*****50 Tomahawk Missiles launced against Syria***** (Putin, Iran, Canada, Obama)

[PullMyFinger]

Originally Posted by dechatelet

Oh, please.

Trump was talking about warnings to ISIS that took place months and weeks in advance -- e.g., in Mosul.

There is no comparison between that and telling the Russians they have 30 minutes to clear out.

Furthermore, we have had a "deconfliction" agreement with Russia to give warnings so we stay out of each other's way in Syria.

Trump was following a protocol that was established by...you guessed it...Obama.

We warned the monks at the Abby of Monte Cassino so they could move the art and get the innocents out.

Even in all out war warnings are given at times.

[marino760]

Originally Posted by pknopp

Non intervention used to be a position the Conservatives took. What happened?

You're historically wrong. That would be the position of Libertarians like Rand Paul and his father.

[dechatelet]

Originally Posted by Magritte25

Hypothetically speaking...

We launched an airstrike on Syria last night.

If there was retaliation against the US because of this action and innocent Americans were killed, would we be getting what we deserve...and more?

No, we would not.

There is an international law against using chemical weapons, and the U.S. had a perfect right to take military action to enforce that law.

[Finn_Jarber]

Originally Posted by pknopp

going after Assad is the same as going after Qadaffi. None of our business.

I am ok with the strike itself, and ironically it is what Obama also wanted to do, but was denied.

It's the overwhelming hypocrisy about the issue which irks me the most.

[dechatelet]

Originally Posted by pknopp

Yep, it's OK and completely justifiable when we do it, no matter what it is. Bomb a hospital......well, they deserved it. Strike a crowd of innocent people just trying to get through a day like the rest of us, well they deserved it.

No one has said they "deserve it."

You are aware that ISIS uses civilians as shields, are you not?

Saddam Hussein did the same thing.

[Scooby Snacks]

It's incredibly ironic that Trump launched missiles against Syria, calling the Syrian attack "an affront to humanity" yet attempted to ban Syrian refugees from entering our country TWICE. Where is his humanity?

[Finn_Jarber]

Originally Posted by jimj

Last night was not an attack on Assad or was he at the airfield when the missiles hit? Again, this was an attack on his WMD capabilities.

It was an attack on Assad, and if they want to disarm him is WMDs, they'll need to do a heck of a lot more than this. One strike is symbolic.

[Goodnight]

Originally Posted by pknopp

Non intervention used to be a position the Conservatives took. What happened?

I don't know if this was the correct move or where it will lead but those 5 million refugees from Syria are most definitely destabilizing Europe and the Middle East. We don't live in a vacuum, Russia, Iran and Assad had no issue with the impact on other countries.

[dechatelet]

Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber

No, he didn't and the Congress made a huge deal out of it and demanded they are involved next time. The next time was Assad, and they declined the request.

Obama didn't need their permission.

He pretended to need it in order to do nothing and thus "justify" his cowardly failure to act on enforcing his own "red line".

[redwood66]

Originally Posted by Magritte25

Obama Seeks Approval by Congress for Strike in Syria - The New York Times

And he did this because he was worried about how it would look if he didn't. He wanted Congress to be implicated as well. That is not leading. Just like B. Clinton worrying about how things would poll.