Trump launches military strike against Syria

  • Thread starter Thread starter DeepDeepTrouble3
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Correction, I’m talking about the invasion, Cromwell, Catholic land being stolen, etc, not ancient Rome.
 
JW55 said:
The topic has swayed somewhat from the initial thread. My biggest concern is what this strike could mean and how big our involvement will get. Syria is half way around the world. Why must we continually intervene in the affairs of these other nations? Our numerous interventions have perpetuated the unrest in these regions. The present disorder in the Middle East is primarily due to the intervention of the west over the last 70 yrs. In the Middle East they fight each other and always have. Why must we involve ourselves in this?
Click to expand...
Why indeed? Because the warmongers are eager to use their war machines.
The things we see happening are the result of war itself. We try to make rules of warfare like a chess game that gentlemen play. We can’t dictate the rules of war. People will do whatever they have to, to save their on hide. The best way to avoid the horrors and tragedies of war is to do everything we can to not enter in to these attacks.
Click to expand...
Once the dogs of war are released no one can predict or control the chaos.
I pray that we don’t escalate this from where it already is.
Click to expand...
But the warmongers will if they can. I am praying too.
 
They deliberately, (religiously) illegally changed “virgin” to “young woman” to suit their needs. If the first young woman giving birth signifies the messiah is here, I want to know why Abel was not able to save us from our sins. 🙂 Than is not a sign! A virgin giving birth is a sign!
Whether or not they worship the one true God is not relevant. Would the British invasion of Ireland have been legitimized if they worshiped the same God?

Since when does converting to a religion give one a right to the ancestral land of that religion? Can I convert to Druidism and lay claim to your home in England? I don’t think so.
 
tomarin said:
Can’t you? That is, would you rather live in a timeline in which the U.S. didn’t enter WWII, or the South was allowed to separate from the U.S. and maintain the slavery of its black citizens?
Click to expand...
Woulda, coulda, shoulda.

No one knows how history would have developed if either of the above scenarios occurred.

I don’t find such speculation helpful, especially when it is used to justify more war today.

I do know that people love their wars!
 
sallybutler said:
Well, if we have to go back to whatever was the beginning, we are all from the continent of Africa, most likely the Tigris-Euphrates Valley. Hi cousin./QUOTE

That is speculative, until the next archaeological discovery.

Ed
Click to expand...
 
Sadly, the point is being missed by a wide margin. Major governments have departments that do nothing but evaluate intel, have a list of targets, and a list of threshold events. So, if country Y does Z, they look at the scenario/consequence list and some group, who will not and cannot reveal what they know, orders the strike. The President rubber stamps it. The end.

If, and this has yet to be verified, a nerve agent like Sarin was used, possibly in combination with chlorine, then this “message” was proportionate and justified. But even if these agents are not independently verified, some people will just believe what they want or forget about it. Vietnam was halfway around the world but the excuse for the war still makes no sense to this day.

In any case, the detective work needs to be done. Was a Syrian jet spotted? Did an artillery shell impact in the area at the time in question? Or both? Or, one was a distraction while the alleged Sarin gas, which is difficult to handle safely and needs the wind blowing in the right direction to work effectively, was deployed by other means?

In any case, this should be a warning to the Syrian leadership that the US, or Russia, could turn on it. And I have no explanation, at all, for US-led airstrikes. What “interests” are we (and the British and Russians) protecting? All I hear are crickets.

The News in the US:

Good Evening!

Death! Killing! Disasters! And now, Sports and Weather.

Yeah. I don’t feel informed because I’m not. And should those in charge care? They don’t.

Ed
 
steve93 said:
I am white. So what? How can I be proud of something that I didn’t do?
I brought up being white to say that some one can’t just take over some place and then claim to be a native of said place to legitimize the takeover.
Like Scots claiming to be “Irish” or Dutchmen claiming to be “African”.
Click to expand...
Steve, the problem is that it seems (to me, at least) that you are selectively offended. You say “it’s not something I did,” but the thing is, some Afrocentric black people would say that even though you are not directly responsible for supposedly your ancestors dealing with slaves in this country, you are PROFITING from it (in the form of discriminatory practices that favor white people, which themselves grew out of the legacy of slavery) from them and you refuse to acknowledge that, thereby making you still part of the problem, not the solution. Afrocentric folk woud not welcome you as a “brother.”

NOT saying that’s what I think----simply giving you the other rest of the story, as Paul Harvey used to say.

And your apparent Christian bias for the New Testament is suspect, anyway, since I could give you evidence in the form of links that would blow the authority of the New Testament to shreds and “prove” they allegedly were corrupted and not accurate. So your “I am against Jews and Israel because Christianity is the “TRUTH”” is just as corrupt as you say the Jewish Talmudic authorities are. NOT saying I agree with this, but I am simply being intellectually honest, unlike you. 🤷👍
 
edwest2 said:
Sadly, the point is being missed by a wide margin. Major governments have departments that do nothing but evaluate intel, have a list of targets, and a list of threshold events. So, if country Y does Z, they look at the scenario/consequence list and some group, who will not and cannot reveal what they know, orders the strike. The President rubber stamps it. The end.

If, and this has yet to be verified, a nerve agent like Sarin was used, possibly in combination with chlorine, then this “message” was proportionate and justified. But even if these agents are not independently verified, some people will just believe what they want or forget about it. Vietnam was halfway around the world but the excuse for the war still makes no sense to this day.

In any case, the detective work needs to be done. Was a Syrian jet spotted? Did an artillery shell impact in the area at the time in question? Or both? Or, one was a distraction while the alleged Sarin gas, which is difficult to handle safely and needs the wind blowing in the right direction to work effectively, was deployed by other means?

In any case, this should be a warning to the Syrian leadership that the US, or Russia, could turn on it. And I have no explanation, at all, for US-led airstrikes. What “interests” are we (and the British and Russians) protecting? All I hear are crickets.

The News in the US:

Good Evening!

Death! Killing! Disasters! And now, Sports and Weather.

Yeah. I don’t feel informed because I’m not. And should those in charge care? They don’t.

Ed
Click to expand...
:clapping:
 
One has to wonder if Western intervention worsen things. For example, the West wasn’t seen in Tunisia during its ‘Arab Spring’ and it’s much more stable than Libya and Syria, where the West intervened. Both of those are still in chaos. At this point it’s probably better to let people there fix their own problems.
 
I_trust said:
At least we can rest assured Trump is NOT in the pocket of Russia.
Click to expand...
There was never any ‘Russian Connection’ but, to claim there was would put pressure with his friendliness with Putin. I thought Trump was going to handle it differently as it would wear out. But, he broke under pressure surrounded by self interest group advisers.

Now, they will back off him. He may even make it to the cover of Time Magazine. Forbes will provide an excellent article about how the wall was build magnificently etc… Soros will pull out the protests. Trump may even be offered the Noble Peace Prize. He is going to look really good - a saviour - when the pass his health care bill. They will work with him as long as he stays out and does what they want internationally. Even AIPAC politically raised (Paul Ryan, Hilary, et al) will hail him. Hillary will stop criticizing him - they will back off. They could careless about the domestic situation. They want the ME.
 
Vouthon said:
Donald Trump demonstrated that he, unlike his predecessor Barack Obama - who was weakened in his position by the British Parliament and his own, perfectly understandable, multilateral instincts - is not only capable of drawing a “red line” but is prepared to punish those who cross it.

I respect that, over and above the moral certitude and international security imperatives underlying this intervention, I really do.

Trump seems to be more of a unilateral actor rather than a multilateral one like Obama, who always relied on consensus from US allies and never exerted American strength in its own right, for its own purpose and strategic goals.

I never understood “Make America Great Again”, nor did I like the nativist-tinged nostalgia and nationalism - or Trump’s often uncouth and insufferable way of speaking as well as conducting himself - but if this is what it amounts to in the foreign policy realm, acting in defence of American values - which are human values - when the need be grave and manifest, unilaterally if required, then I’m all for it.
Click to expand...
Good post.

In short, Trump’s mannerisms make me wince but I support this action he has taken.
 
Gotta say, some really disturbing stuff has been surfacing in this thread.

From the “false flag” accusations, to the “corrupt Talmudist” hate stuff, which could come right from the pages of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, to the insinuations that AIPAC controls certain American political figures, etc. One of the posters of this kind of bile posted in another thread about the “Jewish NKVD.”

The same kind of wickedness you might find on Stormfront.

It’s like there’s a sewer running under CAF, and every now and then there’s a crack in the pipes and we get to see and smell the slime running through it.
 
ATraveller said:
One has to wonder if Western intervention worsen things. For example, the West wasn’t seen in Tunisia during its ‘Arab Spring’ and it’s much more stable than Libya and Syria, where the West intervened. Both of those are still in chaos. At this point it’s probably better to let people there fix their own problems.
Click to expand...
Getting rid of Ghaddifi is regarded by many (including myself) as a big mistake. The fact is he was beginning to behave himself.

The problem with Syria is was the withdrawal from Iraq by Barack Obama resulted in a spill-over.

One of the biggest problems with the last administration, as D’Souza notes, is that for decades American policy has been predicated on choosing the bad guy over the worse guy. What people who are fortunate to live under the shadow of the deep-sea American nuclear fleet and NORAD is that the kind of nonsense we see in these places has been the norm and still is.
 
JW55 said:
The topic has swayed somewhat from the initial thread. My biggest concern is what this strike could mean and how big our involvement will get. Syria is half way around the world. Why must we continually intervene in the affairs of these other nations? Our numerous interventions have perpetuated the unrest in these regions. The present disorder in the Middle East is primarily due to the intervention of the west over the last 70 yrs. In the Middle East they fight each other and always have. Why must we involve ourselves in this?

I am not anyway diminishing the tragic deaths of anyone there. Chemical weapons are terrible. Who used them in this episode has a great deal of uncertainty. We are quick to point the figure at Assad and not consider if there were Chemical weapons in these store houses why wouldn’t who put them there be accountable?.

The things we see happening are the result of war itself. We try to make rules of warfare like a chess game that gentlemen play. We can’t dictate the rules of war. People will do whatever they have to, to save their on hide. The best way to avoid the horrors and tragedies of war is to do everything we can to not enter in to these attacks.

Our involvement adds to the magnitude of this problem and enable an escalation of the tragedies to a world level. This goes at least back to Project Ajax in 1953 in Iran, the arbitrary division of national lines in Middle Eastern countries of tribes as in Iraq that didn’t get along. We somehow feel we can enter a country by force and they will love us so much tat they will accept western style democracy without us considering their own particular customs and beliefs.

Americans also tire very quickly of these type of wars. It seems to gain favor initially with the Tomahawks firing down on the runways as a Lone Ranger do-gooder with a white hat riding off into the sunset with the girl. The same folks who are supportive now will largely be chastising our involvement if we entrench ourselves as we did in Vietnam and Afghanistan. The criticism will flow, the longer in goes. For the time being it has mildly pacified the McCains and Grahams but it won’t last long.

I pray that we don’t escalate this from where it already is.
Click to expand...
Unless Syria is going to somehow attack the USA or Europe, it won’t. Neither side will escalate this to proportions of Armageddon, but America’s adversaries all over are seething because they all were pretty much caught with their pants down. Trump ordered this just after dinner with China, Russia didn’t have anything close to shadowing this fleet, and all the global despots are going to hide their saber-rattles for a while.

They’ve realized there’s a new sheriff in town.

That’s all this is going to be. Trump has no interest in nation-building in the name of progress and religion or the “right thing” or making the Third World better for feminists and progressives at the point of a gun.
 
This action strikes me as both balanced and effective. It is not easy to find a balance between neutrality in someone else’s civil war and not tolerating chemical warfare. This was a proper presidential act.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top