US Strikes in Syria

[OnMyWay]

On 4/9/2017 at 4:32 PM, OnMyWay said:

I agree, N. Korea is the scariest situation.  I think everyone agrees that guy is nuttier than a fruitcake and it would be a disaster to let him have an effective nuclear weapon.

Someone, somehow, is going to have to take care of that situation eventually.  You can't keep playing their game where you give them a bunch of stuff and they promise to stop, then they just continue.

I hope that China will step up and do it in ways that could not be done by the west, either politically or militarily.  China could raise their standing in the world by taking care of a madman who is a threat to world peace.

Interesting report on China / N. Korea here:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-04-11/china-threatens-bomb-north-koreas-nuclear-facilities-if-it-crosses-beijings-bottom-l

[earthdome]

For all you military strategy types out there, I have a question. What was the military or political objective for Assad to use a chemical weapon? What did he gain from that?

[Jack Peterson]

5 minutes ago, earthdome said:

For all you military strategy types out there, I have a question. What was the military or political objective for Assad to use a chemical weapon? What did he gain from that?

One step Forward 5 steps back. Just assuring the world of his stupidity 

[Jake]

11 hours ago, earthdome said:

For all you military strategy types out there, I have a question. What was the military or political objective for Assad to use a chemical weapon? What did he gain from that?

WARNING -- RANT ALERT

First off, the victims.  I did a little research on what brought Syria into a protracted civil war.  I believe it all started when the Arab Spring revolution (2010) brought the oppressed Muslims to arm themselves against the rich and powerful dictators like Assad.  You also need to factor in the Sunnis against the Shiites fighting for centuries against whoever is in power.  In other words, in this case -- Syrians against Syrians.  Also the outsiders like the Iranians, Turkey, Hezbollah, Al Qaeda, ISIS, Russians and the Americans are mixing it up. Needless to say, the situation is very complex with no easy solutions.  

Depending on which talking heads you listen to (mainstream news, alt-right news, fake news, fake-fake news, alt-reality news), I believe both Assad and Putin wanted to test our foreign policy, if any.  Before Trump said he was hands off ("let the Syrians take care of themselves"), which I believe gave Assad and Putin an opportunity to use chemical warfare again.  I don't completely understand Putin real motivation to be buddy-buddy with Assad but Russian made MIG's, technicians, special forces and support groups are in Syria for the long haul. One important note: Putin was in charge of removing ALL the chemical weapon components from Syrian's govt army.  But he didn't care he was caught red handed.  Putin is one slick and dangerous operator.

Assad's and Putin's military and political objective?  To test the resolve of the current US foreign policy. And we responded with 59 symbolic tomahawks (one million bucks each) with a polite warning and minimum damage to that desert airfield AND no plan B.  Russian made MIG's were seen taking off within 36 hours -- go figure.  And by the way, Assad completely denies any chemical attack and blames it on someone else.  

Bottom line -- our warheads should not be configured with political correctness, warnings, tweets or any bombastic comments.  

RANT OVER.  Jake is back to his silly self again after being heavily medicated.  

Edited April 15, 2017 by Jake
attitude check

[Jack Peterson]

4 minutes ago, Jake said:

 Jake is back to his silly self after being heavily medicated.  

 I to be taken every 20 mins

[Dave Hounddriver]

3 hours ago, earthdome said:

What did he gain from that?

People told him to get rid of his chemical weapons.  He found a quick easy place to get rid of them. 

[robert k]

10 hours ago, earthdome said:

For all you military strategy types out there, I have a question. What was the military or political objective for Assad to use a chemical weapon? What did he gain from that?

Revenge, possibly. I think you give too much credit for rationality from ME leaders. Jake could well be right that it was a test.

[Gerald Glatt]

Sure it was a test, after that he used some nasty canister bombs and US said that's not nice either.  Ture let's off everyone in a nice way.  IMO if Putin is assured of a port in Syria he would turn on Assad in a minute. Think we should launch every time gas is used maybe fly one or two into palace window.  We have troops and fire power to set up a sanctuary already in country, let the good refuges in, let the rest fight it out, let Russia boot or keep Assad in exile and pick who they want.  Turn the Israeli lose on Iran and let them take out the nuke facilities.  Let the Turks and Saudis run the rest of mid east and get the hell out.     

[Jake]

13 minutes ago, Gerald Glatt said:

maybe fly one or two into palace window.....

At this time, I would like to be on record to donate my fart bombs at a nominal fee of only 45 pesos each.  It is readily available, at multiple requests -- guaranteed to be presh na presh each and every time.

 

[Snowy79]

Here's why I see the opposing factions in Syria having support from different nations and why I don't fully believe it was Assad gassing his own people. He'd already been giving the rebels a hammering and Trump said he had no interest in replacing Assad. He might be a bit of a mad man but I'm sure he never got where he is today by not being tactically aware. My money is on a bit more propaganda to justify replacing Assad with someone who will support the West's side in the gas line.  http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/The-Natural-Gas-War-Burning-Under-Syria.html