US Attacks Syria with UK, France

[Avery]

Oh boy. **** is going down.

Buckle up.

 

[Zombie]

Here we go again...

 

[enchilada_style]

Couldn't wait for the playoffs to end first?

 

[fishonjazz]

****

 

[Keefe]

You think the carpetpissers did this?

 

[babe]

I don't know what the total information base is. Of course, me being me, I question whether this is Western.... Brit/Am dark "intelligence" agency false flag deployment of chemical weapons. I would have pushed diplomatic measures, and secured whatever explanations/evidence/proof of innocence Assad could have offered, first.

As I understand it, if the Syrians did deploy the WMDs it is a treaty violation which by treaty entitles others nations to intervene to stop the WMD deployments. zero tolerance.

 

[Rubashov]

**** the Russians and their puppets

 

[Gameface]

I want to give this administration credit where due.

This operation was handled professionally, much as it would have been handled under Obama, or Bush Jr.. I think Bill Clinton mishandled situations like this as much as any President in my lifetime. Trump did this better than Bill Clinton probably would have, or maybe the "deep state" has learned lessons from Bill Clinton's mishandling of such situations and advised Trump not to make the same mistakes.

Anyway, he didn't. WWIII did not start over this, yet we made a strong statement and destroyed chemical weapon capabilities with the promise to do it again should they deploy chemical weapons again.

Well done Mr. President!

 

[Rubashov]

Clinton was too busy trying to use air strikes to cover for the wayward missile in his pants.

 

[Gameface]

Clinton was too busy trying to use air strikes to cover for the wayward missile in his pants.

I blame Clinton 100% for Bush Jr's Iraq war. There was an opportunity to handle it decisively on his watch, without an invasion of Iraq, and he punted.

 

[Gameface]

Let's not talk about the Balkans.

Clinton was uncharacteristically impotent when it came to military conflicts.

 

[Rubashov]

I blame Clinton 100% for Bush Jr's Iraq war. There was an opportunity to handle it decisively on his watch, without an invasion of Iraq, and he punted.

Nah Rumsfeld and the Halliburton crowd always planned on getting their hands on the oil. Evil bastards the lot of them, if you ever feel inclined read John Pilger's writing on the Balkans terrible stuff, beautifully written by a giant of journalism.

 

[Gameface]

Nah Rumsfeld and the Halliburton crowd always planned on getting their hands on the oil. Evil bastards the lot of them, if you ever feel inclined read John Pilger's writing on the Balkans terrible stuff, beautifully written by a giant of journalism.

I don't want to comment without reading John Pilger's writing, but I don't know that we ever actually got "our hands" on that oil.

Clinton handled military issues with ineffective half-measures. I'm of the opinion you either stay out, or play a purely diplomatic role, or you state your intentions, your demands, and then achieve them them with the greatest military force in human history. The U.S. is in a unique position. I'd be happy to spout off as to why U.S. military capability is not only larger and more technologically advanced than any of the next several rival nations, but that 1 unit of U.S. military capability is greater than 1 equivalent unit of our rivals military capability. I'll sum it up in a word... Logistics.

The U.S. is by far the most practiced modern military force in the world. We know how to get our power where we need it when we need it.

But we are also the biggest target. Blunders could change the entire dynamic in an afternoon. I fear there is a plan in place amongst Russia, China, Brazil and India to seize the opportunity should the U.S. commit a grand blunder with our military forces. I have been concerned that Trump is just the leader to commit such a blunder and he is why Russia invested so heavily in tampering in our election process.

Today my fears were reduced.

 

[Rubashov]

I don't want to comment without reading John Pilger's writing, but I don't know that we ever actually got "our hands" on that oil.

Clinton handled military issues with ineffective half-measures. I'm of the opinion you either stay out, or play a purely diplomatic role, or you state your intentions, your demands, and then achieve them them with the greatest military force in human history. The U.S. is in a unique position. I'd be happy to spout off as to why U.S. military capability is not only larger and more technologically advanced than any of the next several rival nations, but that 1 unit of U.S. military capability is greater than 1 equivalent unit of our rivals military capability. I'll sum it up in a word... Logistics.

The U.S. is by far the most practiced modern military force in the world. We know how to get our power where we need it when we need it.

But we are also the biggest target. Blunders could change the entire dynamic in an afternoon. I fear there is a plan in place amongst Russia, China, Brazil and India to seize the opportunity should the U.S. commit a grand blunder with our military forces. I have been concerned that Trump is just the leader to commit such a blunder and he is why Russia invested so heavily in tampering in our election process.

Today my fears were reduced.

Pilger has written extensively abut the US but is stuff on the Balkans is pre-war on terror. I think the big problem with Neo-Cons is they all seem to think that the rest of the world wants to live like Americans, a great many people do not, for a large number of very different reasons. The second Iraq war as an example, I got the feeling that the administration seemed to think they could show up, open a McDonald's and everything would be peaches and cream. There was no coherent plan for the peace, furthermore if they were honest and understood history they would have known that there was no likelihood of peace, they instead should of planed on imposing a new form of state terror, in order to create order. The implications of this are obvious and illustrate the problems with imperialism in the modern age.

 

[Gameface]

Pilger has written extensively abut the US but is stuff on the Balkans is pre-war on terror. I think the big problem with Neo-Cons is they all seem to think that the rest of the world wants to live like Americans, a great many people do not, for a large number of very different reasons. The second Iraq war as an example, I got the feeling that the administration seemed to think they could show up, open a McDonald's and everything would be peaches and cream. There was no coherent plan for the peace, furthermore if they were honest and understood history they would have know that there was no likelihood of peace, they instead should of planed on imposing a new form of state terror, in order to create order. The implications of this are obvious and illustrate the problems with imperialism in the modern age.

Liberals in the U.S. are far more convinced that the rest of the world wants what we have than the neo-cons have ever been. Neo-cons sell their wars by promising to deliver western style democracy and freedom to the oppressed. If they didn't have to do any PR they'd just say "we're gonna go **** up some brown people."

 

[Rubashov]

Liberals in the U.S. are far more convinced that the rest of the world wants what we have than the neo-cons have ever been. Neo-cons sell their wars by promising to deliver western style democracy and freedom to the oppressed. If they didn't have to do any PR they'd just say "we're gonna go **** up some brown people."

I don't think anyone really wants to buy the American dream anymore. I suspect going places to kill brown people would be a fairly popular policy in vast parts of this country too.

 

[fishonjazz]

I want to give this administration credit where due.

This operation was handled professionally, much as it would have been handled under Obama, or Bush Jr.. I think Bill Clinton mishandled situations like this as much as any President in my lifetime. Trump did this better than Bill Clinton probably would have, or maybe the "deep state" has learned lessons from Bill Clinton's mishandling of such situations and advised Trump not to make the same mistakes.

Anyway, he didn't. WWIII did not start over this, yet we made a strong statement and destroyed chemical weapon capabilities with the promise to do it again should they deploy chemical weapons again.

Well done Mr. President!

I actually was thinking the same thing last night. If assad really used chemical weapons on people then i think that trump did the right thing and did it the right way.
Only caveat being that if WW3 starts from this then im morally conflicted. I think that the US has the ability to help those in need and if innocent people are being attacked by assad in this way then i think trying to help them is the right thing to do but...... is helping a small amount of syrian people worth the lives of billions of people if ww3 is started?

 

[fishonjazz]

I blame Clinton 100% for Bush Jr's Iraq war. There was an opportunity to handle it decisively on his watch, without an invasion of Iraq, and he punted.

handle what? I always thought the war with iraq was about non existent wmd's (oil). Is that not the case? (not even looking to argue or de-rail the thread btw, i really just want to know)

 

[Rubashov]

handle what? I always thought the war with iraq was about non existent wmd's (oil). Is that not the case? (not even looking to argue or de-rail the thread btw, i really just want to know)

WMD was the lie the US used to get their hands on the oil.

I actually was thinking the same thing last night. If assad really used chemical weapons on people then i think that trump did the right thing and did it the right way.
Only caveat being that if WW3 starts from this then im morally conflicted. I think that the US has the ability to help those in need and if innocent people are being attacked by assad in this way then i think trying to help them is the right thing to do but...... is helping a small amount of syrian people worth the lives of billions of people if ww3 is started?

Don't think WW III is going to start over Syria but a whole heap of Syrian civilians are going to continue to suffer and die, while foreign powers use their lives as chess pieces in their political maneuverings.

 

[fishonjazz]

WMD was the lie the US used to get their hands on the oil.



Don't think WW III is going to start over Syria but a whole heap of Syrian civilians are going to continue to suffer and die, while foreign powers use their lives as chess pieces in their political maneuverings.

Ya thats why i said non existent wmd's. Im wondering what bullet was talking about when he said clinton should have handled it (iraq) before bush had to. Was clinton supposed to invade iraq for non existent wmd's first?

As for the second part of your post...... There are lots of russian military in syria currently. I worry that one of these strikes being executed by france/uk/usa hits and kills a russian soldier and that prompts russia to attack us. Then all hell breaks loose.