.

Kinetic bombardment requires tons of mass, and most importantly very dense mass, usually in the form of LARGE tungsten rods in most theoretical designs. These weapons would not have a large explosive yield either(in terms of mass to size of explosions, it would be just about the same as conventional high explosives), their advantage lies in their ability to penetrate fortifications. Because of their density and speed, they would take some considerable time to come to a stop, no matter what kind of stuff they run into.

Basically compare anti-tank sabot rounds to HE rounds. the HE makes a bigger boom, but the sabot round is much harder to stop because of it's kinetic energy.
 
DontBeThatGuy said:
You don't think their relentless misinformation/hacking campaign played a part?
Click to expand...

I don't doubt it was an influence, but I believe the mismanagement by the democratic party is the main reason. Either way I'm also unconvinced that Trump knowingly colluded with the Russians. Obviously I'm willing to let evidence change my mind though, I'm not an idiot. Until the investigations are complete, the only thing I can do is recognize that Trump IS POTUS, legitimate or not. Anything else is the political equivalent of wavy flappy arms guy, flaccid and noisy.
 
CNN is interviewing a Syrian survivor of the 2013 chemical attack.

His words on the attack: "Thank you, Mr. President. Hit Assad again, and harder....". "What you did is amazing."

"We want safe zones in our country. We don't want to leave to the US. We want to stay here"
 
JayBabay said:
I'm hoping that they can prove without a shadow of a doubt that it was his planes that dropped the chemical weapons and not from a rebel held building that had chemical weapon stockpiles blow up after being hit from above. As much as Assad gets a bad rep, I still consider him a necessary evil for maintaining stability, even though evil is too strong a word relative to many other war mongering nations' leaders.

I'm Syrian, born and raised in USA, been to Syria twice, hard to hear people describe complex cultures and societies so cut and dry in the west. Everything analyzed through the lens of how Western civilization does things, even though oftentimes an unorthodox approach is necessary depending on the demographics of your region.
Click to expand...

The gas hit such a wide area I believe it is impossible for it to have been a storehouse explosion. That was in one of the prelim reports/analysis I believe.

As to the stability I think that bird has flown. He's not getting Rebel held parts back ever, and I'd say his grip on what he has will slip at some point. I think he's done. It's time to help the Syrians find peace and stability without him.
 
As much as I really want to stay out of things this really seems like a fight worth fighting. Especially with all of the things Assad is doing to his people. Nobody should live like this. No one.
 
The Main Event said:
CNN is interviewing a Syrian survivor of the 2013 chemical attack.

His words on the attack: "Thank you, Mr. President. Hit Assad again, and harder....". "What you did is amazing."

"We want safe zones in our country. We don't want to leave to the US. We want to stay here"
Click to expand...

Problem is, he won't be saying that if US air strikes escalate and start killing civilians as collateral damage.

Then the tune will be why is the us bombing us?
 
TheWorthyEdge said:
As much as I really want to stay out of things this really seems like a fight worth fighting. Especially with all of the things Assad is doing to his people. Nobody should live like this. No one.
Click to expand...

So you want to nation-build again? Look how fucked we left Iraq.

And this time we have someone even dumber as the head of our country.

The only thing our military is going to do is make things go from bad to worse. And good luck shoving more money into the military industrial complex instead of diverting those funds to places the people really need it in

Plus we have no good alternatives to Assad atm
 
TheWorthyEdge said:
As much as I really want to stay out of things this really seems like a fight worth fighting. Especially with all of the things Assad is doing to his people. Nobody should live like this. No one.
Click to expand...

I agree with this sentiment at least but the last time we did this we created a vacuum that was filled by ISIS.

"We have to do something" shouldn't mean "let's do something that will make the situation worse in the long term for short term satisfaction".
 
Black_Sun said:
So you want to nation-build again? Look how fucked we left Iraq.

And this time we have someone even dumber as the head of our country.

The only thing our military is going to do is make things go from bad to worse. And good luck shoving more money into the military industrial complex instead of diverting those funds to places the people really need it in

Plus we have no good alternatives to Assad atm
Click to expand...

Right, at least with Iraq there was the possibility of a stable regime replacement as the country wasn't already in a state of complete chaos before we moved in. We really fucked up by purging all the baathists.
 
Black_Sun said:
So you want to nation-build again? Look how fucked we left Iraq.

And this time we have someone even dumber as the head of our country.

The only thing our military is going to do is make things go from bad to worse. And good luck shoving more money into the military industrial complex instead of diverting those funds to places the people really need it in

Plus we have no good alternatives to Assad atm
Click to expand...

fuck this shit being about NO good alternatives to assad .

my stupid cat would be better alternative then this crazy devil shits
 
Kyzer said:
Really? Cuz we just watched Assad use chemical weapons. He has them. And hes not supposed to. Not really an "if". So you're saying, in hindsight, because we know how it all shaked out, even if it turned out Saddam had WMDs, you wouldn't have supported taking him out?
Click to expand...

We didn't have evidence that he did. You want to fight wars based on an "IF"? Just a possiblity?
 
ZOONAMI said:
You keep fighting ISIL and AQ and work to undermine the legitimacy of the Assad regime. Perhaps you simultaneously fight Assad's air power.

You weaken ISIL and AQ to the point where they are not the dominant contingency of the rebel actions. Then you covertly back a coup carried out by moderate rebels and don't tell anyone.

It's a long game plan that minimizes US casualties and doesn't make you look like you are just doing an Iraq 2.0 that will just motivate further ISIL and AQ recruitment.
Click to expand...

But how would you know the person or rebels that you are putting into place are better than Assad?
 
Tovarisc said:
Tube is just to house the missile against environment and then aim it towards the sky. Stress of launch isn't that significant on platform.

---

uXOlV21.png

https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/850425431899680768
Click to expand...

Since the airstrip was not targeted then any jets that were not destroyed would be able to take off so no surprise there. They also could rebase aircraft if they wanted too (and was probably planned to give perception of minimal impact). The real cost is how damaged the primary refueling infrastructure is and how many aircraft were destroyed. You can see plenty of blackened aircraft shelters where the missiles exploded inside.
 
I mean, how big of a fuckin' crater do you need to make a runway inoperable? I get that TLAMs aren't the best tool for the job, but ffs, the runway is made of concrete not diamonds. Even a small crater every few hundred feet would make it unusable.
 
Vixdean said:
I mean, how big of a fuckin' crater do you need to make a runway inoperable? I get that TLAMs aren't the best tool for the job, but ffs, the runway is made of concrete not diamonds. Even a small crater every few hundred feet would make it unusable.
Click to expand...

Until you fill the crater with concrete.
 
So the US is at war with Syria?

More_Badass said:
Trump being Florida Man all along makes too much sense
Click to expand...
lol even the Pentagon folks are memeing trump... (While bombing other countries USA style)
 
maabus1999 said:
Since the airstrip was not targeted then any jets that were not destroyed would be able to take off so no surprise there. They also could rebase aircraft if they wanted too (and was probably planned to give perception of minimal impact). The real cost is how damaged the primary refueling infrastructure is and how many aircraft were destroyed. You can see plenty of blackened aircraft shelters where the missiles exploded inside.
Click to expand...

Destroying fuel and ammo depos means very little from perspective of how usable military airfield is. They just replace those with truck convoys for week or two as they re-establish on site depos. Hardened aircraft bunkers weren't breached (can Tomahawk even penetrate hardened bunkers?) so they were left literally open and what ever was inside exploded / caught on fire from heat coming from outside. If those had been breached they would have caved in or exploded outwards. Structure of bunkers seem to be intact.

Seen figures of 6 to 20 planes destroyed and some speculation that those were there only because they were unusable for repairs etc. Depending what planes they were it could have been big hit on Assad's air capabilities, but to leave field basically 100% operational is kinda sad.
 
That Dmitry Medvedev is doing the Russian talking on this and not putin says it isn't a big deal for them.
Even if they didn't cook up the chemical attack they can recognize a domestic stunt from a president who just got fingered in the press by the CIA.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

[AP] India fires missiles at Pakistan
News  2 3 4
159
1K
Gp1 replied
  • Locked
Syria has fallen
2
70
5K
Joramun replied
More hype than you expected.
34
1K
MaestroMike replied
Joe Biden has prostate cancer
News  2
91
749
Chuck Berry replied
Apple is losing more than $1 billion a year on streamer Apple TV+ according to a new report
News  2
71
3K
Yerd replied
Top Bottom