Syria
- Thread starter toophly1124
- Start date
Breaking news: ABC News reports US launches dozens of tomahawk missiles on Syrian air base.
Unfortunately not much makes sense anymore!!!! T-Rump just said that this was simply a message to Assad to not do this again!
My problem is that I NEVER know who or what info to trust. I think we are fed so much BS that it makes it hard to truly form an opinion! The pictures coming out of Syria of the chemical attacks are heartbreaking....IF Assad did indeed do this, then he needs his ass handed to him.....like you though, it don't make sense why he would do that!!!!
The NCAAT run was such a nice bonding topic for this board after the election. Oh well...
F'ck it...this has been long overdue, from what I understand. Good to have a POTUS with the balls to step up when no one else will.
I am glad we all agree. Moving along...
F'ck it...this has been long overdue, from what I understand. Good to have a POTUS with the balls to step up when no one else will.
I am glad we all agree. Moving along...
He's not using it now, he's been using it for years. This is nothing new. People are just paying more attention to it at the moment. As soon as Trump sends out another tweet the media will forget about Assad.
From what I've read, yes, this was a "warning" to Assad to settle down. I've also read where plans are being made to have Assad overthrown. That's where my issue lies. Trying to control other countries and throw our collective balls around never seems to work out how we want it to. Yes I'm glad Trump has a backbone to defend US but I'm still uncertain what good this is going to do in the long run. With Assad gone wouldn't ISIS just take over moreso than they are now?
ISIS videotapes burning captives alive and broadcasts to the world.
Assad just used chemical warfare on children and the media broadcasted it to the world.
I'm not sure I'm seeing much difference here.
I hate to even be this guy but allegedly he did this. Fox News is telling me he did this but I haven't seen Assad own it so who really knows!? It just doesn't make sense why he would. IF he actually did it then I agree w you.
I have a hard time believing that he wants to overthrow Assad.....the pictures that show the airstrike show it to be a very strategic strike intended to minimize casualties.....gonna be interesting to see how this plays out the next few days!! Gonna pray for our country
https://www.facebook.com/FoxNews/posts/10155286012926336:0
That's where the SOS says steps are underway to pressure Assad to step down. I agree this attack was tactical and to avoid casualties.
That's where the SOS says steps are underway to pressure Assad to step down. I agree this attack was tactical and to avoid casualties.
It's very easy to be a side-seat driver. When you're the one in charge, and you see innocent civilians -- especially little kids -- have that done to them, I would like to think it changes your perspective from when you were standing in front of the friendly confines of your supporters making a speech.
apparently seeing little kids get brutally murdered can impact one to have a change of heart!
Yeah... that just started happening.
If that really mattered to people who start wars, they would never start them. American bombs have killed just as many innocent people as "enemy fire" ever has. And, you can bet your ass that more will die this time around as well. Let's remedy war by bombing people! What could possibly go wrong?
I thought that back when he said that in 2013 there was an even worse chemical attack? Maybe that isn't correct though.
Of course it is a change of heart when Trump does it and hypocrisy when a Democrat does it.
Overall, this seems like an emotional reaction, which I'm not a huge fan of. I am not against what we did. I'm kind of scared of the way it happened though.
Of course it is a change of heart when Trump does it and hypocrisy when a Democrat does it.
Overall, this seems like an emotional reaction, which I'm not a huge fan of. I am not against what we did. I'm kind of scared of the way it happened though.
It's not just Fox News, everyone is saying it. The WHO has also said it. He's done this multiple times in the past. Remember Obama's "red line" speech? He's been using fire bombs recently instead of gas. He's never going to admit to it, not sure why you think he would.
The previous administration would NEVER have taken this action. I've been screaming for the US to bust Syria wide open since Beirut. Assad should be put on trial for crimes against humanity; he has used chemical weapons in the past and he will do it again.
Guess that Trump/Putin buddy-buddy crap is out the window now, eh?
Guess that Trump/Putin buddy-buddy crap is out the window now, eh?
Somebody finally responded to Obama's red line being crossed.
Its absolutely horrific what's happening over there. The pictures I saw won't be easily forgotten. But the sad realization is that it's not our problem is it? I know that may sound bad but I don't think we should be policing the world. YES! I wish anybody and everybody in the world who would do that to children would die a slow death and burn in hell. It sickens me. But when does trying to overthrow another country's leader ever turn out good?? I'm just legit worried about this.
I've always, always been of this opinion! The problem is, the world is so connected now and the U.S. had made so many friggin bungles in the 50s, 60s, 70s, and 80s, that situations happen now in 2017 where we almost HAVE to intervene. Which sucks.
In a perfect world, though, if we could completely isolate ourselves from other countries' issues, that would be my preference.
It's not always a matter of having to isolate ourselves.
This is one of those situations where the "we" and "us" lines get blurred. It's also a situation where what we, as individual citizens, actually contribute. And, to what extent do our contributions actually reach the problem that we're reacting to, that motivated our feeling to be involved in the first place.
It's a little bit like seeing those ASPCA commercials. As a human being with a conscience, you see suffering and you want to help. But... is the most effective solution in sending money to people you don't know every month going to change it? I've been seeing those commercials for a few decades now. I realized that I can be more directly involved, and make a much larger impact by volunteering at my local shelter and experiencing direct results.
It may not be our problem, but do we have a moral obligation to help those in need if we have the ability? I guess that would depend on your personal beliefs. I'm not 100% caught up on the story, but if all we are doing is bombing his military bases to cripple his ability to do these things I don't have much of a problem with it. I'm not a big fan of trying to get rid of him by sending in a lot of troops, because I don't think we need to be involved in that way. I think the best thing to do at this point is to try to get Russia to stop propping him up. Without Russia's support he can't win.
Firing missiles and dropping bombs equals collateral damage of dead innocent people. When governments are involved, they have a different prize/reward in mind and they use the killing of innocent people to gain the favor of other people whose consent allows them to get that prize. The unintended consequences are never mentioned because it would greatly affect the consent process.
From what I understand the missiles are targeting his military bases. I wouldn't think a lot of civilians would be there.
it just started happening when he is Pres. of the United States and can actually do something about it!!! And he really didn't bomb people...he bombed an airbase that he gave notice to ahead of time. I know you hate him but I don't see how you have a problem with this course of action.....he is defending the ones that can't defend themselves....he bombed an airbase to temporarily prevent the Syrians from making more bombing runs....Yeah... that just started happening.
If that really mattered to people who start wars, they would never start them. American bombs have killed just as many innocent people as "enemy fire" ever has. And, you can bet your ass that more will die this time around as well. Let's remedy war by bombing people! What could possibly go wrong?
Serious question. Are you all for having open boarders and allowing any and all refugees here? I'm torn on the issue. I think there's a very thin line from what we can do and what we should do. Again I agree that the attack last night was sent as a warning to Assad and not to kill civilians. But there's talks about plans being put in place to overthrow Assad and that's where my issues lay.
From what we're told, it's always going to be what typically encourages our consent. I wouldn't believe them if they told me water was wet. I've reached that conclusion from an awareness of knowing that they will lie to me. But, I'm also aware how partisan politics is a popular pastime in our society. So, believe whatever you want.
Last edited:
Not only no, but HELL no.
Any aid we give to foreign countries, be it military or economic, should be administered over there, not here on our own soil.
Sooo... when he ran his mouth tweeting the opposite, he was FOS. Now, he's doing the right thing because he's president.
Left=bad
Right=good
Circumstances are irrelevant. SSDD
I'm not about the US being in the regime change business. Kudos to Trump and our military for their well thought out and surgical strike on Assad's air base. Maybe Assad will get the message about chemical weapons, Obama didn't have the balls to do it. I hope Trump will do as he said he'd like to do and set up "safe zones" over there for the innocent people affected. I don't want them here. We don't do a good job of looking after our own Vets or homeless.
The "news" is reporting humanitarian groups have said no civilians suffered casualties. However, if they gave the Russians advance notice I can almost guarantee no planes where destroyed. If there were Russian troops or support personnel on the ground at the base they were all evacuated beforehand as well.
Trying to cure war with more war just seems, in a word, stupid, to me.
I have absolutely no doubt that something bigger, and much more important, is at stake here. Otherwise, they wouldn't bother with it. Innocent poor people dying hasn't been a big concern for people in power in any society thus far. I don't expect that has suddenly changed.
Would you just sit back and let Assad continue to bomb women and children with chemical weapons or at least try to slow him down? I am just curious as to what you believe should be done.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
THI Podcast: The Football Show | Observations 2 Months into Belichick Era- Latest: ticket2ride04
-
