Trumpled (Alternative Leading)

[Baggers]

A lot and it isn't great, I don't think anyone thinks it is. But it is undeniable that the West make more effort to direct their strikes in a way to try and minimize the impact on civilians, but it doesn't always work and sometimes there have been terrible consequences. Nobody is saying that the west is without fault, but it can't be denied by anyone that there has been an attempt by the world to define acceptable use of force, as opposed to War Crimes.

Assad makes no distinction at all. I find it hard to believe that anyone would believe for a moment that if all evidence was on the table and he was before the International Courts in the Hague that he would be found guilty of War Crimes.

I don't see though why the discussion is "We do bad crap too"...

Shouldn't the discussion be

Who was responsible for the chemical attack in Syria?
What actions are to be taken against those responsible?

If the answer to A is Syria (or it's allies), then it is hard to argue against the US response isn't it?

It is a terrible world where armed conflict is the answer to any situation, but I think it would be niave of anyone to think that it is never required.

All in all it says little that is impressive about we humans when it comes to handling conflict/difficulties between each other. Perceived bad person does sh1tty thing, so perceived good people do sh1tty thing, but just not as sh1tty. Bad person retaliates, good people retaliate... nicely. And so goes the cycle of stupidity...

[LP]

The one who pulls the trigger.

There is no trigger.

[mateinone]

All in all it says little that is impressive about we humans when it comes to handling conflict/difficulties between each other. Perceived bad person does sh1tty thing, so perceived good people do sh1tty thing, but just not as sh1tty. Bad person retaliates, good people retaliate... nicely. And so goes the cycle of stupidity...

No one is saying war is good, in fact it is a horrible horrible option.
It doesn't mean you can continually turn blind eyes, want a clearer example?
Should Churchill and the French ignored the invasion of Poland?

What about the taking of Sudetenland a year earlier?
Or the Anschluss a further 6 month earlier?

What about the atrocities against local opposition, the handicapped and Jewish population prior to that?

Unfortunately it is true that ruthless individuals can take power, unfortunately it is true that a number of these consider inaction a weakness and believe it gives them the option to act with impunity.

War is evil, killing humans for the sake of a group or individuals need for power is an evil within the human race, but it doesn't then mean that any military action is the wrong action.

Declaring war on Germany in 1939 was the correct decision, probably taking military action years earlier would have prevented a mass catastrophe the likes of which the world has rarely seen, not declaring war on Germany after taking Poland would almost certainly seen further consolidation by the Germans as they made preparations to push back west.

War is horrible, states killing people is disgusting, but it is an over simplification if people think every bomb dropped is a wrong decision

[LP]

As much as I despise Trump and his clown mate Spicer, the media do themselves no favors when they stoop to the same level of cherry-picking facts and verballing Spicer.

I appreciate Spicer should have been more succinct in his chemical warfare comments, but technically he is correct if not in a vague way. Hitler never dropped chemical weapons bombs on his own towns and people, despite the Nazi regime using chemicals in the execution of the Jews in the gas chambers. The nutters who voted for and support Trump will see right through that weakly veiled insinuation and strengthen their resolve!

Then for the media to pick on him for his mispronunciation of Assad, like the US media are the world authority on pronunciation! That deserves an eye roll! :

The media don't get it, it's not just the people who supported Trump that are dumb puppets, the media fall into Trump's traps over and over again like baldfaced amateurs. I think that is because most of the journalists and been replaced by syndicated baldfaced amateur bloggers. News Ltd and Rupert Murdoch have a lot to answer for!

[mateinone]

Don't disagree with any of that.
Spicer is the worst Press Secretary probably in history, but with regards to the Hitler gaffe.. C'mon, seriously did anyone really not get what he was saying? He wasn't denying the Holocaust as many are stating (including those who should know better), he was saying that no one in World War II dropped Chemical weapons in Air Raids on civilians.
The press should leave that alone, they are there to report real news, not sensationalize a gaffe.

With regards to the pronunciation, that is just laughable, again.. why is it even reported?
If it is reported... well considering America pronounces quite a few words differently to the rest of the world, why does it matter if Assad is one?

I understand the press hates the White House and in particular Spicer and they should as well. The actions taken to try and intimidate the press have been disgusting, but if they want to continue to promote themselves as impartial then they need to keep out of any pettiness.

[flyboy77]

I could go as far to say no one has proven that it was the doing of the Assad government.....the US are masters of the false flag after all.....

Feel fee to how me some proof but ask one question, who stands to gain most by these most heinous actions....? (Answer = not Assad)

[Thryleon]

I could go as far to say no one has proven that it was the doing of the Assad government.....the US are masters of the false flag after all.....

Feel fee to how me some proof but ask one question, who stands to gain most by these most heinous actions....? (Answer = not Assad)

Ive been trying to point that one out for a while.

In the mean time, look at the press over in the USA arguing semantics about whether or not Hitler dropped chemical weapons on his own people.

[Lods]

Spicer's problem is that he has arguably the most important communication job in the world.
There should be no grey area.
No room for misinterpretation.
No need for clarification or apology.

He seems to fail this task on a regular basis.

I don't see a lot of difference between dropping chemicals on a village from the air or dropping them through a hole in the roof....except that in the enclosed setting you have much less chance of survival.

[LP]

Spicer's problem is that he has arguably the most important communication job in the world.
There should be no grey area.
No room for misinterpretation.
No need for clarification or apology.

He seems to fail this task on a regular basis.

I don't see a lot of difference between dropping chemicals on a village from the air or dropping them through a hole in the roof....except that in the enclosed setting you have much less chance of survival.

He communicated it badly and he deserves a whack, and we assume he did so accidentally, but with Trump I am not so sure.

By the same token, and as much as I hate Spicer, the media cannot twist the words of their targets to suit their own agenda. If they do that they may as well just give him control, it's neither morally or legally correct for the media to do so, and in my opinion they have an obligation to report without coloring the facts. Not the Alternate Facts either!

As Thry points out, lets consider what happening in the world right now and compare that to what the media is focused on. Is Spicer really the front page story, it seems to me he's just a sideshow?

Thry. Flyboy.
As for the conspiracy theories, I doubt so many countries would fall into line so quickly without the facts. The reaction has been far too swift for this to be accidental, conspiracy theorists will point to this quick response as evidence that they knew the attack was coming. But in regions like Syria, Iran and Iraq the PSS systems that are in place now pretty much allow them to run events backwards in high definition for time for periods of up to 72hrs, some allude that capability has now being extended to weeks with whole cities being covered to 10cm resolution. Cutting edge two decades ago was 20 Megapixel cameras, I know civilian applications that now use 150 Megapixel cameras delivering 30cm resolution over an area the size of Boston or Melbourne from an altitude of 15000m. High end science projects are now building 1.8 Gigapixel cameras that capture 1000 frames per second. The military operate at 25000m to 30000m and can afford to spend and have been spending way more than any science project.

The decisions on what information to expose and what to conceal are purely political, at least two or three of the allies would know exactly what is happening and who is responsible.

I read an interview with a retired secret service chief that put it quite nicely. He basically said,

"The public think the scenarios shown in Hollywood movies are future of surveillance technology, we were way beyond that many years ago!
If you can imagine it we've already done it, and now it is probably obsolete!"

[Thryleon]

^^lp I don't doubt that they could know if there was something to know,  but there are two issues that I see.

1.  Motive.  Someone mentioned ethnic cleansing, and I'll admit that's fine but this is a small fry way to try that on.  surely Assad would be better equipped to handle this if that's what drove him.

2.  If it was him, I'm confident everyone would have been shown how and when not to mention who actually performed this attack.
After all, why keep it quiet? If there is footage of it, it would suit the allied forces for it to be in the public domain wouldn't it??