Jump to content
Thailand Visa Forum by Thai Visa | The Nation
webfact

Trump unleashes military strikes against Assad airbase in Syria

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, Morch said:

 

Peter Ford is openly supportive of Assad's regime. To quote one of his phrases as to why Assad should remain in power - "repression works". Another pearl was describing the siege of Aleppo's end as "relatively peaceful".

 


"To quote one of his phrases as to why Assad should remain in power".

Look, I'ill tell you why Assad should and must stay in power.  The biggest rebel groups have already been called "Islamic fundamentalists" by the media. Yes, rebels like ISIS and the Al-Nusra Front are dangerous. Why should Assad remain in power ? Because IF he is toppled, the biggest rebel groups will still be there.

We do not wish to see a Syria with groups like ISIS and the Al-Nusra Front being there if Assad is removed. Washington's previous intent was to support the rebels, watch them remove Assad, and then bomb any rebels who don't like America and Europe. This is a strategy that I think, is too risky. In other words, Washington might find that bombing the bad rebels after Assad has gone is not something that is easy to do. It's better to help Assad remove the rebels.

Trump did say earlier on, that there was now going to be a new Syria policy from Washington.  A policy where removing ISIS is more important than removing Assad. I do hope Trump still feels the same way.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wisher said:

Enough dead babies in Mosul for the UN Security Council, Russia, and Iran.

Geography much?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, tonbridgebrit said:

<snip>
Trump did say earlier on, that there was now going to be a new Syria policy from Washington.  A policy where removing ISIS is more important than removing Assad. I do hope Trump still feels the same way.

 

Trump's base in social media are reported to be extremely unhappy with his policy U Turn with attacking Assad forces.

 

To me it's inconceivable Trump was unaware of the war crimes being committed by Assad's forces, including systematic murder of civilians, including children, when he was seeking election and articulating his views of non interference in the M.E., but excepting Islamist terror groups. One could say the attack on the airfield was cynical opportunism. Have to wait & see what Trump policy, if any, unfolds in the coming weeks regards the Assad dictatorship and it's regularly reported crimes against humanity.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, LannaGuy said:

fair point but... I doubt there was much intel and I think he personally knows Assad and his crew and he thinks it wasn't him... think about it?  why do it?  on eve of peace talks?  it's madness and as he say's he's lot's of things but not mad

 

most of the rebels are ISIS and this plays right into their grubby evil hands and I'm amazed you are defending Trump as this is just a version of one of his mad 'Tweets' in the early morning but with missiles 

There was lots of intel.  What planes were involved, where they came from, where the bombs exploded, satellite images of all of this.  I think that's a lot of intel.  None of which Ford would be privy to now.  Peace talks have been going on for years and going nowhere.

 

Most of the rebels are Syrians fighting Assad.  Many are with ISIS now, but some Syrians were forced to join as this war has progressed.  I'm not defending Trump.  I'm opposed to Assad. For good reasons.

Share this post


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

Is by today, Syrian Army, Assad or any member of the Syrian government accused and sentenced by any national or international court concerning use of chemical weapons on the Syrian opposition since 2011 going from the FSA up to ISIS ?

Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

Assad and Russia have been condemned by many Western nations.  As mentioned before, due to Russia, many actions proposed by the US have been vetoed by Russia.  Hmm...wonder why.  Some of these western nations are also proposing charging Russia with crimes against humanity.  For good reasons.

 

Not sure why you are so hard on this.  You do understand what Syria is doing to it's own people is a crime?  I sure hope so.

 

This article explains the complexities of going after Assad, the rebels and ISIS for various crimes:

https://www.irinnews.org/analysis/2016/12/12/syria-war-crimes-guide-navigating-legal-minefield

Quote

 

Once there’s an armed conflict, the basics of what you can and can’t do in war are codified by the Geneva Conventions as well as the Rome Statute that founded the International Criminal Court.

A few basics that will sound all too familiar with regards to Syria: it’s a war crime to launch an attack on civilians; it’s a war crime to intentionally attack medical facilities; it’s a war crime to attack peacekeepers or humanitarian workers.

......

The law has clearly not served as much of a deterrent in the Syrian war, but that doesn’t mean wrongdoers won’t eventually be brought to book. It probably won’t be by the International Criminal Court, however.

 

This is because Syria is not a member of the ICC, and without membership it takes UN Security Council referral for investigation – this was attempted in May 2014 but voted down by veto-wielding powers Russia and China.

 

 

Hope this clears things up for you.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, klikster said:

Seriously? Liquid chemical agent sprayed by helicopters? Have you ever noticed the "donut" shaped rotor wash that 'choppers create? Might kill the entire crew.

 

 A drone might work.

 

Helicopters are used for crop-dusting; wouldn't be too hard to switch out the pesticide for something more lethal. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obama could have done this after the last chemical attack,  but he did not, Obama was the President just as

President Trump Is the President,  what a difference!  I read that Obamas hands were tied, Really!  I mean Really!

No the difference is the attitude  and the courage to go through with some sign to say you crossed the red line.

These missles  were  a good sign.

Geezer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, craigt3365 said:

There was lots of intel.  What planes were involved, where they came from, where the bombs exploded, satellite images of all of this.  I think that's a lot of intel.  None of which Ford would be privy to now.  Peace talks have been going on for years and going nowhere.

 

Most of the rebels are Syrians fighting Assad.  Many are with ISIS now, but some Syrians were forced to join as this war has progressed.  I'm not defending Trump.  I'm opposed to Assad. For good reasons.

you did not address the question - why would he do it knowing the international outcry? the answer is he wouldn't 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, LannaGuy said:

you did not address the question - why would he do it knowing the international outcry? the answer is he wouldn't 

You mean the international outcry from every western nation supporting the bombing?  The ones against it are Russia, China, Iran, North Korea....LOL

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, LannaGuy said:

you did not address the question - why would he do it knowing the international outcry? the answer is he wouldn't 

You're making huge assumptions as to the behaviour of Assad. Do you think the torture and murder of children in Assad's prisons has stopped because of international condemnation and threats to replace him?

 

 Considering the Assad dictatorship has carried out crimes against humanity for years, including use of chemical warfare, on a number of occasions, despite repeated condemnation and threats against him personally. Why would his behaviour with the latest mass murder of civilians be any different?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LannaGuy said:

you did not address the question - why would he do it knowing the international outcry? the answer is he wouldn't 

I think you massively overestimate the saviness of world leaders in general. Remember Bush's Iraq war? Pretty stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

                   It doesn't bode well for US military might, if they launch 59 state-of-the-art cruise missiles costing around $100 million altogether, and don't do much damage.  

 

                    Usually, when a country launches military strikes, it's also showcasing its weapons.  It happened during the Falkland's battles (Brit Harriers vs French Mirages) and in nearly every other war.  

 

                 If $100 million worth of Tomahawks can't even disable a runway at an air field..........  

 

                   With $100 million, 2,500 homes could be built at $40k each, or 40,000 libraries in Africa.   $100 million for a few potholes in a Syrian airfield?  Oh, and possibly a few out-dated Syrian jets destroyed, all of which will be replaced by state-of-the-art Russian fighter jets.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/7/2017 at 2:21 PM, thaihome said:

 

Though I don't disagree that the removal of Assad will likely lead to even more sectarian violence and civil war in Syria, continuing in undoing two generations of progress in developing a "westernized" country in the middle east (a debatable goal in the first place). It is very unfortunate that Assad in attempting to stay in power turned to  tactics that go beyond norms in warfare, such as they are.

 

In most cases, a leader such as Assad, in face of such opposition, will often sacrifice himself (in comfortable exile) and allow a new face from his faction to negotiate a face savings solution.  Assad and his followers  (or more likely advisors) have forcefully rejected this path and have doggedly pursued ruthless war against his opposition.  

 

To me, this has more the cancelled any good he may have done for the country in the past. If he had resigned 7 years ago in face of what was then non violent protests, there is a very good chance the civil war would not have happened.  Instead, he started shooting the protesters. And here we are. Attempts to list all the good from Assad 8 or more years ago and saying these are reasons to keep him around  is disgenous. 

TH

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/05/world/middleeast/syria-bashar-al-assad-atrocities-civilian-deaths-gas-attack.html

Didn't his Father also kill Syrians who protested? Must be a family tradition. I wonder what his English wife says about all this?

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


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

BANGKOK 13 December 2017 21:51
Sponsors
×