BigRedBuster Posted April 7, 2017 Author Share Posted April 7, 2017 The man is completely incoherent in foreign policy and constantly contradicts things he says. Link to comment
Danny Bateman Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 Welp, whomever had Syria in the Trump Wars betting pool just paid out. Funny, I thought it would be North Korea. Link to comment
GM_Tood Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 What would be the best thing to do, Tood? I think airstrikes against military targets, including airfields and planes. I don't see any other option that does not involve military action. We can't sit back and let Russia dictate the world's role in this region/Syria. If not for the use of Chemical weapons, then I think it would have been same ol same ol for our involvement in Syria. Kinda sad imo. Do I win a cookie? Link to comment
knapplc Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 Trump launches military strike against Syria The United States launched a military strike Thursday on a Syrian government target in retaliation for their chemical weapons attack on civilians earlier in the week. On President Donald Trump's orders, US warships launched between 50-60 Tomahawk cruise missiles at a Syrian government airbase where the warplanes that carried out the chemical attacks were based, US officials said. "Tonight, I ordered a targeted military strike on the air field in Syria from where the chemical attack was launched," Trump said during short remarks to reporters at Mar-a-Lago. "It is in this vital national security of the United States to prevent and deter the spread and use of deadly chemical weapons." He added: "There can be no dispute that Syria used banned chemical weapons, violated its obligations under the Chemical Weapons Convention and ignored the urging of the UN Security Council. Years of previous attempts at changing Assad's behavior have all failed and failed very dramatically." There were Russians at the base that the US struck Thursday night, a US defense official said. It was not said what the Russians' role was at the base. In addition, according to the official, the US had multiple conversations with the Russians today to warn them of the coming attack. Separately, in an effort to tie the US strike to the chemical attack, the US military showed reporters an image of the radar track of a Syrian airplane leaving the airfield and headed to chemical strike area on Tuesday. A second image of bomb damage craters at the airbase was also shown to reporters at the Pentagon. Lawmakers generally supported Trump's decision to strike back against Assad Thursday night, but cautioned the President against unilaterally starting a war without first consulting Congress. Elections have consequences. This is the guy you voted for, people. Link to comment
zoogs Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 Turns out we were all Syria hawks all along. At least the Trump supporters can drop their pretense. I'm not sure striking Syrian airfields is the wrong move. Now that Trump has hinged his Syria policy on the defense of their innocent children and babies, I wonder what his stance -- and those of his supporters -- on Syrian refugees will be. 3 Link to comment
knapplc Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 If I was the guy who professed neutrality in his campaign against hypocrisy, I would be all over those Trump tweets like white on rice. Can't wait for the diatribe on this. Link to comment
knapplc Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 Now that Trump has hinged his Syria policy on the defense of their innocent children and babies, I wonder what his stance -- and those of his supporters -- on Syrian refugees will be. Good thing that travel ban didn't get enacted, huh? Link to comment
Making Chimichangas Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 Militarily, we're still in Iraq and Afghanistan, we just bombed Syria, with North Korea on the radar. I know we spend more annually on defense than the next 10 nations combined, but we cannot fight wars on 4 different fronts. And that's assuming that neither China or Russia decide to intervene. Link to comment
Danny Bateman Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 Turns out we were all Syria hawks all along. At least the Trump supporters can drop their pretense. I'm not sure striking Syrian airfields is the wrong move. Now that Trump has hinged his Syria policy on the defense of their innocent children and babies, I wonder what his stance -- and those of his supporters -- on Syrian refugees will be. 1 Link to comment
Atbone95 Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 Here is what is wrong with American politics. The amount of people I have seen on social media (or here) that are getting more glee out of citing 4+ year old DJT tweets advising against Syrian involvement and enjoy "being right" is ludicrous. The same people who seemingly don't want to look at the pictures of dead children in the streets of Syria. Who haven't seen the videos of children gasping for breath as the sufficate. This is what Obama wanted too - can we at least agree that that is true? We'd rather gloat over 5 year old tweets than try to constructively rationalize a national security/humanitarian efforts decision. Zero patience for people like that. This, along with the nuclear invoke today (Surprise, I can criticize both sides of the aisle) is exactly why American politics will implode and collapse before I die (next 60-70 years?), and we are screwed when that happens. 4 Link to comment
zoogs Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 How do you feel about Syrian refugees, At one? 1 Link to comment
Moiraine Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 Here is what is wrong with American politics. The amount of people I have seen on social media (or here) that are getting more glee out of citing 4+ year old DJT tweets advising against Syrian involvement and enjoy "being right" is ludicrous. The same people who seemingly don't want to look at the pictures of dead children in the streets of Syria. Who haven't seen the videos of children gasping for breath as the sufficate. This is what Obama wanted too - can we at least agree that that is true? We'd rather gloat over 5 year old tweets than try to constructively rationalize a national security/humanitarian efforts decision. Zero patience for people like that. This, along with the nuclear invoke today (Surprise, I can criticize both sides of the aisle) is exactly why American politics will implode and collapse before I die (next 60-70 years?), and we are screwed when that happens. I agree with your general sentiment but it's interesting that people showing his hypocrisy upset you (Assad has been killing scores of civilians for years now so it's relevant that Trump did a sudden 180) but you have no comment on Republicans telling Obama they would vote no on a strike on Syria's airfields. That's worse, and it's done by Congress. Not FB friends. Link to comment
Recommended Posts