Russia PM says Trump attack came within an inch of war with Russia

originally posted by: NerdGoddess

originally posted by: darkbake
This is a tricky situation because Russia is in Syria fighting for Assad. If we fight against Assad there is a high risk we will end up fighting or wounding Russians. I thought the missile strike was a good idea to retaliate for the use of chemical weapons, but I don't want war with Russia.

I share the same feelings, and had the same worries about war with Russia.

-Alee

Don't sweat it, we're not gonna go to war with Russia.

originally posted by: kyleplatinum

originally posted by: allsee4eye
Trump goes on a rampage

Rampage huh?... lol, not even close.

It was a limited short term military intervention.

Take a breath.

Some of you people must be niave to think that if the US does not interfere in a senerio as to what is going on with chemical attacks elsewhere, then eventually
those attacks will at some point make it to other countries and the west.

Justified 100%

Keep on repeating the same lies.

How much more do you want? Clearly, Afghanistan and Iraq weren't enough. Libya. Yemen. Iran is still on the "they're gonna kill us all," list. Now Syria?

And all of them created by the purposeful use of logical fallacies (appeal to emotion - "it's for the children") and perpetual lies regarding weapons of mass destruction (now "chemical weapons").

Some of us are naive?

Clearly. How many bombs were dropped last year? Upwards of 20,000, no? How many more until this perverted sense of security is appeased?

How much more draconian legislation do we need in order to "protect us," and better yet - how have NONE of the previous breaches of privacy for "security," through surveillance prevented any sort of terrorist attacks?

But some suggest that we need even MORE government interference, as if it's going to yield a different result than what we've been seeing for the past six or seven decades.

Just like the Gulf of Tonkin, just like the 7/7 bombings, like 9/11, like many of the mass shootings that many ATS members consider to be "false flags," - this, too, is no different.

You know what I find absolutely hilarious? The die-hard cult fanatics grasping at straws to deflect to liberals - as if that's relevant to this event at all, considering conservatives have been preaching how they have full control of the House/Senate... yet they STILL blame "the other side."

And don't misconstrue me - Democrats aren't any different. Speaking of, am I the only one who finds it ironic that Hillary just made a statement regarding Syria and how we need to involve ourselves?

You know - this is golden, but no conservative has the balls to admit it. They CHEERED and PRAISED that "Hillary isn't in office," which I admit I'm happy for as well, but Donald Trump - the current, relevant POTUS - acted in a demeanor that is EXACTLY that of what Hillary herself has proposed.

So where people deflect and say, "but what about Hillary," this scenario is fertile ground for reminder that Donald Trump is absolutely no different than other corrupt, scandalous, , self-idolizing POS that is poisoning this nation.

Will be interesting to see how this turns out.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: NthOther
a reply to: darkbake

Retaliate? For what?

They didn't do anything to us.

ETA: I just echoed Annee. I'm gonna go throw up.

And - - we block Syrians from entering the US as refugees.

Now, we try to save them?

Yes, because they need to stay in their own country. There's nothing wrong with defending them and not wanting them here at the same time. I believe it's been brought up to set up protection in Syria for the people wanting to leave. Maybe now you'll understand that not wanting them here doesn't mean we hate the innocent people trying to leave.

a reply to: RomeByFire

a reply to: Wardaddy454

Or it helps a desperate administration make that very claim. Nice timing.

a reply to: Gandalf77

No coincidence there either right? The game is rigged. Russia was ready for war because Hillary wanted to do this when she took office. Now they have an agreement with Russia to make it look like they aren't in bed together. It was all rigged and this was a distraction into Russia/Trump ties.

a reply to: mzinga

Well said. I wouldn't be surprised. Maybe Trump will take things too far & piss off Putty enough that he leaks the mother of all leak tapes. Comrade Trump! You will comply....

a reply to: LSU0408

How can you be so sure?
Russia suspends agreement to ensure flight safety in Syria
Which basically means that they can down any plane and say "oops we didn't know that was yours"
The US claims Russia is responsible for the gas attacks
Which is pretty much an expected move since it was the Russians which signed responsibility for removing them a few years back. But also bad because it shifts the conflicts focus from Assad to Putin.
The Admiral Grigorovich is not on the way to the eastern Mediterranean Sea to hand out candy.

So how can you be so sure this won't escalate further? The decision to launch the airstrike was entirely emotional, not fact based, what if Putin shows Trump the middle finger and he loses it again?

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: allsee4eye

i got a feeling that those pictures are bullsh@@, a tomahawk is 18 feet long and 20 foot with boater and two foot wide. carries about a 1000 pounds of explosives.

i maybe wrong but i don't think you can pack a 1000lbs into this.

Same thing I was thinking... Nothing in the pictures these nerds posted on Twitter look like any part of this.

originally posted by: RomeByFire

originally posted by: Willtell
This is an absolute reckless act with no justification.

The deep Nazi state forced Trump to do it because of his bad press.


So there going to risk a war with Russia, a potential world destroying event just for this deep state political act against Assad without any clear proof he used gas.


No investigation


We are in trouble folks

God help us

Yeah, we're in trouble alright.

God doesn't exist, and has nothing to do with geopolitical schemes.

The deep state Nazi's made Trump do it.

Goddamn - you people are bat# insane.

Two. Thumbs. Up.

a reply to: Gandalf77

If such a leak exists it would have been leaked in the 2016 election.

originally posted by: paraphi

originally posted by: allsee4eye
More than 30 were intercepted by SA-22 Greyhounds near Tartus.

A couple of points. Well, four actually.

1. Where is the evidence that Russia shot down 30 cruise missiles. Only your word for this so far. I would have thought RT.com and other Russian propaganda sites would be broadcasting that fact by now, eh?
2. No disrespect to the Russians, but they won't try war so an inch is a mile.
3. All these fancy Russian missile systems have so far been unable to protect Syrian airspace. They are as good as cardboard cut-outs
4. Russia has no moral position in Syria since they did a Grozny on Aleppo, used cluster bombs in built up areas and have been uncritical of Assad’s brutality.

"4. Russia has no moral position in Syria since they did a Grozny on Aleppo, used cluster bombs in built up areas and have been uncritical of Assad’s brutality."


Although there is the possibility that the news you parrot from US media sources is correct. We must not forget that the same news sources told us that Iraq had WMD, day after day after day. Regardless of reports from UN Inspectors working in Iraq, that Iraq HAD NO WMD. So its clear that the US and its propoganda news services have no interest in telling the truth so its not a reliable source of information that one should trust. It is only interested in spreading propoganda to allow the continual plundering of soverign states planned in 2001 if not before.

In 2013 UN investigators found that rebel forces used nerve agent sarin, not Assad. So its likely that US or one of the allies is providing the rebels with WMD (and training in use off) given that the rebels don't have any manufacturing plants to produce their own weapons.

There is also evidence that the US used WMD in Iraq so its not a great surprize that they would train and supply rebels with WMD in Syria, then blame Assad, to justify the ongoing plundering of a sovereign state.

I hope its food for thought at least.

originally posted by: Annee
So, the US is just one country among many.

All countries should condemn this type warfare - - gas/chemical attacks.

But, why should the US be the one to retaliate via bombing?

Add this to Obama 12,000 Bombs dropped in Syria in 2016 alone.

a reply to: allsee4eye
Not necessarily. If Trump has been groomed by Ivan for as long as some suspect, the kompromat would have been gathered as a matter of course in that whole game and squirreled away for a really rainy day. As long as team Trump was willing to play ball, there was no need to play that card.

Now if someone opposed to Trump had come across that million dollar video, then yes, it most likely would have been leaked in 2016.

a reply to: Gandalf77

Trump is the American president. If some foreign state tries to blackmail the American president, the whole American people would stand behind the American president. Americans aren't as stupid as some might think they are.

originally posted by: allsee4eye
a reply to: alphabetaone

Yeah it's old. It's subsonic. Easy to shoot down.

And it hits its target.

originally posted by: Gandalf77
a reply to: ZIPMATT
It detracts from the whole tough guy story. Hypocritical republicans are too busy praising their flip-flopping, floundering flimflam man in the oval-a-lago to talk about the real implications of this.

Psh. Every news agency in America would be on it like flies on # if it was true. In fact, I'm surprised they're not all yammering about it right now since someone on Twitter said so.

originally posted by: glend
So its clear that the US and its propoganda news services have no interest in telling the truth so its not a reliable source of information that one should trust.

Honestly, I think you might have that backwards...it would seem to me to make more sense that a globalist agenda would find it prudent to feed lies TO the media, create an air of unreliability so that what the globalists fear the most, honest reporting, is no longer trusted.

a reply to: allsee4eye
I'm not so sure about either of those points.
Blackmail is one of the oldest dirty tools in the book, & if it turned out to be true in this case, Trump certainly wouldn't be the first politician to be screwed by it.

And while there are plenty of stupid Americans who probably would stand behind Trump in that case, there are plenty of smart Americans--maybe even some who voted for him--who would comprehend the gravity of the situation.

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: LSU0408

How can you be so sure?
Russia suspends agreement to ensure flight safety in Syria
Which basically means that they can down any plane and say "oops we didn't know that was yours"
The US claims Russia is responsible for the gas attacks
Which is pretty much an expected move since it was the Russians which signed responsibility for removing them a few years back. But also bad because it shifts the conflicts focus from Assad to Putin.
The Admiral Grigorovich is not on the way to the eastern Mediterranean Sea to hand out candy.

So how can you be so sure this won't escalate further? The decision to launch the airstrike was entirely emotional, not fact based, what if Putin shows Trump the middle finger and he loses it again?

Trump didn't get emotional and push a button on those Navy vessels. He was given a plan after hours of intelligence and planning and ok'd the strike. He didn't act alone. People were frightened over a nuclear fallout in the 50's, let's not fall for it again. America is more powerful than Russia anyways, Putin would be stupid to wage war with us.