webfact

Trump unleashes military strikes against Assad airbase in Syria

576 posts in this topic

1 hour ago, craigt3365 said:

Libya is better off than Syria.  But yes, both places are a mess.  No easy answers.

But some answers are easier than others. The easiest, and the best for everybody in Syria, is to let Assad keep a lid on the sectarian conflict. The only other option is partition of this artificial country, which ISIS have already attempted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, rockingrobin said:
21 minutes ago, sujoop said:

Called it correctly yesterday (below):
 

------------
Assad has the upper hand now so did not need to risk a renewed backlash. So, who besides Assad has free range of air space in Syria? Trump's pal, comrade Putin (Russia also has monitor control over Syria's chemical weapons).  This despicable act comes as Russia-Gate was dominating and increasingly revealing complicit ties between Trump's Whitehouse & Russia. But now, suddenly Trump & Putin appear on opposite sides. (pure theatre)


The situation in Syria could now make for a mutually convenient, distracting, 'theatre' of faux confrontation between Russia and the Whitehouse. Trump could order a couple strategic air strikes on Syrian bases or chemical targets, with Russia threatening back but it's only theatre. Meanwhile all the steam behind Whitehouse/Russia-Gate evaporates ...
--------------
 

Doubters, one logical question: Since Russia defacto controls Shayrat Airbase and also monitors Syria's chemical weapons, how did the chemical attack happen in the first place if not under direction of Putin and for what purpose?

 

Next up, onto N Korea for even more wag-the-dog dangerous distractions.

 

 

In 2013 it was reported the Syrian regime had no chemical weapons, whilst it is known some rebel factions are in possession 

 

So, you are saying the 'rebels' (which Syria & Russia are fighting) somehow managed to commandeer planes from the Soviet controlled airbase in Syria where the Trump administration states the chemical attack originated from?

'The missile launch was directed at a government air force base where a chemical attack was launched on Syrian civilians April 4.'

I take back one part of my earlier prediction - Putin the theatre director will now have to retaliate to close the curtain for this particular act. Hopefully Donnie's role will not cause a ripple effect in the region or worse.

1 person likes this

Share this post


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

Agreed, though it should be only if the US was directly threatened. I would hope that he conferred with the leaders of the house before launching though.

No need. But he did appear to advise the Russians that they needed to vacate those particular premises ahead of the strikes.

 

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I believe few if any children of politicians died in Vietnam. I doubt that has changed much.

Of course you are speaking for the children of Vietnamese politicians as well?

 

1 hour ago, oz457 said:

Will this ignite WW3? I'm worried about the Russian answer to this strike if any of the Russian Military are hurt.

This does not look very good.

As stated, the Russians were advised in advance.

1 person likes this

Share this post


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

17796700_10212668994220283_334322891636448109_n.jpg

You are quoting a hugely irrelevant also-ran.

2 people like this

Share this post


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

Agreed, though it should be only if the US was directly threatened. I would hope that he conferred with the leaders of the house before launching though.

You're both missing the point. He required Obama to get Congressional approval before taking any action, but that standard apparently does not apply to himself.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Cruise missiles are not bombs and they go where intended. Air bases don't have collateral casualties.

Thanks for correcting my terminology, so its not a guided bomb? nice to know they go where intended, & if they don't? Never mind eh, as you have stated no casualties!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, rockingrobin said:

In 2013 it was reported the Syrian regime had no chemical weapons, whilst it is known some rebel factions are in possession 

...and of course the rebels have the know ability to deliver such chemical weapons by air.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, rockingrobin said:

In 2013 it was reported the Syrian regime had no chemical weapons, whilst it is known some rebel factions are in possession 

That was actually a lie. And we all believe our own lies. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, sujoop said:

 

So, you are saying the 'rebels' (which Syria & Russia are fighting) somehow managed to commandeer planes from the Soviet controlled airbase in Syria where the Trump administration states the chemical attack originated from?

'The missile launch was directed at a government air force base where a chemical attack was launched on Syrian civilians April 4.'

I take back one part of my earlier prediction - Putin the theatre director will now have to retaliate to close the curtain for this particular act. Hopefully Donnie's role will not cause a ripple effect in the region or worse.

None of the news reports I saw said anything about planes dropping anything. If the rebels did it they could have just detonated gas bombs remotely on the ground.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

You are quoting a hugely irrelevant also-ran.

And you are supporting a hugely malevolent con-man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, CGW said:

Thanks for correcting my terminology, so its not a guided bomb? nice to know they go where intended, & if they don't? Never mind eh, as you have stated no casualties!

Hmmmm. I said no "collateral" casualties, not "no" casualties.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

None of the news reports I saw said anything about planes dropping anything. If the rebels did it they could have just detonated gas bombs remotely on the ground.

Well that's a rather bizarre statement since even the Syrians actually said they were carrying out air raids that targeted the rebels' chemical warehouse (which they say belonged to the al-Nusra Front, not ISIS). 

 

Assad has shown many times that he would quite happily obliterate the opposition to him whatever their affiliation. An attack like this doesn't mean he's stupid, just that he's done it before and thinks he can get away with it. To think it's some kind of conspiracy seems much more implausible IMO and some genuine evidence would be interesting.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ID: 74   Posted (edited)

2 hours ago, Rob13 said:

Who makes the cruise missles and whats trumps holdings in that company?:coffee1:

Raytheon is the manufacturer.

 

rtn_167806.jpg

 

News from 9.11.2016

 

Raytheon (RTN) shares soared into buy range Wednesday as defense contractors took flight on the wings of Donald Trump's victory in the U.S. presidential election but sales to foreign countries could take a hit.

 

http://www.investors.com/news/raytheon-launched-into-buy-range-on-trump-win-defense-stocks-rally/

Edited by alocacoc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, KhaoNiaw said:

Well that's a rather bizarre statement since even the Syrians actually said they were carrying out air raids that targeted the rebels' chemical warehouse (which they say belonged to the al-Nusra Front, not ISIS). 

 

Assad has shown many times that he would quite happily obliterate the opposition to him whatever their affiliation. An attack like this doesn't mean he's stupid, just that he's done it before and thinks he can get away with it. To think it's some kind of conspiracy seems much more implausible IMO and some genuine evidence would be interesting.

some genuine evidence would be interesting.

AGREED!!!!!

So far there is sod all, just a load of people saying what they think as if it's fact. Ron Paul has got it right.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And you are supporting a hugely malevolent con-man.


And you're siding with Putin.

Maybe we should stop this petty 'guilt by association' and stick to presenting the facts as reported by eye witnesses, experts and world leaders, like this:

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/world/middleeast/chemical-attack-syria.html

The statement was issued hours after Syria’s foreign minister challenged accounts by witnesses, experts and world leaders that his government had carried out the attack.
1 person likes this

Share this post


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

 


And you're siding with Putin.

Maybe we should stop this petty 'guilt by association' and stick to presenting the facts as reported by eye witnesses, experts and world leaders, like this:

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/world/middleeast/chemical-attack-syria.html
 

 

this link proves what?  we know it was sarin - who supplied it? why would Assad do it?   OPEN your mind

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever that's supposed to mean. Open my mind and just let any stray thought wander in?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, sujoop said:
1 hour ago, rockingrobin said:
1 hour ago, sujoop said:

Called it correctly yesterday (below):
 

------------
Assad has the upper hand now so did not need to risk a renewed backlash. So, who besides Assad has free range of air space in Syria? Trump's pal, comrade Putin (Russia also has monitor control over Syria's chemical weapons).  This despicable act comes as Russia-Gate was dominating and increasingly revealing complicit ties between Trump's Whitehouse & Russia. But now, suddenly Trump & Putin appear on opposite sides. (pure theatre)


The situation in Syria could now make for a mutually convenient, distracting, 'theatre' of faux confrontation between Russia and the Whitehouse. Trump could order a couple strategic air strikes on Syrian bases or chemical targets, with Russia threatening back but it's only theatre. Meanwhile all the steam behind Whitehouse/Russia-Gate evaporates ...
--------------
 

Doubters, one logical question: Since Russia defacto controls Shayrat Airbase and also monitors Syria's chemical weapons, how did the chemical attack happen in the first place if not under direction of Putin and for what purpose?

 

Next up, onto N Korea for even more wag-the-dog dangerous distractions.

 

 

In 2013 it was reported the Syrian regime had no chemical weapons, whilst it is known some rebel factions are in possession 

 

So, you are saying the 'rebels' (which Syria & Russia are fighting) somehow managed to commandeer planes from the Soviet controlled airbase in Syria where the Trump administration states the chemical attack originated from?

'The missile launch was directed at a government air force base where a chemical attack was launched on Syrian civilians April 4.'

I take back one part of my earlier prediction - Putin the theatre director will now have to retaliate to close the curtain for this particular act. Hopefully Donnie's role will not cause a ripple effect in the region or worse.

15 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

None of the news reports I saw said anything about planes dropping anything. If the rebels did it they could have just detonated gas bombs remotely on the ground.

So, are you saying that Trump's administration is lying and the chemical attack did not originate from the defacto Russian controlled Shayrat air Base in Syria which Trump retaliated against? (it's all pure orchestrated theatre anyways, no need to add to it). Meanwhile, with all this blowing up out of seemingly nowhere, suddenly no one is talking about the former top topic about complicit Trump Whitehouse/Russia-Gate election gerry-mandering and financial ties,  plus this suddenly 'appears' to make Trump/Putin look like opponents  (thus, mission accomplished).


To 'wag the dog' means to purposely divert attention from what would otherwise be of greater importance.

Still, news cycles  require that more distractions will be needed soon. Next up, N Korea.

1 person likes 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 28 May 2017 13:40
Sponsors