US launches Tomahawks on Syrian airbases

a reply to: ClydeBuilt

I am not sure what I said, long thread. This is the fault of our congress. They have given their war powers over to the presidency. If wars were debated, planned, and paid for, we would all be home defending the homeland. And, in case you haven't noticed, the republicans party LOVES war or skirmishes. And Trump needed to look good. Really, you can blame us all because we put the war hawks in power. Sorry.

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: Indigo5

Assad would have los Russian support as well if he gassed anyone anywhere. The Russians even stated recently that their support was not unconditional.

I think you think too much of Putin.

You mean the guy that kills people that have a serious chance to oppose him? The guy that literally re-wrote Russian law to keep himself and Medvedev in power until they die?

Nono my friend. You are mistaken.

Breaking news: www.bbc.co.uk...

"Russia promises to strengthen Syrian air defences following US missiles"

We now have an openly accepted proxy war between the two countries. Furthermore, Russia has suspended the air safety deal with the US. Expect a Russian plane to 'accidentally' shoot down a US aircraft soon.

a reply to: Vector99

Since last night, and especially in this thread, you could have fooled us.

RAH RAH

a reply to: eriktheawful

Could you honestly expect real news from any US source? They are still claiming sarin.

DP

originally posted by: IAMTAT
Fox reporting one of the 2 US warships has left the area in order to rearm with more cruise missiles.

that Is MSM news...
I think that the cruise missiles would be delivered to that USA battleship...

the real reason for the ship to scurry away was to get-out-of-the-crosshairs of the Russian hypersonic Anti-Ship Missiles that will surely be coming to the Syrian theater

a reply to: Vector99

Nah, I'm referring to the weapons systems.

You have certainly made yourself very clear in this thread: Go Russia!

It's okay. Everyone should have a hobby and a favorite team to cheer on. Yours is just very obvious is all.

originally posted by: DazDaKing
Breaking news: www.bbc.co.uk...

"Russia promises to strengthen Syrian air defences following US missiles"

We now have an openly accepted proxy war between the two countries. Furthermore, Russia has suspended the air safety deal with the US. Expect a Russian plane to 'accidentally' shoot down a US aircraft soon.

Wasn't this the plan all along. As in all things, follow the money...who profits?

War is a Business and business is picking up....

They don't care about the dead babies...it business as usual.

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

Yeah don't presume to know what I speak out of, you'd be wrong.

Not a lot of presumption on my part. Your responses reek of fear, regardless of what that fear is telling you.

I speak out of maintaining measured , well thought out responses , over knee jerk reactions and bravado

Knee-jerk would have been leaving a crater we could later convert to "Trump Syrian Resort Lake."

What Trump did was take out an air base used to deploy chemical weapons, in the middle of the night, with advance warning to other countries in the area, using extreme prejudice to deliver a clear message.

Maybe he should have sent Assad a mean tweet instead?

TheRedneck

a reply to: St Udio

The ship has to port to restock cruise missiles. They are kinda big and heavy and in large quantities.

a reply to: St Udio

Pssst.

US Navy no longer has any active battleships.

a reply to: Vector99

I am disgusted that I would have to fund a mentality like yours without choice.

Been funding yours for how long now? Time about is fair play.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: eriktheawful
a reply to: Vector99

Nah, I'm referring to the weapons systems.

You have certainly made yourself very clear in this thread: Go Russia!

It's okay. Everyone should have a hobby and a favorite team to cheer on. Yours is just very obvious is all.

No, I've been saying don't discredit Russian capabilities.

Many here have said they couldn't hit us...stealth, they wouldn't hit us..war

I've simply been providing a realistic view of this.

Do you think Russians shoot bottle rockets for air defense? Russia has always been ahead of us on missile tech and air defense tech. They just now said they will no longer acknowledge the safe airspace memorandum in Syria.

How am I rah rah Russia? I'm only pointing out the obvious.

Regardless of who is responsible for the gas attack,
How do you fight it?

How many people have to die, as it spreads into Europe and America, personally I am terrified of the chemical weapons being used,

How many innocent women and children have been murdered in the middle east?

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Vector99

I am disgusted that I would have to fund a mentality like yours without choice.

Been funding yours for how long now? Time about is fair play.

TheRedneck

You don't fund me in any way lol. I pay a lot in taxes.

a reply to: Vector99

That 'purty' paper was keeping missiles from launching at US jets.

That's some seriously strong paper, to stop a missile launch.

The promise was keeping the missiles from launching. And it worked both ways. We gots us some mean missile-thingy's too, y'know.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

Not in Syria we don't.

Offshore we do, but in Syria? No we don't.

Russia does.

That's why I say it's a big deal.

a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

Not so long ago the concepts of 'good terrorists' and 'bad terrorist' were still handy to justify US policy in the area.

That's a big problem, too.

If someone intentionally kills a bunch of innocent people, they need to have the favor returned. If there were women and kids involved in that target, they need to have the favor returned times ten.

Simple. No re-writing dictionaries required.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: AnkhMorpork

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Shepard Smith reporting that Trump wants to build a coalition to fight Syria.

The end game in this involves something that Trump has talked about - safe zones in Syria (ground and air both), amid the obliteration of ISIS in Syria, for the eventual return of the refugees and the long path of reconstruction (using oil reserves..?).

It cannot have taken place without tacit Russian consent and Iranian restraint via Russia.

Therefore they have to be careful not to kill Russians in the process, and to begin to collaborate in the establishment of these safe zones.

This Is the first stage in a softening up of the territory for a limited invasion or incursion by US troops to establish those zones after ISIS falls in Raqqa and elsewhere.

This goes way beyond McCain's version of continuing to arm Syrian rebel forces and who knows who and to where those go..

This is the right and only way forward, but Tillerson better get to Russia and via Russia, Iran ASAP to prevent blowback and some sort of tailspin into ME chaos.

This in my view, is like the center of a knot of interweaving threads, or like the center piece of a global security puzzle that must be solved and that must also lead to a mid-East peace agreement in Israel and Palestine.

As to North Korea there is no military option in that case, only a deal brokered by China, which will see Kim Jung Un lose his nukes in exchange for the lifting of sanctions and the opportunity to join the International community, so strangely trade is also at the heart of it all including the lifting of sanctions on Russia.

It's all interconnected and it will lead to either peace, and security, and global prosperity, or to an ever-widening sphere of chaos and war (for the doom porn people).

I see this as also sending a message to North Korea, to put more pressure on there, but it can't be any more than a bluff because of what that fat bastard can unleash both conventionally and nuke-wise if he felt he was under threat (of his life) or cornered and susceptible to a revolution or overthrow - the North Koreans are starving and really hurting economically after years of sanctions.

This is not an isolated limited strike by any means, but part of a larger puzzle or tapestry.

That's my best analysis of the current situation.

Best regards, and with prayers for peace, security and a lasting mutual prosperity and global ..love,

Ankh

I think I may have been mistaken.

It looks like this was a false flag and that Trump bought it, and can't really have gone down the path of arguing on the side of Assad, that he didn't do it (it would be an absurd thing to do if he did), and further, if a war were launched against the Syrian regime, it could very easily spin out of control and even lead to WWIII.

I think this was probably a CIA orchestrated false flag and that Trump has placed collaborative efforts to fight ISIS with Russia in jeopardy.

Russia is now bolstering air defenses in Syria, perhaps due in part to Hillary Clinton's comments a few days ago.

Thus, the ability to create safe zones for the eventual return of refugees has probably been set back with this action.

To see through these things, all one needs to do is to watch the way that CNN spins and plays it.

I wish they (deep state) would stop playing these kinds of heinous games with the world. It's bad business.