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

The public has no-idea how well planned these things have to be...because defenses are always in place. James "Mad Dog" Mattis planned yesterday's attack personally.

originally posted by: carewemust
The public has no-idea how well planned these things have to be...because defenses are always in place. James "Mad Dog" Mattis planned yesterday's attack personally.

Sources please?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Idreamofme
a reply to: allsee4eye

i was just wondering how this whole thing works. so lets say hypothetically, daesh sets off chemical attack, msm says assad did it, then us attacks assad, making russia and iran irate. sounds like a whole can of worms, and the lids off....

You just pinpointed why Trump should have stayed out of this.

Just found this interesting:

Some of President Trump’s most ardent campaign supporters were among his most vocal opponents on Thursday after he ordered the missile strike against Syria, charging him with breaking his promise to keep the United States out of another conflict in the Middle East. www.msn.com...

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.

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

originally posted by: carewemust
The public has no-idea how well planned these things have to be...because defenses are always in place. James "Mad Dog" Mattis planned yesterday's attack personally.

Sources please?

Defense Secretary James Mattis will present President Trump with plans prepared by U.S. Central Command for a "saturation strike" on Syrian military targets tonight at Mar-a-Lago, per The Intercept.

What that means: The U.S. would launch dozens of Tomahawk missiles at Syrian military targets to overwhelm their Russian-bolstered defense systems and cripple Syrian air capability against rebel forces, military sources told the Intercept.

The big risk: The saturation strike would almost certainly result in Russian deaths, which is the "sticking point" for Mattis. The risk of Russian casualties — plus the location of Syrian air defenses in densely populated areas — were big reasons why the Obama administration never went forward with such a plan.

Axios "article"

I think somebody has decided that the above means Mattis personally planned everything out.

a reply to: Annee

Yeah. I've been reading about that too. Looks like this decision was the first major gut check to Trump's supporters.

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.

Yeah, US has all the moral position after such a great humanitarian job they can't seem to finish in Mosul. Not to mention the rest of the middle east they have destroyed. The Hypocrisy coming out of your mouth, can be matched only by that of your leaders.

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.

a reply to: allsee4eye

The Medvedev tweet is accurate, the other tweets of shooting down the missiles aren't.

Not saying they didn't. But I doubt they did. Cruise missiles are fairly hard to shoot down.

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: Velatropa24

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.

Yeah, US has all the moral position after such a great humanitarian job they can't seem to finish in Mosul. Not to mention the rest of the middle east they have destroyed. The Hypocrisy coming out of your mouth, can be matched only by that of your leaders.

Pointing out that Russia doesn't have the moral high ground is not the same as claiming the US has it.

The idiocy pouring out of your mouth is only matched by whatever drivel you read for "information."

Before pointing the finger at others, its alwYs a good idea to have a look of you are any better - go figure.

Sounds fake, Russia is on the metric system. Did we come within 2.54 cms to war?

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.

How can you or anyone with half a brain buy that "chemical weapon" crap. I honestly can not comprehend.

Knock Off The Insults

This is NOT the Political Mud Pit forum, and even if it where, we've been clamping down on the personal insults.

ENOUGH.

You disagree with someone, that's fine. If you have to resort to insulting, you need to log off and take a break.

Do not reply to this post.

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

Preliminary reports state 7 SAA soldiers killed by Trump attack.

twitter.com...

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?

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.

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

originally posted by: carewemust
The public has no-idea how well planned these things have to be...because defenses are always in place. James "Mad Dog" Mattis planned yesterday's attack personally.

Sources please?

Certainly.
theintercept.com...

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?