US launches Tomahawks on Syrian airbases

a reply to: BlueAjah

Russia are an ally of the US in the fight against terrorism

Not anymore

a reply to: BlueAjah

I think Lil' Kim now knows that he better not get the US angry. Much better for our safety than Obama, who looked weak to the world.

There are different ways of looking at that - different philosophies. Sometimes restraint is true strength

Dear leader is not rational. He believes in might makes right - is it just posturing? It's no longer posturing on our side

a reply to: Martin75

I mean it the way I put it. No criticism for your king? There are some Trump supporters here in this thread, and outside in the world who have made some very reasonable observations and criticisms

What did you turn up in your research? Why do you now solidly support his actions?

Wow, the US has helped ISIS greatly in its efforts to overthrow Assad. And the people cheered, bowed and prayed to the neon god they had made....

Defense Secretary James Mattis briefed President Donald Trump on Thursday at Mar-a-Lago on military options against Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad's regime in the wake of a deadly attack which activists said killed at least 100 people — including 25 children — and injured 400 others earlier this week.

The White House and Pentagon have had detailed back-and-forth conversations over the past two days about options, including a National Security Council meeting Wednesday. Mattis and National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster have had repeated contact about the best way forward in Syria, a U.S. official told NBC News.

www.nbcnews.com...



Everyone can speculate on what we know. Everyone can criticize based on their own opinions.

I think it was a bad idea.

But the one person I would trust is General Mattis. If he says do it, then there had to be a good reason.

Doesn't mean I like it, but it's something I'll have to accept.

a reply to: Spiramirabilis
In my research I found that international leaders are standing behind Trump in his air strike. They feel that he acted in the best way possible.

U.S. officials portrayed the strikes as an appropriate, measured response and said they did not signal a broader shift in the Trump administration’s approach to the Syrian conflict.

“The intent was to deter the regime from doing this again,” said Navy Capt. Jeff Davis, the Pentagon spokesman. “It will be the regime’s choice if there’s any more, and it will be based upon their conduct going forward.”

Obama made the USA look weak. We aren't weak, we just had a weak president. Now, we have one with a backbone. It is time the world remembers we are not weak, nor will we continue to cower. The weakling is gone, thank God!
Maybe you should try looking at this with less of your slant.
It seems that international leaders are supporting Trump.

originally posted by: Dr UAE

originally posted by: allsee4eye
4 Syrian children killed in Trump attack last night

www.telegraph.co.uk...

why are 4 children in an airbase, im just confused

Again...The Pentagon fully admits they contacted Russia (same as Assad since it was Russia-Assad Joint operations at the airfield) well in advance of the strike, so that they could evacuate men and equipment. The Pentagon also said they avoided targeting buildings purportedly for fear of hitting Chemical Weapons and dispersing them.

So that leaves Asphalt...and a whole lot of advance notice...

How did kids end up in that equation?

a reply to: Martin75

Exactly!

And the Syrians are happy too:

"I am so happy. People are happy. They have hope the U.S. can end this war by stopping the regime aircraft from more bombs," 27-year-old aid worker in Idlib, Ali Essa, told Fox News. "We wish for the peace."
...
For Essa, this was symbolic.

"This airbase killed many of our friends and neighbors," he said.

Another doctor on the ground treating chemical victims, Dr. Mohammad Alhamwj, noted that the strikes in the very least tells Iran, Russia and Syria that the U.S. intends to be "the main player on the land in Syria," and that what they really need is a complete ban on the flying of all warplanes to stop the bloodshed.

But for others, this simply wasn't enough.

"The death of 100 people by nerve gas is vindicated only through shelling a small airport in suburbs Homs? A very modest intervention that does not rise to the crimes," humanitarian volunteer Rania Kisar, lamented, noting that he hopes now America will "go back to being a great nation like it was before the leadership of Obama."

"Many Syrians have a lot of respect for this move by President Trump," Susan Baaj, the chairwoman for the nonprofit Syrian Institute for Peace said. "We needed someone to take action, not just say they would take action. This is a real turning point."

Dr. Souheil Abbal of the Syrian American Medical Society, too, praised the military response as long overdue.

"This what Obama should have done when Assad crossed the red line," Abbal told Fox News, referring to the chemical attack in 2013 in which Obama warned of retaliation but did not act upon it. "The U.S.A. now has great supporters in Turkey, Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Gulf states and Iraq. Even Lebanon was waiting for such action to signal serious containment of Hezbollah. This is the moment of truth in the Middle East."

US attack on Syrian airfield lauded by regime opponents in the war-torn nation

a reply to: Indigo5
That's simple. As soon as they received the phone call they sent the children there to die.


a reply to: BlueAjah
BlueAjah - Thank you for posting that source. There are so many different people at play over there it's really hard to sort it all out.

a reply to: Martin75

Obama made the USA look weak. We aren't weak, we just had a weak president. Now, we have one with a backbone. It is time the world remembers we are not weak, nor will we continue to cower. The weakling is gone, thank God! Maybe you should try looking at this with less of your slant. It seems that international leaders are supporting Trump.

I have mixed feelings. Assad has this and more coming. But you have to wonder - is vengeance now an appropriate response in the world we live in?

a reply to: BlueAjah

An Eyewitness to the Syrian Rebellion: Father Frans in His Own Words

An examination of texts published by Father Frans van der Lugt in 2011 and 2012 shows that the late Dutch Jesuit priest had a dim view of the Syrian rebellion, which he held to be the work of a violent minority, and favored a process of political reform in Syria to be implemented by the current government under President Bashar Al-Assad.

Father Frans was murdered under still unclarified circumstances in the embattled Syrian city of Homs earlier this month.(April 2014)

...

From the start, the protest movements were not purely peaceful. From the start I saw armed demonstrators marching along in the protests, who began to shoot at the police first. Very often the violence of the security forces has been a reaction to the brutal violence of the armed rebels.

...

Moreover, from the start there has been the problem of the armed groups, which are also part of the opposition….The opposition of the street is much stronger than any other opposition. And this opposition is armed and frequently employs brutality and violence, only in order then to blame the government. Many representatives of the government (regeringsmensen – Father Frans might also be referring to supporters of the government) have been tortured and shot dead by them.

...

In the first place, it has to be said that it is very difficult to provide a nuanced and objective account of what is happening. Many journalists fall into describing matters in black and white. For them, good and evil are not interwoven, but are clearly separated. They demonize the one side and glorify the other. Thus, for example, it is not true that our (the Syrian) government has only bad sides and the opposition only good ones. But because the US, Europe and certain Arab countries support the opposition, they endeavor, whether consciously or unconsciously, to idealize it as much as possible, without engaging in any careful analysis of the real situation. Certain interests are obscuring our view of the real situation and contaminating the description of it.

a reply to: DBCowboy

I think it was a bad idea.

You and I agree on this

Mattis presented him with options. That's not the same thing as an endorsement - they're just options. This is what the president decided to do

It's hard for me to feel good about this

a reply to: Spiramirabilis
Well if you read my posts through this thread, I have struggled with this.
When I woke up, I was pissed. I didn't want Syria bombed because I felt Trump was being sucked in by propaganda. But after reading it seems he realizes that there is a good chance that the chemicals came from rebels or Assad. But he felt that he had to react. He couldn't wait to let them clean everything up. Sometimes you have to pick the lesser of two evils. Trump, along with his military advisors, made the decision that force was needed.

After Obama, I believe he was right. Obama worked overtime to create a weak United States of America and now we are working to show the world, we are not weak!

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

In this day and age, torture is an appropriate response supported by most. Vengeance is not the Lord's, vengeance is Donald's and his subjects'.

originally posted by: BlueAjah

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: FauxMulder
a reply to: DBCowboy

Holy sh##! Is all i can say.

Trumps red line was a little more serious.

He called up the Russians, told them the plan to hit the Airfield in several hours...and kindly asked them to evacuate all personnel, planes, equipment etc. BEFORE the strike..And yes, the pentagon acknowledged it was the same as calling up Assad and giving him the advance notice.

Does that count as a strike? When you notify the enemy and ask them to move their stuff and people out of the way?

What was the target? Asphalt?

Just saying...the only planes left were the ones that were unable to fly..

This was a fake response..

Russia are an ally of the US in the fight against terrorism, which is why Russia and the US are in Syria.

Russia is an Ally of the enemy we targeted and they are in Syria to assist that enemy we targeted. Fighting ISIS just happens to be on their to do list their to keep Assad in power while he gasses his own people.

That is just factual reality.

It is agreed upon to warn each other of such things. The goal was not to kill anyone. It was to send a message.

Correct..was symbolic and for show. The message was for domestic political posturing. A strike where you inform the target well in advance of the strike so that they can move all valuable equipment and the personnel involved in gassing children is not a strike.

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: Dr UAE

originally posted by: allsee4eye
4 Syrian children killed in Trump attack last night

www.telegraph.co.uk...

why are 4 children in an airbase, im just confused

Day care?
Take your daughter to work day?

what day care? the strike took place hours before sunrise

a reply to: Indigo5

How did kids end up in that equation?

you tell me, i was the one asking the question, they are claiming that 4 children died in the strike

originally posted by: Martin75
a reply to: Spiramirabilis
Well if you read my posts through this thread, I have struggled with this.
When I woke up, I was pissed. I didn't want Syria bombed because I felt Trump was being sucked in by propaganda. But after reading it seems he realizes that there is a good chance that the chemicals came from rebels or Assad.

"Struggled with this"...LOL

Yes..He could shoot someone on 5th avenue and not lose any supporters..

Bombing folks is that when you are POTUS.

Of course you will cheerlead this...He could drop a bomb on Canada and you would "struggle with it" for about 3 milliseconds before explaining how it is the right thing to do.

a reply to: Martin75

That's simple. As soon as they received the phone call they sent the children there to die.

Are you being serious? I'm asking seriously.

When that phone call comes through it means attack is imminent and you have minutes to evacuate. Not time to pick up the kids and rush out to a military airbase for dramatic effect.

No civilians or children were killed on the airbase by the way, they were deaths from missiles missing their targets and hitting villages.

But RAH RAH RAH. WE GOT THE BAD GUYS!!!

Wait, we don't know who the bad guys are...OH, wait again!!! We have US intel to tell us. Because they are NEVER wrong.

SMH...

originally posted by: Dr UAE
a reply to: Indigo5

How did kids end up in that equation?

you tell me, i was the one asking the question, they are claiming that 4 children died in the strike

I will have to research when work slows down today...But obvious answers are it's propaganda, or Assad planted some kids there having advance notice of the attacks for propaganda purposes, or some bizzare mistake where kids showed up to play after the evacuation.