Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Are you for or against Trump's missile attack on Syria?
For 112 34.67%
Against 153 47.37%
Mixed feeling/unsure 58 17.96%
Voters: 323. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-08-2017, 10:17 PM
 
Location: LA, CA/ In This Time and Place
5,443 posts, read 4,681,680 times
Reputation: 5122

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by McGowdog View Post
It was a proportional one-off hit.

58 missiles hit 44 targets at least once, one went into the drink, that is fact.

The USA might not be done with them yet.

I'm all for it.

I'm not surprised to see Trump detractors politicize this act like everything else.

You don't need to ask Congress in this one-off situation, what Obama did was Hand-wringing, same with Bill Clinton in Rowanda.

Turkey backs the US, Saudi Arabia backs the US., Syrian refugees back the US, Israel backs the U.S., etc. Schumer Pelosi and Juan Williams and perhaps even Hillary back the President's action. Oh, John McCain for God's sake.

Assad and Russia oppose. Eff them.

Which side do you stand on?

Then there's that puppet liar Susan Rice.

Do none of you liberals find it troubling that she had better intel on the Trump Team than Syrian Chemical Weapons? John Kerry, Obama, what a bunch of worthless idiots.

Trump did more on a Thursday afternoon to tell the world the U.S. of A. is back and don't Eff with us, than the Obama Administration did in 8 years.



No, that idiot just crammed his decisions through and vetoed everything Congress tried to do, so like Sinatra, Obama did it his way.



Yeah, that's what I meant by Syrian refugee.

OH MY GOD! KASSEM EID! Love this guy! You people protesting the travel ban, I didn't see you protesting worthless destructive Barack Hussein Obama! Cnn reporter... We gotta go now...

Kassem Eid... Please let me finish... We do not want to be refugees.

We want to stay in our own country!

We want safe zones...

Cnn reporter... We have to go now... blahblahblah nawnawnaw neener neener augity augity augity... Commercial Break! Cut the feed gD it!

Haha!

Losers!

You lost again!

It's another Trump Rally Weekend, Losers!
I agree with this. Instead of allowing or banning Syrians, why not allow them to stay home which they want? This was a good move ON Trump's part but he needs to do more.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-08-2017, 10:18 PM
 
Location: Japan
15,292 posts, read 7,765,220 times
Reputation: 10006
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA View Post
Pure symbolism. Before anyone creams their pants over the almighty US military firepower, that amount of ordnance could have been delivered by 5 WWII bombers. The airbase was up and running in 24 hours.

Crossing the threshold to using full-on military means comes at a a cost. Doing so while not achieving a military objective worth mentioning? - that is not a bright statesman move. If there's a plan in there somewhere, good. Not seeing one yet.
You realize you are just echoing the current elite media line, and that the goal is to egg Trump on toward more military action and a fresh new American war in the Middle East? Is that what you want?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-08-2017, 11:41 PM
 
46,967 posts, read 26,011,859 times
Reputation: 29456
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dark Enlightenment View Post
You realize you are just echoing the current elite media line, and that the goal is to egg Trump on toward more military action and a fresh new American war in the Middle East? Is that what you want?
No. I'm pointing out that symbolic military strikes are as politically costly as military strikes that actually have an effect. I'd much prefer to think there is some sort of plan in play here beyond a rousing patriotic fireworks display.

We're stuck with the idiot. All other things being equal, misguided competence would be preferable to his administration randomly reacting and calling it policy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-08-2017, 11:41 PM
 
13,586 posts, read 13,126,981 times
Reputation: 17786
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chowhound View Post
IDK, images of children being gassed is tough to take. I'm not sure in the greater larger sense if it's a good thing. At least it was just the airfield and runway.

Time will tell. Everything has a reaction and ripples, we'll see what happens. I have a MIL that is a staunch trump hater and she approved of it, I suppose again, it's the imagery of women and children civilian victims and that is a hard to watch and maybe doing this might help deter more of those types of gas attacks.

I voted unsure just because I'm war weary and just friggin sick of seeing/hearing and watching anything related to that shythole called the middle east.
Agreed on the Middle East. We don't want to be there, they don't want us there, wtf are we still doing there?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-08-2017, 11:49 PM
 
Location: On the Great South Bay
9,173 posts, read 13,259,290 times
Reputation: 10145
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
Trump wasted 50,000 pounds of TNT, to prove to all Americans he ain't in bed with Putin.
That is what that was all about.
Well there is that although that is something I think most Americans knew already.

But is it possible to stop being partisan for a moment and to look at the strike strategically? I believe Trump was being tested. At least by the Syrians, possibly by the Russians as well. This is because I believe Assad is so dependent on the Russians (and Iranians) that there is a possible chance he got the ok to use chemical weapons before hand. Or at the very least he wanted make sure the Russians will veto (again) any UN resolutions condemning his use of chemical weapons.

If Trump had not done anything, especially after the rhetoric he made last year about crossing the line in the sand, he would have looked weak and the USA would have lost credibility in such places as North Korea, the South China Sea and Eastern Europe.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-08-2017, 11:55 PM
 
Location: London
12,275 posts, read 7,145,579 times
Reputation: 13661
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chowhound View Post
IDK, images of children being gassed is tough to take. I'm not sure in the greater larger sense if it's a good thing. At least it was just the airfield and runway.

Time will tell. Everything has a reaction and ripples, we'll see what happens. I have a MIL that is a staunch trump hater and she approved of it, I suppose again, it's the imagery of women and children civilian victims and that is a hard to watch and maybe doing this might help deter more of those types of gas attacks.

I voted unsure just because I'm war weary and just friggin sick of seeing/hearing and watching anything related to that shythole called the middle east.
I'm sorry, but as horrible it was for people to be gassed, I don't think important foreign policy should be based on emotion.

Logically, we can prevent years of additional harm to both Syrians and our servicemen by being wise enough to stay out of Middle Eastern drama.

I mean, there are atrocities committed every day around the world with plenty of heartstring-tugging photos to go along with it. Why does this particular atrocity warrant our intervention from across the planet?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-08-2017, 11:58 PM
 
Location: London
12,275 posts, read 7,145,579 times
Reputation: 13661
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dark Enlightenment View Post
So you're a hawk now?
You want Trump to start a new war in the Middle East and fight the Russians to show that he's potent and genuinely cares about Syrian children?
I'm not sure what's up with these liberals on here applauding this... I thought they were supposed to be against unnecessary wars. But if they're the ones that supported Hillary (especially as opposed to Sanders), I shouldn't be surprised...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-08-2017, 11:59 PM
 
32,072 posts, read 15,077,213 times
Reputation: 13694
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohhwanderlust View Post
I'm sorry, but as horrible it was for people to be gassed, I don't think important foreign policy should be based on emotion.

Logically, we can prevent years of additional harm to both Syrians and our servicemen by being wise enough to stay out of Middle Eastern drama.

I mean, there are atrocities committed every day around the world with plenty of heartstring-tugging photos to go along with it. Why does this particular atrocity warrant our intervention from across the planet?
Ah, what I read here is that women wouldn't be good leaders because they base their reaction on emotion
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-09-2017, 01:13 AM
 
56,988 posts, read 35,221,200 times
Reputation: 18824
Against 1000%
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-09-2017, 01:22 AM
 
3,458 posts, read 1,456,779 times
Reputation: 1755
Quote:
Originally Posted by NLVgal View Post
Agreed on the Middle East. We don't want to be there, they don't want us there, wtf are we still doing there?
Agree as well. We need to get out and stop any involvement there. It's sad, but it always is. We don't ever fix the problem and sometimes we are the problem. We cannot relate to those problems, and we use the weak to gain leverage over there.

Let the U.N. handle it. And if the Saudi's want to take it over they should. They never do anything but push us out there like gang leaders. Trump should just do what he promised.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:08 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top