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

Status
Not open for further replies.
DrFurbs said:
I'm confused.

Last week the US military kill over 200 civilians in a botched airstrike. Hardly a word about it on main stream news.

Assad kills 50 civilians and the news all over the world are going nuts including the US.

Is there a reason we are being given a very one sided perspective?
Click to expand...
Because nobody knows how to react to being the bad guys.
 
E-Cat said:
Right. There was only a demolished airbase, a few dead soldiers, civilians and whatnot. There's no way this could possibly escalate further.
Click to expand...

Yep. This strike was serious. But so was using chemical weapons - once again - against non-combatants (I am not starting about the bombing of the hospital, because the US has an own track records when it comes to that).

I absolutely support the usage of military actions as a repressive measure to prevent further strikes of the regime with chemical weapons. Assad - and everyone supporting him - must know now that the next time he uses nerve gas against towns hold by rebels, his military force has to pay an even bigger price.

Yes, this could escalate, but the idea behind repressive measures isn't escalation but de-escalation.
 
DrFurbs said:
I'm confused.

Last week the US military kill over 200 civilians in a botched airstrike. Hardly a word about it on main stream news.

Assad kills 50 civilians and the news all over the world are going nuts including the US.

Is there a reason we are being given a very one sided perspective?
Click to expand...

I don't know what kind of mainstream news sources you are reading, but there was quite a bit of coverage of the airstrikes in Mosul last week, at least in the American press.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/24/...stigation-airstrike-civilian-deaths.html?_r=0

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...ca1b05c41b8_story.html?utm_term=.9d0c73e139e9

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-...ul-airstrikes-caused-mass-civilian-casualties

That's just 3 articles from 3 separate news orgs. There are plenty more where that came from.
 
Flai said:
Sure. I don't think that anyone believes that USA was trying to kill civilians. They had bad intel and iirc, SDF asked for US to air strike that position. Where as in this case, Assad used chemical weapons (a war crime itself I think?) on a village that wasn't even on the front lines. Chemical weapons by their nature are imprecise, inhumane and almost always ends up in mass civilian casualties.
Click to expand...

All actions from US led forces and Russia result in mass civilian casualties. They've consistently been bombing residential areas (or a fucking MSF hospital), then blaming their targets for hiding behind civilians. I don't think they're targeting them, but they just don't give a fuck because "collateral damage" - probably one of the most toxic phrases used by meddling trigger happy governments.

I'm obviously not condoning Assad or chemical weapons - but the only ones seriously affected by western intervention are innocent bystanders and all it really achieves is further radicalisation and fuel for the ISIS propaganda machine. And then the ones fleeing the conflict are told they're not welcome. Awful.
 
Reports saying that Russia was notified beforehand, the strike killed 6 non civilians(regime report). Not sure what the damage is, and if the runway is intact.
 
Flai said:
Sure. I don't think that anyone believes that USA was trying to kill civilians. They had bad intel and iirc, SDF asked for US to air strike that position. Where as in this case, Assad used chemical weapons (a war crime itself I think?) on a village that wasn't even on the front lines. Chemical weapons by their nature are imprecise, inhumane and almost always ends up in mass civilian casualties.
Click to expand...

So all Assad has to say is that he got some bad intel, gps broke down and the wrong city got gassed, put in the mix that the translation of the Geneva convention is borked and hell be good to go?

The US accepts the loss of up to 15 (it was i think) civilians per killed terrorist. So yes they do.

I dont try to condone the gas attacks, i want them put onto the same pedestal as other warcrimes done in that area.
 
Bitch Pudding said:
Yep. This strike was serious. But so was using chemical weapons - once again - against non-combatants (I am not starting about the bombing of the hospital, because the US has an own track records when it comes to that).

I absolutely support the usage of military actions as a repressive measure to prevent further strikes of the regime with chemical weapons. Assad - and everyone supporting him - must know now that the next time he uses nerve gas against towns hold by rebels, his military force has to pay an even bigger price.

Yes, this could escalate, but the idea behind repressive measures isn't escalation but de-escalation.
Click to expand...
What about Saudi Arabia bombing Yemen? Does anybody care about that? I doubt that this chemical attack, real or not, was the fundamental reason behind the attack. Because being a moral guardian is generally not how the US standard operating procedure in geopolitics goes.

There could have easily been Russian casualties in these strikes. That would be crossing into some very dangerous territory.
 
The Hamburglar said:
How much does one tomohawk cost? Did trunk fire like 5 million worth of missiles at an empty base lmao.
Click to expand...

According to the US Department of Defence's annual budget, a single Tomahawk missile costs $1.59 million.

Combine that by the 59 missiles the US ordered to be fired off two warships in the Mediterranean Sea, and you're looking at a bill of around $94 million.


Read more at http://finance.nine.com.au/2017/04/07/15/09/how-much-a-tomahawk-missile-costs#PO7mb62UpuYv1MJw.99
Click to expand...
source : http://finance.nine.com.au/2017/04/07/15/09/how-much-a-tomahawk-missile-costs
 
Vigilant Walrus said:
People are not concerned about Assad - It's the innocent people who get caught in the cross fire. Trumps rhetoric on foreign policy during the election was insane.
There are situations where invasion is warranted. But you need to pick up the pieces afterwards, you need to take the country back to stability. The US managed to do that with Germany and Japan after WW2, though those countries were completely broken. But that was not a comparable situation with sub tribal wars tearing the countries apart, that the US had helped start. In those countries you had "Superiority complex" of seeing the US (the occupiers) as better than themselves. Particularly in Japan. The populations were willing to work alongside the US and helped rebuild. Their legislative forms of governance where not as different from the US mentality, where as in the case of countries like Iraq and Syria, you got a situation where the US are seen as invaders.
Click to expand...

I would definitely delete this paragraph of poorly researched, poorly phrased babble from the rest of your paragraphs. What happened in Germany and Japan can't be boiled down to: Their government was like ours to begin with!! and "they worshiped the Americans." By attempting to distill Reconstruction to suit your narrative about the Mideast you've simplified the situation to a degree that's fairly offensive. The only part of this paragraph that remains true is that the situation in Iraq and Syria are different than that of Germany and Japan.
 
E-Cat said:
There could have easily been Russian casualties in these strikes. That would be crossing into some very dangerous territory.
Click to expand...

Russian military was forewarned via "standard channels". I daresay that Syria was forewarned as well (by Russian military at the very least), as number of casualties is extremely low (5, according to latest reports). Military airfield supposed to have more guards, you know.
 
sankt-Antonio said:
So all Assad has to say is that he got some bad intel, gps broke down and the wrong city got gassed, put in the mix that the translation of the Geneva convention is borked and hell be good to go?

The US accepts the loss of up to 15 (it was i think) civilians per killed terrorist. So yes they do.

I dont try to condone the gas attacks, i want them put onto the same pedestal as other warcrimes done in that area.
Click to expand...

Some weapons are considered worse than others and for good reasons. You don't want anyone, even the worst despot that tortures his people to be able to escalate to A/B/C weapons - ever.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't attack and conedmn other breaches of the geneva convention. But if the use of these weapons is considered the same as conventional bombing runs that just means these weapons are going to be used more.
 
Wace said:
Russian military was forewarned via "standard channels". I daresay that Syria was forewarned as well (by Russian military at the very least), as number of casualties is extremely low (5, according to latest reports). Military airfield supposed to have more guards, you know.
Click to expand...


I believe this to be the case as well. This was all a ruse in my opinion
 
Ihyll said:
I believe this to be the case as well. This was all a ruse in my opinion
Click to expand...

You can't destroy a military base including all personel and then claim it was a warning and meant as deescalation.

That's a delcaration of war.

The warning allows you to hinder air operations without forcing Russia into retaliating. That could still backfire of course. But not killing a base full of russian soldiers is the sensible route unless you want war wir Russia.
 
Boy Wander said:
Leave colour out of it. Trump isn't killing his own people, Assad is. Someone has to do something about it. What's the alternative - stand idly by and let this megalomaniac poison innocent children?
Click to expand...

While i'm certainly in favor of Assad being removed from power in Syria, perhaps you've heard of the American Health Care Act (AHCA) which Trump has been actively pushing to become law? The Congressional Budget Office estimates it would result in 24 million Americans losing their health insurance.

Dude is certainly in favor of killing his own people, just at a more glacial pace. Still, I don't think I could get behind the statement that "someone has to do something about it" and in a single night fire the equivalent of half the annual budget of the National Endowment for the Arts worth of missiles at whichever airport services Mar-a-Lago.
 
The fact that lots of reasonable people support this and the only real detractors are alt-right crazies (including 2013 Trump) and Russia suggests to me that this may have been a good move.
 
They clearly had plently of time due to the warning, how is it there are people dead? I wouldn't be surprised if Assad forced those 5 men to stay behind and die.
 
MisterFalcon said:
Empty except for all the spare parts, tools, planes that cannot immediately take off, bunkers, ammo, fuel and other facilities.
Click to expand...
I would wait until details of what planes were blown up are released - or perhaps they won't be. Syria has 600 planes, varying from antiquated on upward.
Cruise missiles are not bunker busters.
It could easily be some tin hangers and some old migs and a fuel depot.
 
Holy shit... if you poke around FB for a bit, a lot of people are huge into the idea that this Syrian gas attack was a false flag to justify intervention/war.

I mean it's not like I'm surprised, but....

The crazy goes round and round and round....

I'm curious how the conspiracy fringe comes to regard Trump. It would actually be more "status quo" that they regard him as being an enemy/played by the deep state. Because this "Alex Jones and Trump are best buddies" shit was too surreal......
 
sankt-Antonio said:
Of course Assad is killing his own people, its a civil war. :/

I mean the use of chemical weapons has to be stopped but this was a publicity stunt, no one can know for sure who did this, the Russians, Assad, the rebels (moderate/hardliner), Isis... It took like two years to disclose who did the chemical attacks in Aleppo but here they came to a conclusion within a week.

And by the way, what is the international community doing against the megalomaniac(s) that drone bomb children?
Click to expand...

Was the drone bombing deliberate? Look I'm not saying the US is above retribution but if you can't see a difference between deliberately attacking your own People with chemicals and stray US drone strikes then I guess were not going to agree on this matter and that's fine because that's what debate is about. So who do you think most likely launched the Sarin attack on the civilinans if not Assad ?
 
In theory retaliation after an attack with chemical weapons is a good thing. Anybody who uses chemical weapons deserve anything that comes to him.

But, I'm not sure what's the bigger plan here. Attacking the airbase makes sense, but as they had to notify the Russians about it before I'm not sure how effective it is beyond destroying the runway (which is not confirmed yet).

So what's next? Or that's it? I don't see how this one time hit will stop Assad from anything.
 
BocoDragon said:
Holy shit... if you poke around FB for a bit, a lot of people are huge into the idea that this Syrian gas attack was a false flag to justify intervention/war.

I mean it's not like I'm surprised, but....

The crazy goes round and round and round....
Click to expand...

Why go in Fb when you have such posts also on NeoGAF and this thread? Some even pretend that Assad doesn't have chemical weapons anymore.
 
KingSnake said:
So what's next? Or that's it? I don't see how this one time hit will stop Assad from anything.
Click to expand...

patapuf said:
The warning allows you to hinder air operations without forcing Russia into retaliating.
Click to expand...

If I was an anti-trump US citizen, I would claim it ruse for the following:

1. Assad makes (alleged) chemical weapon attack on civilian targets first time in what? two years? With no military or political reason whatsoever, just for the fun of it.

2. West media immediately condemns Syria, Russia immediately backs Syria ("they bombed chemical warfare production site"), both sides call for investigations.

3. Kremlin declares about "not unconditional support" for Assad. "it is not correct to say that Moscow can convince Mr. Assad to do whatever is wanted in Moscow. This is totally wrong." (c)

4. Trump makes a "strong move", calling for strike. Moscow (and Syria, by default) is warned in advance.

Perceived result of this strike:
- Trump isn't a puppet;
- nobody cares about investigations anymore;
- US lost 59 Tomahawks, Syria (allegedly) lost 15 planes + airbase infrastructure + 5 men.

In my very humble Russian opinion: Trump just wants to be as not-Obama as possible - and that's it.
 
Okay my anxiety calmed down after reading through.

Mass Hysteria is such a bitch.

It's weird seen people agree with Trump, but a blocking clock and all that
 
Wace said:
If I was an anti-trump US citizen, I would claim it ruse for the following:

1. Assad makes (alleged) chemical weapon attack on civilian targets first time in what? two years? With no military or political reason whatsoever, just for the fun of it.

2. West media immediately condemns Syria, Russia immediately backs Syria ("they bombed chemical warfare production site"), both sides call for investigations.

3. Kremlin declares about "not unconditional support" for Assad. "it is not correct to say that Moscow can convince Mr. Assad to do whatever is wanted in Moscow. This is totally wrong." (c)

4. Trump makes a "strong move", calling for strike. Moscow (and Syria, by default) is warned in advance.

Perceived result of this strike:
- Trump isn't a puppet;
- nobody cares about investigations anymore;
- US lost 59 Tomahawks, Syria (allegedly) lost 15 planes + airbase infrastructure + 5 men.

In my very humble Russian opinion: Trump just wants to be as not-Obama as possible - and that's it.
Click to expand...

I agree that this is unlikely to follow any particular long term strategy and that it was an impulse descision more than anything else.

It's just that if you were going to bomb a syrian/russian airbase and not want war with russia the warning was the way to go.
 
BocoDragon said:
Holy shit... if you poke around FB for a bit, a lot of people are huge into the idea that this Syrian gas attack was a false flag to justify intervention/war.

I mean it's not like I'm surprised, but....

The crazy goes round and round and round....

I'm curious how the conspiracy fringe comes to regard Trump. It would actually be more "status quo" that they regard him as being an enemy/played by the deep state. Because this "Alex Jones and Trump are best buddies" shit was too surreal......
Click to expand...

yea even republican (voters not donors) are exhausted with endless war and intervention. Trump will not get Iraq war support if he puts more boots on the ground in Syria.
 
So an act af war against a sovereign country, justified by a still to be clarified event, brought without the nulla aosta of the ONU.

Way to go 'murica.
Your are truly the hero we need and deserve, a model of freedom and democracy the whole world must look at.
 
Syria was clearly testing the Trump Administration after Secretary State Tillerson and others basically said, "Assad is the Syrian people's problem, not ours".

Regardless, Assad using chemical weapons again demanded some kind of response even if it was just a symbolic response (which this was). These rockets essentially had a giant sign on the them saying, "Hey Russia, Syria, and Iran, we are going to bomb this particular airfield, get out of the way." So tactically these airstrikes didn't accomplish anything militarily, it was just a way to communicate to Assad "don't embarrass us while you commit genocide, use conventional weapons instead"

Honestly though I wish Obama tossed a few dozen pre-warned rockets after Assad "crossed the redline" initially. Just to signal that chemical weapons are off-limits.

As for Trump, you can tell he completely stumbled into this. This whole week he has looked reluctant but I think he realizes this has the major benefit for him to provide a real distraction from the Russian investigations and possibly get his base and independents to rally behind him. But as with any military action, it usually provides a short-term boost in the initial phases but if it's not resolved cleanly then there's a harsh backlash.

Another party that's happy with these airstrikes is the FBI. They can now continue their investigation without the White House trying to muck things up every few days. This might actually give them some space to work even if the White House, Congress, and the American people are distracted.
 
I am still sceptical about the circumstances behind the sarin deaths. It does not make sense for the Assad regime to use chemical weapons once much less twice but everyone has accepted it on the pretext that Assad sprays chemical warfare routinely, cos reasons.

Bullshit.
 
Rentahamster said:
This is good?
Click to expand...

Planes from this airbase were used to drop nerve gas-spraying payloads into neighbourhoods in Idlib. The US first requested through the UN that the Syrian government hand over its flight records and open their airbases up to inspectors, but Russia and China blocked that.

I've yet to see an actual argument for why putting some holes in that runway wasn't a good idea.
 
DrFurbs said:
I'm confused.

Last week the US military kill over 200 civilians in a botched airstrike. Hardly a word about it on main stream news.

Assad kills 50 civilians and the news all over the world are going nuts including the US.

Is there a reason we are being given a very one sided perspective?
Click to expand...

They are all bad guys but everyone tries to pretend they are the "good guys".

There's no good guys in war. Chemical attacks are terrible but the US has killed its far share of innocents both directly and indirectly by not letting refugees in.
 
Meus Renaissance said:
I am still sceptical about the circumstances behind the sarin deaths. It does not make sense for the Assad regime to use chemical weapons once much less twice but everyone has accepted it on the pretext that Assad sprays chemical warfare routinely, cos reasons.

Bullshit.
Click to expand...
A lot of things Assad does makes no sense.
 
French President Hollande encourages the US to continue striking the Syrian regime in a more international scale prior to heading to an immediate closed French safety meeting. (Al Arabia)

Italy supports the US Air strike (Skynews Arabia)
 
Meus Renaissance said:
I am still sceptical about the circumstances behind the sarin deaths. It does not make sense for the Assad regime to use chemical weapons once much less twice but everyone has accepted it on the pretext that Assad sprays chemical warfare routinely, cos reasons.

Bullshit.
Click to expand...

Ah yes, the false flag attack take. So what's your theory? They bombed themselves? In the hopes of reversing their war fortunes?
 
mid83 said:
People are going to hate on the US no matter what actions Trump does or doesn't take.

If the US does nothing people get mad over how awful it is that a county that has the means to act ignores what Assad is doing. Of course this also opens the floodgates of all the Russia collusion theories. If the US does something in Syria then people are upset that the US is once again acting as the world police and/or attempting to cover up the whole Russia issue.

So basically no matter what happens the US is in the wrong according to large groups of people, so I have a hard time shedding any tears for a piece of human filth like Assad.
Click to expand...
The USA has more options than just war or nothing. People want them to look at the others. To be blunt, the us has tried to be the world police for nearly 100 years now. They've proven to be basically awful at it, but they keep trying the same things over and over anyway, each generation convinced that somehow they'll be the ones to do it right. "We can't sit idly be and do nothing" somehow equals "let's kill some civilians ourselves too! Oh and set up some military bases that, afaict will be in place forever".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

[AP] India fires missiles at Pakistan
News 
31
32
Shubh_C63 replied
  • Locked
Syria has fallen
2
70
5K
Joramun replied
More hype than you expected.
34
1K
MaestroMike 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
I think the Predator franchise has more stronger movies than Aliens
2
59
2K
adamsapple replied
Top Bottom