Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Trumpled (Alternative Leading)
(04-07-2017, 04:34 AM)madbluboy link Wrote:So much for Trump being in bed with Putin.
Interesting turn of phrase.  When a cheating spouse is caught in flagrante delicto, said cheating spouse then has to be on best behaviour, at least in the short term.  Obviously, the other spouse will be watching like a hawk for a while.  If Trump had been able to keep his bedtime frolics with Putin secret, how long would the affair have lasted and what effect would it have had on US policy?  Strange how an FBI investigation stopped the bromance in its tracks  :-X
Reply
(04-07-2017, 05:20 AM)Thryleon link Wrote:Either way, I think its deplorable.

The retaliatory strike or the initial chemical attack?

The swiftness of the response I think is very deliberate and about the first thing Trump has done that I agree with.
The intelligence they have at hand obviously provides a far clearer picture than what we can speculate on, but it seems all Western governments seem to be in agreement that the attack was by Assad's government.

Interestingly Russia has shown a willingness to use gas themselves on their own people, notably with the Theater crisis. Now that may well have been the right response to that particular situation, but it also shows that Putin might consider the use of chemical agents as valid if it hastens a resolution.

I don't like Trump, I don't think most do... But I did like that someone stood up and said 'Fuck You' to Assad and to Putin, because I think that they feel the West is quite weak at the moment and will let them get away with anything.
Goals for 2017
=============
Play the most anti-social football in the AFL

[Image: blueline.jpg]
Reply
The use of chemical weapons is deplorable.

A swift strike to flex muscles is not great either as the USA is partly responsible for the situation in this country.
"everything you know is wrong"

Paul Hewson
Reply
That is an interesting chestnut that...
It is very easy to really say that the US is partly responsible for any issues in the middle east, but the reality is that the problem in Syria is mainly Assad's doing. The guy is a criminal, time and again his actions against citizens contravene International Law.

Whilst the US involved in the country (as you would suspect), I don't see that Syria is 'caused' by the US, partially or otherwise. They have been essentially a dictatorship for 40 years, the Arab Spring scared the crap out of Assad and he had to ensure he kept power and wasn't overthrown in the way others were, he decided suppression through force was the right option, this turned the country to chaos.

Now America chose sides and it was NEVER likely to be Assad's, but they didn't start this civil war, they didn't create the tension that is there between Sunni and Shia Muslims either.

America screws up a lot, they may have create a massive power vacuum in Iraq (not commenting on whether they should or should not have in this particular argument) which may then have allowed for the growth of the likes of ISIL within that country, but I don't see how they created the Syria problem.

I think flexing muscles is actually what needs to happen on occasion, there are some who only respond to strength.
Goals for 2017
=============
Play the most anti-social football in the AFL

[Image: blueline.jpg]
Reply
The only thing I find interesting is that everyone is happy to enforce their ideas of democracy on other nations and then state that our brand of war pain and suffering is better than the home grown version.

Meanwhile the occupation of northern Cyprus by Turkish insurgents continues from 1974 to today.

No one seems to worry overly about that one though.

"everything you know is wrong"

Paul Hewson
Reply
(04-07-2017, 01:34 PM)Thryleon link Wrote:The use of chemical weapons is deplorable.

A swift strike to flex muscles is not great either as the USA is partly responsible for the situation in this country.

No more or less deplorable than the use of conventional weapons against civilians or starving them to death.

“Why don’t you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don’t you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don’t you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?”  Oddball
Reply
... or deliberately targetting hospitals. 
Reply
Agreed.

Ask yourself this question.  Why would Assad choose now to attack his own people like this when he's been regaining control.  What's the strategic advantage of doing so? 

The answer is none.  This episode reeks of false flag to me.
"everything you know is wrong"

Paul Hewson
Reply
Watch this video.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?sns=fb&v=KU5taO5vRDo

I'll defer to this man.

"everything you know is wrong"

Paul Hewson
Reply
(04-07-2017, 11:58 PM)Thryleon link Wrote:Agreed.

Ask yourself this question.  Why would Assad choose now to attack his own people like this when he's been regaining control.  What's the strategic advantage of doing so? 

The answer is none.  This episode reeks of false flag to me.

"Regaining control"... isn't that the problem?
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 9 Guest(s)