It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

US launches Tomahawks on Syrian airbases

page: 76
122
<< 73  74  75    77  78  79 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 7 2017 @ 07:58 PM
link   




posted on Apr, 7 2017 @ 08:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Bedlam

That actually makes a lot of sense with those I know, including my advisor and a research engineer for the school. Both rely heavily on mathematics and can write amazing papers, but when it comes to application... eh, so-so.

I tend to analyze a problem half to death, then fix it, first time. Occasionally, I'll have to make a few adjustments and do a rebuild. They'll develop the math, throw something together, tear it down, re-develop the math, throw something together, tear it down... eventually, they get it right.

TheRedneck



posted on Apr, 7 2017 @ 08:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

How the heck do you aim at Syria and hit Iran? They don't even share a border... not even close!

TheRedneck



posted on Apr, 7 2017 @ 08:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Phage

How the heck do you aim at Syria and hit Iran? They don't even share a border... not even close!

TheRedneck


Little too much hot sauce on the old fastball, ya?



posted on Apr, 7 2017 @ 08:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Phage

How the heck do you aim at Syria and hit Iran? They don't even share a border... not even close!

TheRedneck

Atmospheric disturbances.

Sunspots.

Nibiru.

edit on 4/7/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 7 2017 @ 08:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage




posted on Apr, 7 2017 @ 08:30 PM
link   
This is my first post on ATS. So, here it goes:

The more I've had to time to let it sink in, the more and more I'm convinced that this entire series events in Syria that have unfolded in the last week is - as was my first impression - a giant false flag. Here's a short summary of what I think might have transpired:

First, Putin swears up and down that Assad wasn't in possession of any chemical weapons - and he may have been right. The chemical attack did actually happen and people were hurt. However, the chemical used probably wasn't Saran, but rather a new type of Saran-like chemical developed in the US and was used on Syrian civilians by US military/intelligence to accomplish the following aims:

1) to test the chemical out on people to gauge its effects, and 2) to create a pretext / reason / excuse for launching 59 missiles by blaming Assad.

There are far more than the two reasons I've listed here, but I'm not going to sit here and write a thesis.

Regardless, I'm not even convinced now that the missile launch was entirely as it was portrayed. Pictures of the air base show only light damage compared to what it should have looked like after being struck by 59 consecutive tomahawks. Were the missiles really fired from a ship like we were shown - were they even tomahawks? Then, on this side of the ocean, you have bizarro neoliberal / globalist types like Schumer, Pelosi, Trudeau, McCain, and Hillary all essentially endorsing or even praising Trump's decision to order the strike.

To me, this reeks of a huge psyop. The government and the media are once again duping everyone in sight.
edit on 7-4-2017 by AndrossWittyWitmyer because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 7 2017 @ 08:31 PM
link   
When John McCain, Hillary Clinton and CNN applaud something that Trump has done, you have to wonder if it was the right thing..



posted on Apr, 7 2017 @ 08:47 PM
link   
What are these?

twitter.com...



posted on Apr, 7 2017 @ 08:56 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Let's just hope, if there is a confrontation, that the Russians aim directly at us...

TheRedneck



posted on Apr, 7 2017 @ 08:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Realtruth
What's interesting is we only know what they want us to know, and basically nothing else.

Talk about spoon fed BS. smh


Applies to the whole damn thing. The gas attack, the missiles and the entire mother loving Middle East. # like we pulled should be reserved for direct threats to our people or our homeland.



posted on Apr, 7 2017 @ 09:02 PM
link   
I’m going to tell this one more time to remind us what’s going on.


I’m not going to post the youtube with General Wesely Clark again.

But just google it

WESELY CLARK 7 NATIONS


You’ll see the plot to destabilize 7 ME countries.

Syria and Iran is all that’s left.


These people are ruthless, programmed to do this no matter how long it takes, no matter the administration, they are going to get this done, or kill us all trying



posted on Apr, 7 2017 @ 09:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: burdman30ott6


Ideally, a lot of us voted for Trump because we hoped he'd do things a bit differently than his predecessors.

I do have to admit Trump's reaction is far preferable to failure-based diplomatic disasters and threats or posturing quickly followed up by retreat.

My only concern is that something about the Sarin attack just seems fishy. I'm hoping this doesn't go badly.

However it goes, Trump gets the blame or the credit.

TheRedneck


Oh he'll be blamed alright. Was there a UN resolution to strike Syria? No.

Did Congress authorize a strike?

So how was this even legal?

Short answer, it wasn't. It was a war of aggression against​ a soverign state exclusively perpetrated by the president of the united States, this whole thing is on his lap.

I doubt he even understands the gravity of the situation.
edit on 7-4-2017 by Rosinitiate because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 7 2017 @ 09:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Rosinitiate




Did Congress authorize a strike?

Congress doesn't have to authorize it. But he is supposed to discuss it with them first.
Title 50 U.S. Code - "War Powers Resolution"

§ 1542 - Consultation; initial and regular consultations

The President in every possible instance shall consult with Congress before introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, and after every such introduction shall consult regularly with the Congress until United States Armed Forces are no longer engaged in hostilities or have been removed from such situations.

www.law.cornell.edu...



posted on Apr, 7 2017 @ 09:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

The US military was already in Syria.



posted on Apr, 7 2017 @ 09:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Rosinitiate




Did Congress authorize a strike?

Congress doesn't have to authorize it. But he is supposed to discuss it with them first.
Title 50 U.S. Code - "War Powers Resolution"

§ 1542 - Consultation; initial and regular consultations

The President in every possible instance shall consult with Congress before introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, and after every such introduction shall consult regularly with the Congress until United States Armed Forces are no longer engaged in hostilities or have been removed from such situations.

www.law.cornell.edu...


Yes, yes. He can act arbitrarily for 60-90 days or something before requesting authority to wage war, correct? If, their is a threat to US sovereignty that is imminent in nature.

Or am I missing something.



posted on Apr, 7 2017 @ 09:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Rosinitiate

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Rosinitiate




Did Congress authorize a strike?

Congress doesn't have to authorize it. But he is supposed to discuss it with them first.
Title 50 U.S. Code - "War Powers Resolution"

§ 1542 - Consultation; initial and regular consultations

The President in every possible instance shall consult with Congress before introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, and after every such introduction shall consult regularly with the Congress until United States Armed Forces are no longer engaged in hostilities or have been removed from such situations.

www.law.cornell.edu...


Yes, yes. He can act arbitrarily for 60-90 days or something before requesting authority to wage war, correct? If, there​ is a threat to US sovereignty that is imminent in nature.

Or am I missing something.

edit on 7-4-2017 by Rosinitiate because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 7 2017 @ 09:26 PM
link   
Bad CIA! Leave my phone alone, just trying to fix a typo.


Nevermind, I'll just leave the typo. Let's see what happens here.
edit on 7-4-2017 by Rosinitiate because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-4-2017 by Rosinitiate because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 7 2017 @ 09:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Rosinitiate

He can act arbitrarily for 60-90 days or something before requesting authority to wage war, correct?
Not exactly.
www.law.cornell.edu...



Or am I missing something.
Yes, some details. But the legality of Trump's action should be added to the list of investigations. Whether or not it will be is another matter.



posted on Apr, 7 2017 @ 09:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Rosinitiate

He can act arbitrarily for 60-90 days or something before requesting authority to wage war, correct?
Not exactly.
www.law.cornell.edu...



Or am I missing something.
Yes, some details. But the legality of Trump's action should be added to the list of investigations. Whether or not it will be is another matter.




The Lefty's should have him by the balls for this one. Yet, they'll finally agree with him over of his actions and let him skate. Funny that.
edit on 7-4-2017 by Rosinitiate because: (no reason given)







 
122
<< 73  74  75    77  78  79 >>

log in

join