Help support TMP

"Here's How The World Has Reacted To The Missile " Topic

25 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.

Back to the Ultramodern Warfare (2008-present) Message Board

1,009 hits since 13 Apr 2018
©1994-2018 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Tango01 Supporting Member of TMP14 Apr 2018 2:25 p.m. PST

…Strikes On Syria.

"The strikes have been supported by Nato's general secretary, but China and Iran have condemned them. Vladimir Putin has demanded an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council.

Russian president Vladimir Putin has denounced the missile strikes by the US, France and the UK as an "act of aggression" that will exacerbate the humanitarian catastrophe in Syria.

Putin was backed up in condemning the attacks by Iran and China – but other countries, including Germany and Turkey, backed them – while Jens Stoltenberg, Nato secretary general, also gave them his support.

In a statement on Saturday, Putin reiterated the Russian claim that an alleged chemical weapons attack in Douma that killed dozens of civilians was fake: "Russian military experts, having visited the place of the alleged incident, did not find any traces of the use of chlorine or other poisonous substances. No local resident confirmed the chemical attack."…."
Main page


Leadjunky14 Apr 2018 3:27 p.m. PST

These are not the droids you're looking for.

He may go about his business. Move along. : )

Cacique Caribe14 Apr 2018 4:56 p.m. PST

"China and Iran have condemned them. Vladimir Putin has demanded an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council."

I'm reminded of something Gomer Pyle used to say a lot:

YouTube link

Funny how we are constantly led to believe that only one of these is our adversary. Time to wake up.



zoneofcontrol Inactive Member15 Apr 2018 5:56 a.m. PST

It does seem odd that the outsiders lined up against the Syrian people all came out against the raid. However, the Syrian people themselves have a mixed but seemingly positive view of the event.

USAFpilot15 Apr 2018 9:53 a.m. PST

It depends on whose propaganda (oops, I mean truth) you believe.

All warfare is based upon deception.

zoneofcontrol Inactive Member15 Apr 2018 12:01 p.m. PST

That's very true.

We do not KNOW for a fact that this alleged strike actually took place.

USAFpilot15 Apr 2018 12:48 p.m. PST

What is the deadliest conflict since WWII?

Where is the news reporting on that?

Is being killed by chlorine gas worse than being burned alive?

Is hundreds of people killed by chemical weapons worse then millions of people killed by conventional weapons?

Cacique Caribe15 Apr 2018 12:52 p.m. PST

Maybe it's a good thing I haven't watched news in the last couple of days.

Is this one of those situations?

A) Media claims that something bad happened and gets people worked up and demanding immediate action; and then
B) Media points fingers and gets people angry over whatever action was taken afterwards

So tired of those constant emotional hype cycles.


USAFpilot15 Apr 2018 1:33 p.m. PST

Yep, that seems to be the standard media algorithm. a) show video of innocent babies being killed or starving or other atrocities, b) work public into a frenzy so they demand action, c) show images of collateral damage from our action or dead US Servicemen KIA, d) work public into frenzy demanding ‘no more war'. Rinse and repeat; it's great for media ratings.

Begemot Inactive Member15 Apr 2018 4:23 p.m. PST

"No more war". What a reprehensible notion to promote.

Curious that the frenzy in the media I see seems to be moving in the opposite direction.

Different planets, I guess.

Cacique Caribe16 Apr 2018 3:53 a.m. PST

Depends which part of the cycle you catch them on.


Costanzo116 Apr 2018 10:25 a.m. PST

Excuse me, is there, in the world, someone so offended by nature, who believe one reconquer his country with gas?
Especially when his enemies wait that to attack him?

Cacique Caribe16 Apr 2018 12:38 p.m. PST


Both sides (Syrian government and the rebels*) have Norinco-supplied chlorine gas and have used it to terrorize rivals, and then blamed each other. It seems they think they can keep up that media mind game indefinitely.

Iran and China are also have lots of it, though I'm not sure if their troops in Syria have brought any along, for "emergencies".

As China keeps saying, the many canisters they keep selling to these warring factions also have lots of "industrial" applications.

* The interesting thing is that the rebels are the ones who always stand to gain the most each time gas is used and publicized. Specially when the attack targets Shi'a civilians or their many other rival rebel factions. Assad looses each time gas is used (or allegedly used) and made public. If you ask me, it's all about who stands to gain the most from the media circus.

Begemot Inactive Member16 Apr 2018 4:10 p.m. PST

It is always worthwhile to ask in these matters: cui bono? Who benefits?

Lion in the Stars16 Apr 2018 5:18 p.m. PST

Yes, the standard question is cui bono?

This question requires fully rational actors, however.

If a dictator has bought fully into the "if they are not for me, they are enemies" mindset, this can make it logical to attack, even if the attack itself increases external pressure.

Also, just to remind people: Chlorine gas isn't one of the banned chemical weapons because it sucks as a weapon and is far too critical in industrial uses (like making water safe to drink).

Personal logo Wolfshanza Supporting Member of TMP16 Apr 2018 9:30 p.m. PST

I thought they were talking Sarin nerve gas ?

Cacique Caribe16 Apr 2018 10:30 p.m. PST

Last time the media jumped the gun and said sarin, but the evidence showed none. Also, emergency workers were touching victims without any protective clothing and did not suffer any ill effects. Then it was found to be chlorine, from Norinco canisters.

What about this time? Who knows!

PS. Some of the Al-Qaeda/Al-Nusra guys keep popping up at some of those gas attacks:


Begemot Inactive Member16 Apr 2018 10:46 p.m. PST

"if they are not for me, they are enemies"

George W. Bush, right?

Cacique Caribe16 Apr 2018 10:48 p.m. PST


Lol. That's reaching.

I think everyone has said that "with us or against us" phrase at one point or another through the ages. Perhaps even some of your own favorites have said it too.

"No pasarán" is another one of those phrases that people keep trying to take ownership of.


Begemot Inactive Member17 Apr 2018 8:30 a.m. PST

Cacique –

Perhaps even some of your own favorites have said it too.

No, they haven't.

This statement, "with me or against me", is a good expression of the authoritarian mind though. Projection at play?

USAFpilot17 Apr 2018 9:21 a.m. PST

This statement, "with me or against me", is a good expression of the authoritarian mind though.

No, it's not.

It was rather an appropriate statement for the President to make in the wake of 911.

Cacique Caribe17 Apr 2018 1:08 p.m. PST

Begemot: "No, they haven't."

LOL. Somehow I find that extremely hard to believe, that none of you heroes ever uttered the words "with us or against us", not even in their hidden back room rallies and the basements where they did their strategizing and planning. :)

We are talking about people from planet Earth, humans, right?


Begemot Inactive Member17 Apr 2018 4:36 p.m. PST

In reply I'll borrow Shakespeare's words:

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

- Hamlet

USAFpilot19 Apr 2018 7:45 a.m. PST

And here's another Shakespeare quote:

"Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player, that struts and frets his hour upon the stage, and then is heard no more; it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. "


Begemot Inactive Member19 Apr 2018 11:38 a.m. PST

USAFpilot – One of my favorite Shakespeare lines.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.