U.S. Launches Millitary Strike Against Syria (merged)

Do you agree with Trump's decision to strike Syria?

  • Total voters
    0
  • Poll closed .
#453
#453
Grand Vol said:
I'm still on the fence about what happened. However, some good things to take away (for those open minded enough):

A: We used Tomahawk missiles which means we were not putting American pilot's lives directly at risk.

B: We warned Russia in advance (and yes, they told the Syrians) but avoided a direct confrontation with Russia by killing their troops. I'm sure Tillerson's meet and greet with Putin next week will be a bit chilly, but other than gripe, the Russians really don't have any ammo to toss at us.

C: The loss of life was remarkably low for that many cruise missiles being lobbed at that base (gives credence to the Russians warning Syria theory). But all in all, the death toll could have been far worse.

D: World leaders saw the US was not going to be yet another empty rhetoric Presidency. It does give our allies renewed hope knowing they won't be on their own. And also:

E: Fat Boy Kim in North Korea saw it, Iran saw it, Russia for sure saw it, other despots around the world saw the fact we didn't even give any notice (save the Russians) that we were about to do it. Very Reagan-esque way of business in my opinion. But overall, they have to be thinking "dang, Trump isn't the pushover his predecessor was." And that can have serious ramifications down the road.

I do think it was kind of funny that all this went down while Trump was at dinner with Xi. "Oh, by the way, right now we're bombing a base in Syria back to the stone age. How is your steak?"
Click to expand...

All the little dicktators on the block just got put on notice
 
#456
#456
n_huffhines said:
I'm surprised to see some of my Trump-supporting FB friends (and VN posters) turn on Trump over this. Regardless of what's right or wrong, I'm impressed...I thought he could do no wrong in people's eyes.
Click to expand...

The media wants you to think its some kind of cult
 
#461
#461
Grand Vol said:
I'm still on the fence about what happened. However, some good things to take away (for those open minded enough):

A: We used Tomahawk missiles which means we were not putting American pilot's lives directly at risk.

B: We warned Russia in advance (and yes, they told the Syrians) but avoided a direct confrontation with Russia by killing their troops. I'm sure Tillerson's meet and greet with Putin next week will be a bit chilly, but other than gripe, the Russians really don't have any ammo to toss at us.

C: The loss of life was remarkably low for that many cruise missiles being lobbed at that base (gives credence to the Russians warning Syria theory). But all in all, the death toll could have been far worse.

D: World leaders saw the US was not going to be yet another empty rhetoric Presidency. It does give our allies renewed hope knowing they won't be on their own. And also:

E: Fat Boy Kim in North Korea saw it, Iran saw it, Russia for sure saw it, other despots around the world saw the fact we didn't even give any notice (save the Russians) that we were about to do it. Very Reagan-esque way of business in my opinion. But overall, they have to be thinking "dang, Trump isn't the pushover his predecessor was." And that can have serious ramifications down the road.

I do think it was kind of funny that all this went down while Trump was at dinner with Xi. "Oh, by the way, right now we're bombing a base in Syria back to the stone age. How is your steak?"
Click to expand...

This I agree with now if only the gas price bs in the US (using this as an excuse to jack up prices)could be flamed by the press and Trump
 
#464
#464
So this is going to be harsh, and some of you may be upset with me for posting this, so I am sorry in advance if this offends you.

How is a Syrian baby killed by a poison gas bomb really any different than a Syrian baby killed by an exploding bomb?

After all, the fact that Donald apparently became so emotional after seeing photos of dead babies killed by Assad's Sarin gas attack was the *only basis* for his amazing 180-degree turnaround from years of promoting the policy of "stay the hell out of Syria" at all costs.

Look at the facts: Over 400,000 Syrians have been killed during this civil war over the past 6 years. 99% of them by "normal" weapons not considered of "mass destruction": Bombs, Bullets, Shrapnel, Knives, etc. 400K dead people... men, women, teenagers, infants, elderly. In comparison, less than 100 people died from this one gas attack, and *now* we intervene? WTH?

Yeah, I know. Sarin gas is a WMD, and is prohibited by treaties and so forth. So what? Isn't a dead, innocent baby killed still a dead, innocent baby regardless of how Assad's troops did it? Well, you say, what about the pain and suffering caused by Sarin? To that, I ask is the pain and suffering that occurs after having your arms blown off really some sort of morally-elevated condition better than gas? The end result is still the same: death.

And don't forget: We just unilaterally bombed and killed people in a sovereign (screwed-up) country without seeking UN approval. As in, we arguably violated international laws to "enforce" another agreed-upon international agreement. Syria is no "clear and present danger" or threat to us. Assad hasn't threatened to blow us up with nuclear weapons like N. Korea. Hypocritical?

Similarly, look at some of the weapons we use in our military. We haven't hesitated to drop white phosphorous incendiary bombs on others, have we? We claim that we do so for illuminary purposes, but the resulting dead bodies fried to the bone tell otherwise. In sum, WP is a banned chemical munition that our own military uses, so we - ourselves - violate the various treaties that we signed agreeing not to do so. Hypocritical?

In the grand scheme of things, our nation's inaction over the years followed by Donald's one-off bombing effectively states the following:

It's OK that you Syrians kill one another as much as you want, and frankly, we're not going to take any action to stop you from killing one another, as long as you kill one another with the weapons we approve of.

Want to bash that rebel baby in the head with a spiked-club? No problem, we're not gonna intervene. Gonna drop a 2K lb bomb on that apartment building filled with kids who will die a slow, agonizing death under tons of rubble? Knock yourself out, Assad. But if you start killing people with gas, you have crossed the lines of morality.

And that what this is really all about: Taking a "moral high ground" on the how-to's of warfare.

But in the end, that dead baby is still a dead baby. And here in the US, while the media won't air the thousands of mutilated babies killed by bombs over the past six years, the media will air intact babies killed by gas. The irony.

So, it begs the question: How is a Syrian baby killed by a poison gas bomb really any different than a Syrian baby killed by an exploding bomb?

This question is dictating our national policy, and could be the basis for dragging us into another Middle East war.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#465
#465
You can respect the right of people to wage war internally. But once a government starts using WMDs own it's own citizens, you have reached a different zip code.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#466
#466
We lobbed the ball into Syria and in all honesty its not Assads play it is Putins to decide what the future holds for Syria. I'm starting to believe that Assad will be sacrificed in order to advance US - Russia relationships.
 
#467
#467
allvol123 said:
You can respect the right of people to wage war internally. But once a government starts using WMDs own it's own citizens, you have reached a different zip code.
Click to expand...

WMDs? Hmmm...

470,000 people killed by bullets, bombs, shrapnel, etc.
100 people killed by sarin gas

Which method of killing represents "mass destruction"?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#470
#470
Also, according to the NYT and the Washington Post, if you're against the air strikes, then you're a white supremacist and sexist.
 
#472
#472
Seems like we are in this endless cycle in the ME. We act, feel good about ourselves, then find ourselves full of regret about a year later. That lasts for about ten years, then we do it again.

Rinse. Repeat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#473
#473
This strike is interesting because it doesn't fit the narrative that each side wants to construct about Trump.

Trump supporters believe Trump to be anti-establishment and not beholden to special interests, yet this strike is more in the mold of our conventional, establishment, interventionist, neocon foreign policy.

Trump detractors think he is beholden to Russia/Putin and wouldn't do anything to upset them, yet he carried out this strike which has angered them.
 
#474
#474
lawgator1 said:
Seems like we are in this endless cycle in the ME. We act, feel good about ourselves, then find ourselves full of regret about a year later. That lasts for about ten years, then we do it again.

Rinse. Repeat.
Click to expand...

And spend trillions in the process
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#475
#475
05_never_again said:
This strike is interesting because it doesn't fit the narrative that each side wants to construct about Trump.

Trump supporters believe Trump to be anti-establishment and not beholden to special interests, yet this strike is more in the mold of our conventional, establishment, interventionist, neocon foreign policy.

Trump detractors think he is beholden to Russia/Putin and wouldn't do anything to upset them, yet he carried out this strike which has angered them.
Click to expand...

It totally fits my narrative.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top