Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
ClearedHot

Syria strikes underway

Recommended Posts

It just doesn't add up. We announce we are leaving Syria, which is exactly what Assad wants, so he gasses a bunch of women and kids in a town that was already surrounded?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Jaded said:

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!

 

524CFE4C-1748-4239-B89B-987281C97C18.png

  • Like 1
  • Haha 4
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And how much trouble did Obama get in for doing the same?!? :moon:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I’m some warmongering traitor to my oath, but I have zero issues when we do strikes like this given the circumstances.

Bracing for thread implosion in 3, 2, 1...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Napoleon_Tanerite said:

One of these days we as a country will learn what "not our fight" means.

I believe that the use of WMD crosses a significant and serious line.  While I agree that we jump into too many fights, this is one I believe we should stand up for, and I am willing, as an American citizen, to accept the consequences.  

Additionally, it has the tertiary advantage of putting notice to the rest of the world that, despite the Obama administration's hollow threats of a red line, the current administration isn't going to be bullied by the Russians or anyone else.  The more the Russians scream and shout, the more satisfied I am.  Hell, if they wanted to influence the election, I'm sure they would have supported Hillary, and kept the status quo of American inaction towards Russia's aggressiveness.  

BTW... Trump should personally call Assad and let him know a bomb is going to be dropped on one of his palaces on Monday, and that he might want to find a hotel for a few evenings.  Then on Monday, do what he told him he'd do.  

Edited by HuggyU2
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, HuggyU2 said:

BTW... Trump should personally call Assad and let him know a bomb is going to be dropped on one of his palaces on Monday, and that he might want to find a hotel for a few evenings.  

and then offer him a 10% discount to the nearest Trump hotel like a boss

Edited by BashiChuni
  • Haha 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, HuggyU2 said:

I believe that the use of WMD crosses a significant and serious line.  

Does it? 500,000 people have already been killed in the war. The suspected chemical weapon attack in Douma killed under 100. Yeah, chlorine isn't a good way to go, but neither are the myriad other horrible methods of killing people that Syrians face. It's extraordinarily clear there is zero positive endgame in Syria, so why get involved? Even if we were to do what it takes to kill Assad and drive his allies from power, you're still looking at an ongoing civil war with at least three direct participants and a dozen-odd sponsors.

Sometimes the best (only) move is to not make any move at all. Maybe at some point in the future there will be a situation in Syria where US influence, brought to bear at the right time and in the right way, could have positive longterm effects. When and if that day comes, then we should consider if doing so aligns with our interests and act accordingly. But it's not going to happen if we bomb every side of the civil war just to flex our muscles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Stoker said:

 Even if we were to do what it takes to kill Assad and drive his allies from power, you're still looking at an ongoing civil war with at least three direct participants and a dozen-odd sponsors.

Quite possibly true.

But now, those "participants" will not have access to a significant WMD resource.  

So, to answer the question you posed to me:  yes.  

Edited by HuggyU2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This was about sending a message. 8 years of weakness emboldened Putin, Iran etc. We needed to send a message that we can pounce on people breaking international law even when drug is defended by top of the line Russian air defenses.

I want out of Syria but this was a good call to flex out balls.

It also shows our allies that we are the leaders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎4‎/‎13‎/‎2018 at 8:55 PM, Napoleon_Tanerite said:

One of these days

 Quote; "Get ready Russia, because they will be coming, nice, and new and “smart!" You shouldn't be partners with a Gas Killing Animal who kills his people and enjoys it!

"One of these days" this type of Presidential "Smack Talk" is going to result in US Military Assets (US Ships/Bases/Aircraft/Personnel/etc) being on the receiving end of a "Preemptive Strike". POTUS please tone it down.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Stoker said:

Does it? 500,000 people have already been killed in the war. The suspected chemical weapon attack in Douma killed under 100. Yeah, chlorine isn't a good way to go, but neither are the myriad other horrible methods of killing people that Syrians face. It's extraordinarily clear there is zero positive endgame in Syria, so why get involved? Even if we were to do what it takes to kill Assad and drive his allies from power, you're still looking at an ongoing civil war with at least three direct participants and a dozen-odd sponsors.

Sometimes the best (only) move is to not make any move at all. Maybe at some point in the future there will be a situation in Syria where US influence, brought to bear at the right time and in the right way, could have positive longterm effects. When and if that day comes, then we should consider if doing so aligns with our interests and act accordingly. But it's not going to happen if we bomb every side of the civil war just to flex our muscles.

Disagree.  Twice the regime has used chemical weapons, twice they've been subject to US airstrikes.  This sends a message not only to Syria, but to other countries around the world, that breaking international law will have consequences above a sternly worded memo from the UN.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

They even worked some JASSM-ER into the mix.

giphy.gif

Some additional info; Excerpts;

- Two USAF B-1B Lancers from the 34th Expeditionary Bomb Squadron launched a total of 19 JASSM-ERs. The two bombers, deployed from Al Udeid AB, Qatar, entered Syrian airspace from the south and were escorted by a USMC E/A-6B Prowler.

- The first target hit was the Barzeh Research and Development Center near Damascus, which was struck by 57 Tomahawks and all 19 JASSM-ERs.

- Forty Syrian surface-to-air missiles were launched blindly in defense, and only “after the last impact” of weapons launched by the US-led force.

http://www.airforcemag.com/Features/Pages/2018/April 2018/Syria-Strike-Marks-Combat-Debut-for-JASSM-ER.aspx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably venturing into a sensitive area here, but I've been reading conflicting reports concerning how many missiles made it to the target.  Most US sources are saying near 100% hit rate, but some international sources are saying the Syrians managed to shoot a decent amount down before they made to their intended targets.  Anyone able to verify?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love the revisionist history going on in this thread.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/09/09/obama-congress-syria-vote-in-doubt/2788597/

Obama follows the Constitution to get Congress' approval for military strikes. Congress never backs the strikes so the strikes don't happen. Obama gets labelled as weak for not acting out in violation of the Constitution. Had Obama ordered the strikes anyways you guys would have been crapping in your diapers over the abuse of power. 

Edited by Vertigo
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  



×