It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
I'm appalled at what he just did and will be joining the protesters now, but I still think we made the best choice we could have... given the choices.
originally posted by: shooterbrody
Wow one would think there would be protests against the use of chemical weapons?
originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Gryphon66
It was the man himself
Were you one of those disgruntled Trump U students?
Did you get bad Trump steaks?
Bad hangover from the Trump wine?
originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Gryphon66
No
just looking for a little insight as to your hatred
originally posted by: Dark Ghost
a reply to: jellyrev
This is not a Left vs. Right issue any longer. I appreciate and respect your opinion, but referencing Obama's failures will not help the problem that we face right now. Remember how you were trying to avoid World War 3 by voting against Hilary? Guess what, Trump is leading you to the same destination.
originally posted by: mobiusmale
Russia is not going to get involved in a direct military conflict with the United States, simply because the U.S. sent a strong message to Syria that it is no longer going to sit idly by and watch its Dictator use Sarin Gas weapons against sleeping civilians.
Why?
Because Syria is not important enough to Putin, to risk his own life and the destruction of his Country.
What it will do is alter Putin's calculus as it relates to other geopolitical moves he has in mind (in the Middle East, Iran, Ukraine and elsewhere)...because he now knows he cannot take what he wants with total impunity. He now knows that this U.S. Administration will act.
I am sure that this incident had a similar effect in the discussions that Trump had with Xi over the last few days. The Chinese understand that they need to reign in the North Koreans - because otherwise Trump will (and no, the Chinese will not risk annihilation over Little Kimmy either).
So...take a deep breath. It's not time to panic.
originally posted by: TruMcCarthy
originally posted by: Bone75
I'm appalled at what he just did and will be joining the protesters now, but I still think we made the best choice we could have... given the choices.
What was so appalling about destroying an airbase that launched a deadly chemical attack on innocent men, women, and children? I can understand disagreeing with the action, but to be so appalled that you will go out and protest? I just don't get it.
TextThe United States may take unilateral action in Syria if the United Nations fails to respond to a suspected chemical attack in Syria which is feared to have killed dozens of civilians, including children, the country's UN ambassador has warned. The warning came as the UN Security council held an emergency meeting about the atrocity, after Washington, Paris and London drew up a draft statement condemning the attack and demanding an investigation. "When the United Nations consistently fails in its duty to act collectively, there are times in the life of states that we are compelled to take our own action," Nikki Haley, the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, told the meeting. Earlier Russia has threatened to veto any resolution by the UN security council on a claiming it is based on "false information."
Unilateralism is any doctrine or agenda that supports one-sided action. Such action may be in disregard for other parties, or as an expression of a commitment toward a direction which other parties may find agreeable. Unilateralism is a neologism which is already in common use; it was coined to be an antonym for multilateralism, which is the doctrine which asserts the benefits of participation from as many parties as possible.
Critics of American unilateralism point to the ethical implications of engaging in armed conflicts that may inevitably draw in combatants from other nations, as well as the undermining of the international ability to protect small nations from aggressors. Unilateralism, it is argued, can be considered nothing more than a positively sold version of the very actions that would earn other states the title of aggressor or rogue nation. Opponents of unilateralism say it rejects the essential interwoven nature of modern global politics