Zombie Did we just drop bombs on Syria?

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
The Professional Fan said:
Thanks for the history lesson. Care to comment on current events?
Click to expand...

Rasta's heroes are all saying this was a good move. CNN is raving about how bold and good a move it is. Rasta's boys McCain and Graham applaud it.

Our allies are all for it. China, Iran, and Russia (and obviously Syria) are the only countries not saying it was the right and proportionate response by Trump.

My preference would be we try to win any war we take part in, as quickly and decisively as possible. But stay out of conflicts in the first place, especially those that are none of our business.
 
Last edited:
US air strikes in Syria: Russia suspends agreement preventing direct conflict with American forces

Russia has said it is suspending a deal with the US to prevent mid-air collisions over Syria in response to US air strikes on a Syrian air base.

The Russian Foreign Ministry said following Donald Trump's decision to fire 59 cruise missiles at a military target in Syria on Thursday, Moscow was suspending a memorandum with the US that prevented incidents and ensured flight safety.

Under the memorandum, signed after Russia launched an air campaign in Syria in September 2015, Russia and the US had exchanged information about their flights to avoid incidents in the crowded skies over Syria — where Russia has several dozen warplanes and batteries of air-defence missiles.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...ict-military-donald-trump-putin-a7671631.html
 
Nikolokolus said:
I had all kinds of problems with Obama's cowardly "drone war" because I thought it was a futile strategy, with too much collateral damage and no clear strategic objective, but are you implying some kind of cause and effect between the situation in Syria and Clinton being Sec. State and Obama launching drones in lots of places that didn't necessarily include Syria (although some of them certainly did)? Seems like the Arab Spring and the Shia crackdown on Sunnis in Iraq might be a more likely culprit no?
Click to expand...

I'm quite sure it was Obama/Clinton foreign policy that caused it all. The Shia crackdown on the Sunnis in Iraq was done with Obama's approval - at least that's the signal he sent to Al Maliki. In fact, Obama himself in several public appearances/speeches at the time the crackdown was ongoing, praised Al Maliki and his leadership.

WTF were we doing in Libya?
 
Rastapopoulos said:
Quick! Bomb Syria again!
Click to expand...


http://www.kiplinger.com/article/bu...less-claims-fall-to-234-000-april-6-2017.html

Weekly Jobless Claims Fall to 234,000 on April 6, 2017
First-time applications for unemployment insurance declined once again to remain at generational lows.

The number of first-time filers for unemployment benefits remains at multi-decade lows, the Department of Labor said Thursday. The number of newly unemployed workers for the week ended April 1 came to 234,000, a decrease of 25,000 from the previous week's revised level of 259,000. The four-week moving average was 250,000, a decrease of 4,500 from the previous week's revised average. Weekly initial jobless claims are tracking at levels last seen in 1973, according to the Federal Reserve.
 
dviss1 said:
All the shit Drumpf wants to cut...

We can't afford meals-on-wheels but we can afford $500,000 per missile, to strike a target that was pre informed about the strike? So we effectively wasted 59 tomahawk missiles?

View attachment 13548
We don't have money for health care or for tuition-free college but we always have money for War... This motherfucker is doing worse shit than you lambasted Obama about... Drumpf supporters guys are full of shit.

And I'm really disappointed in you @Denny Crane. How you can support this piece of crap after this shit is amazing. Maybe it's true. Libertarians are just Republicans that want to smoke weed have legal prostitution...
Click to expand...

There's a difference between supporting the man and wanting the other candidate to lose. By your logic, you support Trump because you didn't support Clinton.

I'm interested in the Truth, not in partisan witch hunts. A lot of what Trump says doesn't stand up to scrutiny, which is just how it is.

When people post things that make claims, I look at whether there is reasonable support for those claims. If not, I'll post such and why.

Think about it.
 
SlyPokerDog said:
US air strikes in Syria: Russia suspends agreement preventing direct conflict with American forces

Russia has said it is suspending a deal with the US to prevent mid-air collisions over Syria in response to US air strikes on a Syrian air base.

The Russian Foreign Ministry said following Donald Trump's decision to fire 59 cruise missiles at a military target in Syria on Thursday, Moscow was suspending a memorandum with the US that prevented incidents and ensured flight safety.

Under the memorandum, signed after Russia launched an air campaign in Syria in September 2015, Russia and the US had exchanged information about their flights to avoid incidents in the crowded skies over Syria — where Russia has several dozen warplanes and batteries of air-defence missiles.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...ict-military-donald-trump-putin-a7671631.html
Click to expand...

I am not worried about our planes going up against the Russian built planes, we have the advantage.

However, I am VERY CONCERNED about our planes going up against the Russian built air defense systems, which are 2-3 generations ahead of our systems.

Short version, the Russian built air defense systems can take down anything we can put up. From cruise missiles, satellites and some experts believe even our high tech stealth planes are now at risk.

The Russian air defense missiles can cover approx 10 times or more area than ours can, and with a very high accuracy rate. And they are working on the next generation soon to be released.

While we have been building better and more expensive planes, the Russians have been building better and less expensive ways to knock them down.


The most advanced Russian air defense systems are now in Syria. Why?
 
Last edited:
Denny Crane said:
I'm quite sure it was Obama/Clinton foreign policy that caused it all. The Shia crackdown on the Sunnis in Iraq was done with Obama's approval - at least that's the signal he sent to Al Maliki. In fact, Obama himself in several public appearances/speeches at the time the crackdown was ongoing, praised Al Maliki and his leadership.

WTF were we doing in Libya?
Click to expand...
The sectarian violence started in 2006. So perhaps Obama could have done more to encourage Al-Maliki to quell the recriminations, but that djinni was already out of the bottle. Short of a massive troop buildup to play policeman, I've yet to hear a convincing argument for how they could have realistically halted the civil war.

As for Libya, I'm not sure what our strategic objective was, but it's also not pertinent to the discussion about Syria (except that it was tangentially related because of the Arab Spring).
 
Hey! Denny's back! The guy who thought Trump would be great because he would keep us out of wars and who told us that Clinton would start a war with Russia! So you must really HATE that Trump just did what Clinton advocated literally hours earlier, and which has been a "significant blow" to the relationship with Russia - right? You're mad at Trump now, right Denny? Because otherwise your words mean nothing, don't they?
 
Jade Falcon said:
That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. There is nothing logical about taking in millions of refugees without any plan for their long-term care, and you know it. THAT in itself is a LOGICAL answer.
Click to expand...

Once again, you appear not to know what "logic" means. Perhaps you're using the Spock definition. You mean "rational" and by that you mean "in our narrow self-interest". Do you think there's something "logical" about not taking in refugees and allowing them to suffer and die? "Hey, cheer up - you're dying logically!" you can say to them.

I love it when people act like they're just following reason and common sense when what they really mean is unconscionable selfishness.
 
Does it feel like we're missing something here to anyone else?

Assad had a pretty good thing going, Russia is on his side, the US is focused on taking out some of his enemies. Having two of the world's superpowers in your country, one helping you, the other not fucking with you, seems like the absolute best case scenario when having a large scale protracted civil war.

Then suddenly he decides to drop some chemical weapons? It's pretty much the one thing that would cause us to react. His generals work with Russian generals daily. He waits for them to leave the room and then calls for a chem drop? That doesn't make a whole hell of a lot of sense.

And then our response. We don't target Assad. We don't target any of his generals. We target the airbase where the chemical attack was launched from. We actually call the Russians and tell them where and when we're going to attack. The president himself said multiple times announcing our military plans in advance is a terrible strategy but this is exactly what we do.

Just not sure that Assad launched a chemical attack without Russia's knowledge and approval.

And that's the problem.

Why? Why now? Why provoke us into a reaction?

Seems like Russia is playing chess while we're claiming to be the world's greatest checkers players.
 
Rastapopoulos said:
Once again, you appear not to know what "logic" means. Perhaps you're using the Spock definition. You mean "rational" and by that you mean "in our narrow self-interest". Do you think there's something "logical" about not taking in refugees and allowing them to suffer and die? "Hey, cheer up - you're dying logically!" you can say to them.

I love it when people act like they're just following reason and common sense when what they really mean is unconscionable selfishness.
Click to expand...

There's nothing selfish about considering our country first. RATIONALLY speaking, we have no long term plan for refugees if they were to come here. I guarantee you that they would end up in the inner cities, or slums, with no job skills, little to no education, poor to non-existent healthcare, and no future.

We have...

-No plan for their education
-No plan for their housing
-No plan for their healthcare
-No plan for their job training
-No jobs to give them
-Overtaxed and overburdened welfare system which cannot accommodate further stress from foreign refugees

And that's just what I can think of off the top of my head.

Now, when you consider how many billions of dollars would have to go fund all of this to make it feasible, consider this: Congress can't even decide on a budget for it's own well-being without shutting the government down. What the hell do you think they're going to do about refugees with all the things I just listed (and likely countless more issues I didn't mention)?

Face it, you have an EMOTIONAL argument, not one based on Rational, Logical reasoning or thought.

And let's also assume for a minute that we take in just 2,000 of them. Why not more? Why just 2,000? And the same issues still apply that I listed above. At that point, it's just a feel-good measure to pat ourselves on the back with. We've made no substantial contribution to the refugee crisis when there are millions still out there.

There's nothing selfish about that. It's perfectly acceptable, and it's a must if we want to do it correctly. Which we never do, and won't.
 
SlyPokerDog said:
And then our response. We don't target Assad. We don't target any of his generals. We target the airbase where the chemical attack was launched from. We actually call the Russians and tell them where and when we're going to attack. The president himself said multiple times announcing our military plans in advance is a terrible strategy but this is exactly what we do.
Click to expand...


 
Jade Falcon said:
There's nothing selfish about considering our country first.
Click to expand...
Actually that's what selfishness is. But it's nothing new for the US, as I am reminded when I hear that this year is the centennial of the US entering WWI, when of course WWI actually started in 1914.
 
So. How much did those 59 missiles that didn't actually do anything actually cost?
 
Rastapopoulos said:

Click to expand...


Look, I get why we told the Russians. We can't be launching shit with a chance that we could kill them. But why didn't we say we're going to attack 30 targets and send Syria into a mad scramble to clear them all and then just attack the airbase? From what I've read we only told Russia that we were going to attack the airbase.
 
donald-trump-vladimir-putin-complicated-benefits-17340255.png
 
Rastapopoulos said:

Click to expand...


Kinda hard to use an airplane when your airbase is in ruins.

Rastapopoulos said:
Actually that's what selfishness is. But it's nothing new for the US, as I am reminded when I hear that this year is the centennial of the US entering WWI, when of course WWI actually started in 1914.
Click to expand...

Bullshit. Selfishness is a child not wanting to share a cookie with the other kids. In this case, we have nothing to offer them, because we have no plans for their long-term well-being.

That's not being selfish, that's being rational. If you think putting them in housing projects is not only reasonable, but appropriate for our own citizens already living there, then I don't know what to tell you. And that's exactly where they would end up.
 
Jade Falcon said:
Bullshit. Selfishness is a child not wanting to share a cookie with the other kids. In this case, we have nothing to offer them, because we have no plans for their long-term well-being.

That's not being selfish, that's being rational. If you think putting them in housing projects is not only reasonable, but appropriate for our own citizens already living there, then I don't know what to tell you. And that's exactly where they would end up.
Click to expand...
I think you have been snorting too much.
 
Sedatedfork said:
I think you have been snorting too much.
Click to expand...

I see. So insults. That's what you've resorted to instead of a rational argument about how we are realistically supposed to bring in thousands of refugees and care for them.

I guess that means I've won this argument.
 
Jade Falcon said:
I see. So insults. That's what you've resorted to instead of a rational argument about how we are reaslistically supposed to bring in thousands of refugees and care for them.

I guess that means I've won this argument.
Click to expand...
Snort. You say it in about every 10th post.
 
oldfisherman said:
I am not worried about our planes going up against the Russian built planes, we have the advantage.

However, I am VERY CONCERNED about our planes going up against the Russian built air defense systems, which are 2-3 generations ahead of our systems.

Short version, the Russian built air defense systems can take down anything we can put up. From cruise missiles, satellites and some experts believe even our high tech stealth planes are now at risk.

The Russian air defense missiles can cover approx 10 times or more area than ours can, and with a very high accuracy rate. And they are working on the next generation soon to be released.

While we have been building better and more expensive planes, the Russians have been building better and less expensive ways to knock them down.


The most advanced Russian air defense systems are now in Syria. Why?
Click to expand...

And that air defense system just got 59 real world pieces of data on how to track our cruise missiles.

Valuable information to have if you were thinking about attacking somewhere else like... the Ukraine?
 
Jade Falcon said:
Bullshit. Selfishness is a child not wanting to share a cookie with the other kids. In this case, we have nothing to offer them, because we have no plans for their long-term well-being.
Click to expand...

SO MAKE SOME FUCKING PLANS. You think any of those other countries that are taking them in (Turkey, for example, has taken in literally MILLIONS) have great plans? This is just like when the US turned away Jews fleeing the holocaust.

Refugees: "Help us! We're dying!"
US: "Sorry, this is a lifeboat and it's ours. Find your own lifeboat"
Refugees: "Lifeboat? This is a massive luxury ocean liner and you're using about 1/10th of the cabins!"
US: "You say potato, we say potato. Now fuck off back where you came from. Now you've dissed us we might bomb you, too."
 
Nikolokolus said:
The sectarian violence started in 2006. So perhaps Obama could have done more to encourage Al-Maliki to quell the recriminations, but that djinni was already out of the bottle. Short of a massive troop buildup to play policeman, I've yet to hear a convincing argument for how they could have realistically halted the civil war.

As for Libya, I'm not sure what our strategic objective was, but it's also not pertinent to the discussion about Syria (except that it was tangentially related because of the Arab Spring).
Click to expand...

We weren't bombing Iraq or Syria or Pakistan in Jan. 2009.

Libya is significant because the president, urged by the Secy of State, interfered in the civil war of a nation we had zero national interest in, caused a regime change, and generally destroyed that nation. Syria followed that same logic.

The Sunni crackdown after 2009 is the only one related to our actions in Syria. Iraq was at peace by then, the Sunni were our allies and there was no longer any sectarian violence going on. There was no ISIS, Al Qaeda in Iraq was almost entirely eliminated.


https://www.theatlantic.com/interna...mas-disastrous-iraq-policy-an-autopsy/373225/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...46fd632f9f1_story.html?utm_term=.c06bb6ac2096
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/04/obama-iraq-116708

And many more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Featured content

Back
Top