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.
Many on the left here, and leaders around the world, have praised this action against Syria. It will actually serve to decrease uncertainty and confusion. Finally, after so many red lines in the sand that have been crossed, the US said, in response to horrendous attack on civilians, "enough!" It can serve as a deterrent at least for a while and realign some strategic pieces on the chess board.
Bob Woodward said it was perfectly proportional, not too much, not too little. In his words, "less is more in this case."
Your assessment may be right. Lot's of different opinions cross the partisan lines on this issue.
The deed is done. We'll see how it washes out.
As an ex combat vet with too many tours, I'm always suspect of rapid military action with no endgame policy. But when one reviews history, that's always how the next conflagration starts and mothers start losing their sons. It always starts small with just 1, C-130 and a half dozen coffins but after a year or so, they're landing every 90 seconds and just pushing them off the rollers onto the Dover Tarmac.
Tonkin Gulf............Afghanistan............Iraq....... .....and on.
It will be interesting to see how this is all woven into the "Trump is a puppet of Russia" meme.
Yah, well, KGB Lt. Col. Putin is from the old school. In the USSR, that meant the Punishment Battalions led off in the front lines against the Nazis on the Eastern Front during WWII, & loyal party machine-gunners followed. The Punishment Battalions could not turn back, could not retreat, could not even hold in place. If they didn't march, the party MGs were to open fire on any who shirked.
Brutal, but effective. Would Putin willingly sacrifice a few - less than 100? - Syrian civilians, in order to advance a pawn to be queened? Of course he would - he'd gladly wade through rivers, lakes, oceans of blood - especially of people who don't even belong to him nor his, who aren't fellow nomenklatura members - to achieve his & the KGB's old goal - to be the sword & shield of the party.
I think we just have to wait & see what develops in the investigation of CIS influence in the last election.
How far did the bomb we dropped on Hiroshima carry?
Meaning the radiation carried on the fallout of the bomb's detonation? It was an airburst, so there wasn't a lot of uptake. Plus it rained a lot after the drop - Japan had lots of clouds, rain, storms - one of the reasons that delivery of the nukes turned into such a nightmare.
"As pointed out in another section of this report the radiations from the nuclear explosions which caused injuries to persons were primarily those experienced within the first second after the explosion; a few may have occurred later, but all occurred in the first minute. The other two general types of radiation, viz., radiation from scattered fission products and induced radioactivity from objects near the center of explosion, were definitely proved not to have caused any casualties."
(My emphasis - more @ the URL)
Both attacks were airbursts, & so relatively little matter was pulled up into the fireball & exposed to high levels of radiation. Ground bursts would have generated more radioactive fallout - but the rains would still have washed the particulates out of the air & into the water & then to the sea.
Just the other day, the thread was "what is Trump going to do now? Nothing!". Trump does something and now the opposite reaction. Who is he to do something?!?!
Meaning the radiation carried on the fallout of the bomb's detonation? It was an airburst, so there wasn't a lot of uptake. Plus it rained a lot after the drop - Japan had lots of clouds, rain, storms - one of the reasons that delivery of the nukes turned into such a nightmare.
"As pointed out in another section of this report the radiations from the nuclear explosions which caused injuries to persons were primarily those experienced within the first second after the explosion; a few may have occurred later, but all occurred in the first minute. The other two general types of radiation, viz., radiation from scattered fission products and induced radioactivity from objects near the center of explosion, were definitely proved not to have caused any casualties."
(My emphasis - more @ the URL)
Both attacks were airbursts, & so relatively little matter was pulled up into the fireball & exposed to high levels of radiation. Ground bursts would have generated more radioactive fallout - but the rains would still have washed the particulates out of the air & into the water & then to the sea.
I was in that micro-thread I think he meant the civilians killed when their cities were targeted in an effort to hit the factories supporting the war. That among the last two attacks were nukes and not hundreds of bombers gives him the argument
Do you agree with Trump's decision to strike a Syrian air force base?
No (65%, 5,381 Votes)
Yes (23%, 1,913 Votes)
I don't know (11%, 930 Votes)
Total Voters: 8,224
100% ppl that voted for trump.
Its not a bad idea politically because Democrats and some independents like the military action, so President Trump can gain support from those folks.
And I don't think President Trump will lose his base, whether they agree with the Syrian strikes or not, because I've never seen a more enthusiastic and loyal base than the Trump base.
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.
A little history
