Well, yeah, since you won’t have to fight.:rolleyes:
Attacking Assad means war with Russia, just as much letting Serbia fall meant war with Russia in 1914.
I said above that I thought the attack on Syria was a signal to China that Trump would be willing to attack North Korea. And some analysts in China think the same thing.
As facetious as you mean that, oddly enough it probably works on paper aside from the forced conversions, the Jews would side with the Muslims against that part.
Of course everything looks great on paper 
As facetious as you mean that, oddly enough it probably works on paper aside from the forced conversions, the Jews would side with the Muslims against that part i am sure.
Of course everything always looks great on paper
A happy coincidence, most likely.
There are still 10,000 Al Qaeda fighters in the middle of a major offensive against Hama, they haven’t resumed operations just to show the US up.
How strange. Trump’s administration handled this perfectly, but you’re sure they’ll screw it up somehow. But you’re totally okay with Hillary’s idea that the entire Syrian airforce should be destroyed - an idea that is very close to being batshit crazy and a good example of why Hillary was such a lousy Secretary of State.
Syria’s air force consists of approximately 500 aircraft, spread out over 21 different airbases. Because of the heavy Russian presence, those airbases will also be full of Russians and Russian aircraft and support hardware. Wiping out Syria’s air force would have certainly resulted in Russian casualties and thousands of Syrian casualties.
I can’t think of a better way to trigger a serious reprisal by Russia. You think Putin could tolerate losing a few billions of dollars in assets and maybe dozens to hundreds of Russian soldier casualties without being forced to respond in some way?
And you guys thought Trump was the loose cannon. Here, his response was careful and measured, while the ‘serious politician’ Hillary Clinton’s idea is reckless and dangerous - just like her decisions in Libya and Syria before.
I agree with Sam Stone. HRC’s “plan” to destroy Syria’s air force means going to war with Russia. It’s nucking futs!
We wait with bated breath, what brilliant stratagem have you in mind? That will deliver serious damage to Assad’s capacity with little or no risk of starting some shit with the Russians.
You don’t know? Perhaps he does, given the depth of his experience and understanding? Or would you like to try to sell the natural born strategic genius? That assures us that this man sees what no other could.
And what signs should we look for, of this miracle that surpasseth all understanding? Haven’t checked lately, has Assad fled to Iran? No? Well, his forces stood down, that wretched city of late is safe from attack? No? His forces are massively disadvantaged, immobilized? No?
Is this one of those more subtle miracles, without clear signs to wonder upon? I hope it is not going to be one of those that require faith. I have a bad history with those.
Well…
And…
And…
In related news, Tomahawk maker’s stock up after U.S. launch on Syria. Tomahawk missiles are made by Raytheon.
According to Business Insider, ‘Trump also owns stock in many well-known companies including… Raytheon…’
So it appears Trump is personally profiting from the strike.
Do you think, lacking such profit concerns, Hillary would have used a different weapon system?
Vlad? Donny. Listen, could you have Assad gas a village for me? I could really use the distraction from the Russia investigation. Besides, it’s been almost three months and I haven’t gotten to play Sheriff yet.
Since the word was that the airfield would had been destroyed if it was Clinton, and the word is that Tomahawks were not good to disable the runway, then the answer is yes.
BTW reading about what Clinton proposed it was with the context of having a no-fly zone in place, just ask the Kurds if the no-fly zone did not stop Saddam from gassing them. The point here is that the weak reaction by Trump would not had been much needed because then the poison gas attracts would not had taken place.
As for the profit angle, now you know why that saying about “may you live in interesting times” is in reality a curse. Although I would change it to the now more appropriate “May you live in conflict of interest times”.
Correction, I meant: poison gas attacks.
Where does this come from. I liked a lot about Obama, and I’m as worried as anyone about Trump.
But Obama and Clinton had 4 years to deal with this, and she was there during the “red line” discussion. Now all the sudden she’s a hawks on this and Obama was just “this close” to taking action? Now the Russians are there and it’s an entirely new ballgame.
Damage to a runway is amazing easy to repair. Better to target aircraft than concrete.
It is well known that Clinton was generally a hawk and has continuously supported a no fly zone over Syria.
A runway isn’t the best target at an airfield? Do you have some sort of link that argues against what should be obvious?
A hawk who was unable to persuade her Administration to take action.
What’s past is past, and I probably shouldn’t have jumped into this. My main beef is that the power vacuum that was partially caused by our inaction at the time was and is filled now by Putin, which complicates and restricts our options to this day.
Why is that obvious that the runway is central to the Syrian air force? What do you think is easier to repair? I hole in the ground that requires dirt and concrete, or a jet fighter made of light weight aluminum and titanium that is now in 5,000 pieces?
Runways have been bad targets since WWII due to the ability to easily repair them. To keep them inoperable requires fairly consistent bombing, which the United States wasn’t willing to do.
But it does prevent the other guys from getting aircraft up when they need them the most, as in the Pacific in WWII.
A note of correction: While Clinton was SecState during the famous “red line statement” by Obama, Kerry was in that office when the “red line” was actually crossed. Clinton had nothing to do with how Obama actually handled the situation in 2013 when CWs were used by Assad.