Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Not clear to me how last night’s strikes differ from previous strikes, beyond targets.
The US and a coalition of as many as 60 other countries have been bombing Syria since 2013 when the target was ISIS/ISIL. This bombing persisted through January of this year while Trump continued to advocate for working with Russia purge ISIS from Syria.
Then there’s the Red Line thing - the threat to bomb in reaction to chemical weapons. The US and Russia were successful in getting Assad to admit Syria had chemical weapons and an agreement to give up chemical weapons to a multinational force. This was done without force. Russia was to act as the guaranteeing force.
A year ago the US bombed Syria in reaction to chemical weapons being used on Syrian people.
In late March of this year, Trump said he would withdraw troops, very soon. Then came the most recent chemical attack on Syrian people. Makes zero sense that Assad would bomb his own people, given the US was scheduled to leave.
Russia blames Israel and the UK.
Nicky Haley told the UN Syria has used chemical weapons on its people more than 50 times in the past 5 years, including 2017. If this is true, what makes the most recent incident more significant than all the other times? The 2017 bombing did not put an end to chemical attacks no matter who is behind them. Why would last night’s attack be more successful?
Pentagon is now saying Syria, with the backing of Russia and Iran, abandoned their previous commitment to the international community to peacefully eliminate all chemical weapons ( Outcome of Red Line) Russia continues to blame Israel and the UK for the most recent chemical attacks.
Who benefitted from the most recent chemical attack that followed Trump’s announcement the US would soon withdraw all troops from Syria? Not likely Assad or Russia want the US to remain in Syria.
Pentagon,this morning, characterized the most recent bombings as successful but had not eliminated all chemical weapons or the ability to reconstitute new weapons, which seems to leave the door open.
Congress was not consulted nor was their approval sought. The rational is the Constitution grants permission to POTUS to protect its interests.
What interests are we talking about?
I am not buying into the “ save the children” thing.
Still not a fan of these strikes, but I am happy to see that Russia is reporting that no civilians or soldiers were killed in the American-British-French strikes inside of Syria.
Neocons are fundamentally stupid people. Trump is now the King of the Neocons. How will Russia respond? At the very least, they will supply S300/S400 defense systems to Syria. Russia did not do so in the past at the request of the US. Syria will then have established a no fly zone over all of Syria.
That doesn't mean they are going to turn into communist and vote Dem.
Why should they vote (D) when they support the same thing? Why wouldn't they support someone that supports the non intervention like "conservatives" used to?
Not hearing the press asking the Pentagon what specific US interest in Syria we are protecting that is the basis of the rational to bypass Congress, this time.
Instead, they seem to accept the collective obligation to “ save the children” and the alignment of the Pentagon’s and Trump’s words, one time only vs open ended.
Pentagon spokeswoman indicated the attack was allowed under Article II protecting vital American interests, quite a stretch.
Right. What interests do we have in Syria?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
