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

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

  • Total voters
    0
  • Poll closed .
#78
#78
midnight orange said:
A plane could have hit a chemical weapons munition or it could have been a opportune time for the rebels to release the chemical weapons. Assad knows he's on the radar for this and what the repercussions would be. He would have to be very stupid to do this.
Click to expand...

Could have but didn't. It's been widely reported and photographed where this chemical bomb hit which was in the middle of the road.

Here's extra credit. Anybody know that Assad was dropping barrel bombs on citizens in the dark of night?
 
#79
#79
Does anyone find it odd that while his administration is embroiled in a controversy with Russia that Trump gave the go ahead to attack an airbase that housed Russian soldiers?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#80
#80
Unsure yet.

Part of me supports it because I'm hoping it can bring others to their senses. What happens in the aftermath is far more important than the strike itself.

Part of me disagrees with it because I think we have no business in Syria.

However, we are involved and it was likely to happen eventually anyway. But, still unsure if we should widen our involvement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#81
#81
Last night I thought I was in the minority opinion on this issue. Many more do not agree or arent sure than I realized.
 
#82
#82
ClearwaterVol said:
Does anyone find it odd that while his administration is embroiled in a controversy with Russia that Trump gave the go ahead to attack an airbase that housed Russian soldiers?
Click to expand...

No. That controversy is contrived fairy-tale stuff. It was losing steam irregardless (for you LG).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#83
#83
ClearwaterVol said:
Does anyone find it odd that while his administration is embroiled in a controversy with Russia that Trump gave the go ahead to attack an airbase that housed Russian soldiers?
Click to expand...

The conspiracy theory nuts are already going bonkers over the fact the Russians were warned to leave the base.
 
#86
#86
Grand Vol said:
Unsure yet.

Part of me supports it because I'm hoping it can bring others to their senses. What happens in the aftermath is far more important than the strike itself.

Part of me disagrees with it because I think we have no business in Syria.

However, we are involved and it was likely to happen eventually anyway. But, still unsure if we should widen our involvement.
Click to expand...

Your 1st paragraph is the hope. It seems the only language which gets the attention of people in that region is force and violence.
 
#87
#87
Grand Vol said:
Aren't you just happy now knowing others like you?
Click to expand...

Yes. It restores my faith that others are intelligent, wise, logical, and scholarly. Not as much as me naturally but that is an unreachable standard for 99.99%.
 
#88
#88
McDad said:
Yes. It restores my faith that others are intelligent, wise, logical, and scholarly. Not as much as me naturally but that is an unreachable standard for 99.99%.
Click to expand...

Way to go, oh wise 00.01%er.
 
#89
#89
Here's what I don't understand.

Back in 2013 Trump sent these tweets.

"Again, to our very foolish leader, do not attack Syria - if you do many very bad things will happen & from that fight the U.S. gets nothing!"

"What will we get from bombing Syria besides more debt and a possible long term conflict? Obama needs Congressional approval."

"The President must get Congressional approval before attacking Syria-big mistake if he does not!"

"We should stay the hell out of Syria, the "rebels" are just as bad as the current regime. WHAT WILL WE GET FOR OUR LIVES AND $ BILLIONS?ZERO"

He's a walking contradiction and a huge hypocrite. Sorry, but I have a hard time trusting him.

The sad thing is, he was on the right side of this back in 2013 when it didn't even matter.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 6 people
#90
#90
I say no just on the grounds that it should have gone before Congress first. Albeit seems it have much support there. IMO, launching missiles at another country is an act of war - whether it's a "limited" strike or not. Certainly it would be viewed that way if those missiles were coming from the other direction.

Should that have happened and they agreed to an act of war, I'd still need to know these things before supporting it:

1) Definitive proof Assad did it
2) NATO reimburses us
 
#91
#91
McDad said:
Your 1st paragraph is the hope. It seems the only language which gets the attention of people in that region is force and violence.
Click to expand...

As I stated yesterday, this is where Trump can define himself as a world leader. What he does now is far more important than the strike itself. He's shown we have our own "red lines" and will not hesitate to strike if Assad crosses it. He isn't a paper tiger with empty rhetoric.

But this is the point where he has to show his statesman skills and leadership by promoting effective change and diplomacy in that region. It's easy to lob a bunch of cruise missiles into a target. The hard part is coming up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#92
#92
So the US told the Russians and they moved their troops..... was the only goal to destroy the runway and etc. at the airbase where the chemical attack originated?...... and to send message there's a new sheriff in town?

I'm sure the ruskies told them we were comIng
 
#94
#94
ClearwaterVol said:
Does anyone find it odd that while his administration is embroiled in a controversy with Russia that Trump gave the go ahead to attack an airbase that housed Russian soldiers?
Click to expand...

I don't find it odd. I find it as another distraction from the investigation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#95
#95
McDad said:
Last night I thought I was in the minority opinion on this issue. Many more do not agree or arent sure than I realized.
Click to expand...

Part of the reason I started the poll. I didn't think we were in the minority, or at least not by much.
 
#96
#96
Stoked said:
Here's what I don't understand.

Back in 2013 Trump sent these tweets.

"Again, to our very foolish leader, do not attack Syria - if you do many very bad things will happen & from that fight the U.S. gets nothing!"

"What will we get from bombing Syria besides more debt and a possible long term conflict? Obama needs Congressional approval."

"The President must get Congressional approval before attacking Syria-big mistake if he does not!"

He's a walking contradiction and a huge hypocrite. Sorry, but I have a hard time trusting him.
Click to expand...

I believe your lack of trust is healthy. Trump is about like every other politician, he is just more vocal about his contradictory.
 
#98
#98
Stoked said:
Here's what I don't understand.

Back in 2013 Trump sent these tweets.

"Again, to our very foolish leader, do not attack Syria - if you do many very bad things will happen & from that fight the U.S. gets nothing!"

"What will we get from bombing Syria besides more debt and a possible long term conflict? Obama needs Congressional approval."

"The President must get Congressional approval before attacking Syria-big mistake if he does not!"

He's a walking contradiction and a huge hypocrite. Sorry, but I have a hard time trusting him.
Click to expand...

So essentially you just oppose anything he does because you don't trust him.
 
#99
#99
I'm not sure what was accomplished by the attack.... it may just draw us into another drawn out quagmire.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top