US launches Tomahawks on Syrian airbases

How many women and children have been killed in US drone strikes. Dead is dead.

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: kosmicjack
a reply to: toysforadults

Bull#. I voted for him, in part because he campaigned strongly on the principle that the U.S. shouldn't be involved in regime change. And yet here we are...

This is NOT a regime change action. Get educated on the issue, then comment. Stop making things up.

It is quite right to point out that Trumps campaign platform included the end of intervention in the Middle East.

Educate your own self...

"We will stop racing to topple foreign regimes that we know nothing about, that we shouldn't be involved with," Trump said, insisting the United States must end a "destructive cycle of intervention and chaos."

"Syrian Dictator" "war on terror" here we go again. to be fair if he can pull it off ill give him respect but it does NOT look good in many ways.

"Russia reports Russian casualties at Shayrat airbase from Tomahawk strikes"

Well thanks for that Trump. What a liar.

originally posted by: mOjOm

originally posted by: BlueAjah
a reply to: kosmicjack

Trump cares about people. He was visibly upset seeing the images of children harmed and killed by the chemical attacks.
He did something about it.

Ya, lot's of us were upset by it. But the President isn't just allowed to start a war with another nation because how he feels one day.

That's just f*cking madness!!!

Except that he is.

In a multitude of circumstances with a multitude of potential actions/responses.

Look it up.

Whether that's a good or a bad thing depends on who's sitting in the chair at the time I guess...

The fact that he has surrounded himself with some great military minds and leaders will help a lot in these scenarios.

Mattis alone is worth any other 3 men...sounds like he and McMasters are starting to flex their considerable influence/knowledge.

ON a final note - I'm not a Trump fan by any means. But I still love my country...

a reply to: Ohanka

What lie?

originally posted by: MrPlow

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: MrPlow

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: MrPlow
I'm sorry but where was even the slightest hint of approval from Congress? This literally went down with 24-48 hours and nothing was even ran by Congress? Does this #ing clown understand how this #ing country works!???

Even further, where is the uproar by Congress over not getting any kind of approval?

Didn't Trump just say, the other day, that he was Americas President...not President of the World!? I sure as # don't see it.

I guess you forgot when Obama attacked Libya without congressional approval. The president does have the authority to take such an action.

I didn't forget. I also didn't state I was okay with that move either, did I?

Then don't talk like the President can't do that. He can. You can disagree with it all you want.

Congress didn't seem to believe so then. So did you support Obamas moves in Libya...at least to the extent that he was allowed to make them?

I did acknowledge he had the legal authority. It's black and white.

originally posted by: kosmicjack
a reply to: JinMI

Because propaganda always includes dead children in the streets.

That's my point. It's all I've heard/seen for the past two days.

Assad doesn't gain anything by chemical bombing his own, regardless of supposed affiliation. Russia does. U.S. does.

a reply to: EmmanuelGoldstein

I am willing to bet that Mcmaster made the reccomendation based on intel fron Army SF agents embeded in the area.

originally posted by: intrptr

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: kosmicjack
a reply to: toysforadults

Bull#. I voted for him, in part because he campaigned strongly on the principle that the U.S. shouldn't be involved in regime change. And yet here we are...

This is NOT a regime change action. Get educated on the issue, then comment. Stop making things up.

It is quite right to point out that Trumps campaign platform included the end of intervention in the Middle East.

Educate your own self...

"We will stop racing to topple foreign regimes that we know nothing about, that we shouldn't be involved with," Trump said, insisting the United States must end a "destructive cycle of intervention and chaos."

That's not what I was saying. Read to understand. Cruise missile strikes are not "regime change". YOU educate YOURself. Thanks.

Trump would never kill Russians. He's their buddy. That's what the Left says.

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: c2oden

Get a grip man.

There are steps to doing stuff like this. We don't allow our President to just start some sh*t because he thinks it's a good idea.

How many illegal wars must Republicans start before we stop allowing them to have power???

FFS, they just can't seem to interact on the world stage anymore without pulling out their dick and sticking it in someone's soup!!

Do you think was done by Trump, and Trump only?

a reply to: face23785

Of course it is. And Tillerson implied as much today. But the populace needs to be duck-walked through it since it's clear it's not why Trump was elected.

a reply to: Willtell

Reports are that Assad decided he could go back to killing his people because Trump had said he wants to work with Assad against the terrorists. Assad took this as a free pass. Trump has now clarified that his trust must be earned and not taken for granted. That sends a strong message to other countries.

This is not a regime change attempt. This is a strong warning.

Obama made empty threats years ago, and when Assad crossed the "red line", Obama wavered. The solution at the time did not work.

a reply to: IAMTAT

Apparently Russia was informed prior to the attack.
Apparently there were no Russian assets at the airbase.

Apparently.
www.nytimes.com...

a reply to: buckwhizzle

Why do we think we have to be the Worlds' policeman?

Because we're not.

'World policeman' is a misnomer to begin with.

Cops don't have cruise missiles to begin with.

NYT says Russia was informed. I don't think they'll be very happy about it.

Hopefully the Russians told the Syrians and they were able to get their guys out.

Trump seems to be trying to walk a line here but he's in a bad place. I'm sure he knows the gas attack was fake, but the Neocons at the CIA are insisting and no doubt putting other pressure on him. The Neocons/Saudis/Brits clearly have a lot of power, but Trump will soon have zero support if he governs as 'Neocon Killary afterall,' and probably face impeachment in months not years as a result.

If this doesn't escalate, it amounts to a public spanking of Assad for the sake of the CIA's false narrative, and Trump is hanging tough and keeping the Neocons in check despite immense pressure. I guess that wasn't such a terrible move for the moment, given his predicament. But for Trump, it's already a 'one wrong move' sort of political situation, and the diplomatic/strategic situation isn't much better, with WWIII not many steps down the road should things escalate.

And the CIA is looking really bad here. They are behaving like a bunch of spoiled, idiotic children trying to do something like this just mere months after the historic election that saw the Neocons and Globalists rejected by most of the country. What do they really think they are going to do now anyway, somehow get all the Hillary voters to support Trump so they can invade Syria and start WWIII like she would have? They're caught in their own propaganda strategy because while it is anti-Russian, it is also mostly about being anti-Trump and so the left won't support Trump doing anything. They seem to have defeated themselves already with their own disorganized propaganda in that there will be next to zero support for Trump going to war in Syria. All he'd have is the sort of people who would have voted for Jeb Bush lol.

We now know that Trump is no better than any of the previous neocons that have taken office. And potentially a lot worse.

Russia was not warned of the attack.

twitter.com...