"US Fires Tomahawk Missiles at Syrian Airbase" Topic

"Rand Paul had strong words to say today, it seems."

Doesn't he always? I don't think the Syrian people were looking for "strong words" to come to their aid.

We're not actually coming to their aid though.

We probably should, but we're not

I like Trump, but I really wish he hadn't done this.

It's an understatement to say that I don't think Assad is a good guy. But the people who say Assad probably wouldn't use sarin gas on his own people at this point in time just might have a point.

A day or two ago, Isis said that the US had an idiot for a president, or words to that effect. Now Isis is cheering Trump. Trump has stated that he wants to defeat Isis. For me, none of this adds up.

I pray that I have expressed myself decently concerning a controversial political topic.

even the Russians say it was Sarin, and only Assad has that.

I thought Obama forced the Syrians to give up their chemical weapons a few years ago?

Because nobody else can possibly produce new sarin, right?

Man, I guess we should arrest Assad for gassing Tokyo too. ( link )

On the plus side it sends the world a message that when President Trump makes a statement, he is prepared to back it up with force.

One of the main reasons I was happy to see Trump defeat Hillary was the difference between the two on escalation in Syria. Trump has made numerous statements prior to election that are now null and void. Clearly the swamp is draining the Donald, not the other way around.

Harsh uses anonymous sources a lot …. he lacks credibility.

Turkish whistleblowers came forward *18 months ago* basically stating they had evidence it was a Turkish false flag attack: ( link )

The second source links the White Helmets to Al-Queda and the only folks who have ever linked those two groups to my knowledge has been the Syrian government and Russia.

ISIS video with allied white helmets: ( youtu.be/eVQzkxqHVNY?t=7m38s )
short clip criticizing Netflix White Helmet special, with images showing "White Helmet" personnel pulling double duty as jihadis: ( youtu.be/4oQTWn1JfeA )

I don't think the Syrian people were looking for "strong words" to come to their aid.

Well they weren't looking for American bombs either:

from: ( link )
Roughly 53 percent of those living in parts of Syria controlled by opposition forces and 92 percent living within Islamic State group territory say they are opposed to the U.S.-led air campaign, according to a new survey conducted by ORB International. In Iraq, 44 percent support the campaign while 56 percent oppose it.

That's an article from 2015, and the poll was of opposition-held territory in Syria. Also from 2015 is this:

( link ) The Syrian government currently controls around 50 percent of the territory, but it rules between 55 and 72 percent of the population left inside Syria.

So the opposition territory held a minority of the Syrian population, even back before control of Damascus and Aleppo were consolidated. And it's safe to conclude that the Syrian government-held majority probably isn't in favor of a US air campaign or other involvement either. Therefore, one can conclude that an overwhelming majority of Syria's population would prefer the US mind its own fracking business, and certainly aren't asking for Tomahawks flying into their country as "aid".

Noble, you expect anyone to take you seriously when you link to a video claiming the Illuminati are keeping the war in Syria going for their benefit?

Obviously Assad could make new Sarin, the point being he's signed up to a UN Resolution instructing him not to…

White helmets are all about saving people. They'll work with anyone. And of course, anyone can wear a white helmet.

As for Assad's motives… that dictators do things contrary to their interest is not new, as any stuident of WW2 can easily discover.

But the main problem is simply manpower. His forces are simply knackered. Using air power therefore makes sense and, since he'd gotten away with using chemical wepaons before, so did using sarin.

Most of his enemies are now in Idlib. I fail to see any reaosn why he shouldn't treat it like a free-fire zone for any toys he's still got in his arsenal.

Known facts are, well, disturbing to say the least:

1.- Trump was under attack because of suspicions of colusion between his campaign and the Russians.

2.- Out of the blue, and without any apparent purpose, there is a sarin gas attack against Syrian civilians. There is no follow up by ground forces, to take advantage of the disruption caused by the attack.

3.- Trump orders an attack against a Syrian airbase under government control.

4.- To limit casualties, there is a 60 minutes warning. Then 59 tomahawk missiles are shot at the base.

5.- Democrats are forced to cheer up Trump's actions; after all, they have been accussing him of beein soft on Russia and her Syrian allies. Now they are forced to eat their words.

6.- Less than 48 hours later, the bombed Syrian airbase is again operative. Russia's reaction has been surprisingly muted.

Surely it is a lot of coincidences and there has been not foul play, but you would agree that put together look suspicious as Hell.

Noble, you expect anyone to take you seriously when you link to a video claiming the Illuminati are keeping the war in Syria going for their benefit?

I didn't watch the first video to the end, pausing shortly after the timehack I provided. Can you provide a timestamp for the mention of the Illuminati? Because I honestly didn't catch that.

Obviously Assad could make new Sarin. the point being he's signed up to a UN Resolution instructing him not to

Wow you totally missed the point. If a religious cult in Japan can make sarin, then the demonstrably-resourceful non-state actors in Syria probably can as well. It does not require the resources of a dictatorial nation state to manufacture. So your implication in your post that the US is justified in bombing Syria because "ONLY Assad has sarin" is demonstrably false.

White helmets are all about saving people.

Just admit that you didn't even watch the footage provided, which included White Helmets on scene to provide immediate corpse disposal of a man executed by jihadis. And the white helmets also often wear a distinctive tan uniform jacket with blue shoulders. That particular uniform is what is clearly seen in the videos, not just random dudes in white construction helmets.

As for Assad's motives… that dictators do things contrary to their interest is not new, as any stuident of WW2 can easily discover.

Well, we can either draw parallels from totally different leaders who have been dead for 70 years, or we can trust a primary source who probably has a better personal understanding of Assad's psychology:

from: ( link )
Ex-UK Ambassador To Syria Questions Chemical Attack
It doesn't make sense that Assad would do it. Lets not leave our brains outside the door when we examine evidence. It would be totally self-defeating as shown by the results…Assad is not mad."

On a slightly-related note, how reliable and unbiased are the sources providing amplifying information from "on the ground"?

from: ( link )
After the gas attack in Syria that reportedly killed more than 70 people early Tuesday morning, a Syrian doctor with a British accent was widely quoted and featured by U.S. news organizations, describing the horror of the attack and the injuries, and claiming a hospital treating the victims was bombed by the Syrian government the day after the attack.

But in none of the reports was it mentioned that the doctor, a British citizen named Shajul Islam, was charged in 2012 with kidnapping and torturing two journalists in Syria — one British and the other Dutch — and is reportedly thought by British intelligence to be an acquaintance of Jihadi John, the terrorist with the British accent who cut off the head of American journalist James Foley in Syria in 2014.

"6.- Less than 48 hours later, the bombed Syrian airbase is again operative. Russia's reaction has been surprisingly muted."

7. Jimmy Hoffa and Amelia Earhart's vacation cabana on the eastern edge of the runway also was not targeted so they could continue to enjoy their retirement. Note: The props from the faked moon landing video are stored in their attic.

8. Bomb Damage Assessment photos included two pictures of Adolph Hitler sunning himself atop the control tower roof.

"The Syrian government currently controls around 50 percent of the territory, but it rules between 55 and 72 percent of the population left inside Syria." ibid.

Sarin Gas really makes it a lot easier to "control" that 55 to 72 percent of the population.

It's a while since I have talked to people who know about this sort of stuff but…
Sarin is made up of two components, which on their own, are harmless.
You don't store Sarin, you make it just before use.It is too dangerous. Therefore stupid to do so.
It has got to be mixed up in the right way in the right proportions or it just isn't Sarin.
If you have a warehouse with 20 barrels of component A and twenty barrels of component B and drop a bomb on it, it doesnt matter how big the bomb or even if the barrels were side by side. The explosion does not make Sarin. Indeed the explosion destroys the components.
There is no way at all of knowing that the 'store' contained the components of 'Sarin'
If the Syrian AF/Russians suspected it did and thought there would be some 'fallout', then why bomb it?
Four bombs were dropped using a road as aiming point. Not a massive attack. And way under capacity for an SU22 to carry. So why such a small attack and why so early in the morning?
The smoke and debris clouds don't look very dramatic for HE bombs
Sarin is weaponised 'in flight' within the casing of the shell or the bomb. a small(ish) explosion spreads the Sarin vapour over target. (it has to be a small, specific bang otherwise the explosion would destroy the Sarin!)
The US (and its allies) almost certainly tracked the aircraft from their base to the target and back. They will have listened to their chit chat as early as push -back from the ramp. There has been at least one pilot identified – Col. Yusuf Hasuri (of 677 sqn)-recordings of both will have been kept for posterity.
Apparently, Prof Alistair Hay of Leeds University has said Assad did it, and that is sort of QED on this matter really.

Sorry, if this is widely understood here. No one has said this and some people seem to be making comments without actually understanding the process.

Yes you can make Sarin in your kitchen, but killing sixty people and injuring 500 takes technology and purpose not a series of unfortunate events.

Zoneofcontrol

Whatever you want, mate, but it looks like a huge piece of political theater and nothing else. I doubt it even works as a warning for Syria or Russia.

Noble713:

I didn't watch the first video to the end, pausing shortly after the timehack I provided. Can you provide a timestamp for the mention of the Illuminati? Because I honestly didn't catch that.

It's right at the end of the video.

Cheers.
Rod Robertson.

The missile strike was symbolic. It is not politically feasible to do nothing in the face of such an outrage, even if Trump was inclined not to.

The big picture remains unchanged. Additional sanctions may be levied, but the US will not alter the balance-of-power calculus or militarily challenge the Syria-Iran-Russia axis in Syria.

The sad thing here is the number of people who are ignoring the plight of civilians who, again, are being attacked by their own. Instead some are more interested in scoring political points against Trump or the US while ignoring Assad's culpability and Russia's complicity.

I don't like Trump either, and certainly didn't vote for him, but civilians were gassed by Assad. That cannot be ignored or it becomes acceptable, and will happen again.

The problem in this intervention is that everyone is operating on the assumption that the Assad Regime purposefully attacked Khan Sheikhoun with chemical weapons and accept that Sarin was one of the chemicals used. But no one has been able to make a persuasive case to date based on verifiable facts. Wait until the facts are better known before lashing out against a foreign state which the US is not at war with. Prove the case against the Assad Regime and go to the Congress to get congressional approval for air strikes. That's the law.

Syrians died horribly in the days before the events in Khan Sheikhoun unfolded and more have been bombed and died since the alleged gas attack. Hundreds of thousands have died since 2011 and many more are likely to perish in the future. Whether you're blown to bits, crushed by rubble, burned to death or gassed, you're still dead and beyond mortal help. So there was no urgency to act before the facts were better established and shared. There was no need to go off half-cocked and launch missiles before the facts were known and a proper case could be made before Congress. This rush to judgement was likely the result of domestic American politics more than international urgency. Cui bono? Americans risk the strengthening of an emerging imperial presidency which believes itself to be above the law and not fettered by the US Constitution which cedes the power to declare war to the US Congress and not to the President. The 1973 War Powers Act also constrains the President's hand in waging wars of choice (which this missile strike was).

It's been 241 years since the American Revolution freed your new republic from Mad King George. Do you really want to raise such an unpredictable and impulse-driven man as the man who ordered that launch to the role of King of America with powers unchecked by the Congress and the judiciary?

Rod Robertson.

Critical question to be asked where things are unclear. Who benefits? By all accounts Assad is winning on the ground, and there is scheduled to be a conference very soon. In the circumstances it makes no sense for the Syrian Government to conduct a CW attack on its own citizens in such an overt way. I am waiting for further information, and I refuse to buy into 'general consensus'. Just like the 'general consensus' that Saddam Hussein had WMD.

Noble. ..one of the eyenwitnesses was a Western journalist from the Guardian.

> It is not politically feasible to do nothing in the face of such an outrage, even if Trump was inclined not to.

Sure, it is.
The last time they used chemical weapons, congress voted against intervention.

Sure, it is.
The last time they used chemical weapons, congress voted against intervention.

Not this time. Both parties in the House and Senate overwhelmingly demanded military action this time, not to mention Trump would seem like a hypocrite if he does nothing after criticizing the former POTUS back in 2013 for letting Assad cross the red line without a military response.

There's also the issue of American credibility around the world and the fact that if we did nothing no one would take our "red lines" seriously anymore in the future.

No evidence whatsoever that the Syrian regime undertook this attack. None whatsoever.

Vote Trump? Get Hillary anyway. Sad.