Syria Sarin Gas Attack - 100+ Casualties

[Torto]

And Assad and Putin just waltz directly across the new red line Trump laid last year.

Basically Trump has to bomb the shit out of Assad, or every "tough" thing he ever said is complete bullshit and he'll be exposed even more as the con-man I've said he is for 2 years.

His entire credibility as Commander-in-Chief of the United States is on the line. The Red Line incident fatally wounded Obama's power. Will Trump create a sequel here? Because make no mistake: Russia and Assad had this happen in direct defiance of him. The US throws up a series of sanctions against Russia, some which will really bite Putin's inner circle. Trump says something moronic about leaving Syria that everyone with a brain scoffs at, and that opens the way to Assaed dumping a few barrels filled with chlorine gas out of some helicopters on the anniversary of Trump's Red line.

He is being tested. He must respond, or he has no business being President.

Your whole premise, your whole argument is based on the supposed fact that Assad was responsible for the gas attack. How stupid would Trump look if he throws a few bombs at a random Syrian airport like last time and it turns out ISIL was responsible?

[Skroe]

Why in gods name would Assad use CW's?
He is by any and all measures completely and totally winning - Resistance is literally months away from collapsing.

Let me show you something. Watch this clip. It's from a TV show, but it makes the point. I love this clip. It is fiction, but makes the point so perfectly.



Western Military power is designed about killing the enemy. About winning battles and wars. About securing objectives as efficiently as possible. If you want a direct example, even in the field of nuclear weaponry, the next generation of US nuclear weapons, that are going to replace the entire current Cold War legacy arsenal, will all be far smaller (a fifth the size in some case), but relying on increased accuracy to compensate for effectiveness (google Superfuses Nuclear Weapons).

This contrasts against what Russia does, what China does, and what Assad does... which is to build military power to intimidate the enemy... the enemy almost meaning exclusively the people they rule. That explains Russia's farcical new nuclear weapons programs that are militarily useless horror weapons. That explains China's TV prop weapons. This explains Assad's use of chemical weapons.

We in the west are obsessed with the military utility, that we rarely consider the utility of horror for a regime like Assad. He doesn't just want to secure his military objectives. He wants to invoke terror in order to compel the remaining resistance to collapse and there leave scars that prevent future uprisings.

Weapons of War versus Weapons of Terror. Chemical weapons are not weapons of war. They ware meant to terrorize, and their use is as such. It is no different than war rape, mass executions, strategic warfare, and other things the West doesn't do in an organized fashion anymore, but the likes of Assad, Russia and others practice.

And in so far as the "Resistance being literally months away from collapsing".... yeah, we've been hearing that one for the past 3 years. Fact is, Assad doesn't have the resources to hold more than about 50-55% of the country.

[Skulltaker]

You need some sort of aircraft to carry out an attack of this type so various rebel groups are out of the question. According to multiple sources, SAA commander Suheil al-Hassan gave his army green light to use "all kinds of weapons" in Douma.

No, you don't. Mortar and artillery grenades can be used to distribute chemical weapons, and have been used to do so for over a hundred years.

His entire credibility as Commander-in-Chief of the United States is on the line.

He has any of that?

[Skroe]

Your whole premise, your whole argument is based on the supposed fact that Assad was responsible for the gas attack. How stupid would Trump look if he throws a few bombs at a random Syrian airport like last time and it turns out ISIL was responsible?

The ISIS that the US military has killed 65,000 of?
The ISIS that is basically defunct?
The ISIS that isn't operating anywhere near where this happened.
The ISIS that doesn't have helicopters, or the ability to make chlorine gas?

You people and your obsession with ISIS. Exactly what part of the Pentagon knocking ISIS down the totem pole of threats don't you folks understand. Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, Space, Cyberspace, Afghanistan, ISIS/terrorism. That is the rough order of the US Military's focus. And it is the right order. Because a husk of an army of rapists and murderers living in desert cities on the other side of the planet does not require the full might of a $700 billion a year defense budget.

It's Occam's razor demolishing, reason defying, to even imagine that anybody other than Assad, who has done this for years now, is responsible.

I really hope when the likes of you and your kind look at the face of the gassed children are somehow satisfied with yourselves. who were only gassed because the US didn't do what is necessary in 2013, and then in 2017, while you obsessed with ISIS. Your ongoing moral harlotry in the face of this unspeakable evil.... why? To pursue a vanquished enemy? To secure a domestic political agenda? I hope it is worth it. The muslim rapist army you're worried about is yesterday's news. Today, it's all about state-level warfare.

And that's exactly what this is. A message. From Putin to Trump. The US, and Trump, sanctions Putin's inner circle. The West responds unified to Russia's terrorist attack in the UK. Trump says some stupid shit about withdrawing from Syria, so on the one year anniversary, Putin and Assad remind Trump that they don't respect his authority in Syria. What's more likely, some laughable scenario that some fellows here have constructed whereby ISIS or the US used chlorine barrel bombs, or Assad did it with Russia's blessing?


Occam's Razor, friend.

I'm sorry, but Alt Right President Donald Trump is going to be told by his neocon national security adviser, and his former US General, now SecDef, Mattis, who is at the center of the US military orthodoxy on Russia and Syria (despise the former, bomb the latter) exactly what he has to do.

Trump supporters get to watch.

[Ripster42]

No, you don't. Mortar and artillery grenades can be used to distribute chemical weapons, and have been used to do so for over a hundred years.

In fact, as has already been linked, one of the two chemical attacks in syria that the UN has determined a perpetrator for was by ISIL using artillery (the other, of course, being carried out by assad, 369 days ago).

[Skroe]

Your video makes me think of another video



I know the American empire gets your dick hard, Skroe, but from my point of view, and many on my political spectrum, all you are doing is war mongering.

I'm deeply sorry you were born into fabulously wealthy late 20th century/early 21st century American superpowerdom and not agrarian 1821 post-colonial America that could barely pay the bills and was subject to predation from European Empires along it's borders.

We all can't choose the country we were born into.

But in any event, it's not me you have to worry about. It's the mustached maniac who is National Security Adviser starting tomorrow.

And for the record, and you can go look at my post history pal, all the way back to 2013. I said the US should absolutely do jack shit in Syria. That is until, Assad crossed our red line that Obama foolishly drew, and put American credibility to the test. I, who have spent a life time reading history and foreign policy, have come to understand the importance, from a historical perspective, of this "credibility" that some people fraudulently believe isn't a thing. And Obama blew his moment, and demolished his, and American credibility. We're still recovering from it.

You know what's painfully ironic? I'm actually for a restrained foreign policy. I'm part of the talk softly and carry a big stick school. The US should worry about high-level, fate of the international community stuff... and not be crusading around the world in cultures we scarcely understand or hunting for dragons to slay.

But you know what the difference is between me and others? I actually mean what I say in that regard. The prohibition of the use of chemical weapons is one of those high-level, fate of the international community things. Defending the rules based international order is our national bread and butter. Having a big stick means wielding it when justified. In this case, it is perfectly justified.

If you call this war mongering - where there is no time you'd ever use military action because you define American interests so laughably and implausibly narrowly, then maybe this restraint I impose on myself is for nothing. Maybe I should, as a counter to your extremism, adopt the extremist position you ascribe to me.

You know why I don't? Because I have principles. That's the key difference between me and the moral harlots who have thrown in with Trump and the stick-their-head-in-the-sand liberals who never got over Vietnam and don't care to defend the international community they spent generations building.

The US is being tested by this affront to human decency Assad and Russia have perpetrated. It is well within our rights and our responsibility as the upholder of the international order to respond with overwhelming force.

Don't like that?

Too fucken bad.

- - - Updated - - -

That order being "correct" is probably why China and Russia are able to fuck with us online as much as they are... Because that order is the furthest thing from correct possible, ESPECIALLY if you believe as fervently as you do that Russia handed Trump the election.

Okay you're going to have to explain how being the newly promoted primary targets of our defense aparatus somehow "make them able to fuck with us". Because I legitimately have no clue how that makes any bit of sense.

I'll explain what I mean. It means concrete stuff. It means turning light infantry / counter insurgency brigades back into Heavy Armored brigades with tanks. It means buying new artillery that our ranges Russia and not buying anti-terrorism weaponry. It means bombers, warships and cruise missiles, not light attack aircraft and cheap, non-stealthy drones.

It means training troops in how to dismantle a Russian tank column, not how to go door to door and fight ISIS.

ISIS is over. Terrorism as a primary threat to the US is over. And Americans obsessed with them need to get with the times. You are entitled to your position but budgetarily... from a policy perspective, you're not getting what you want.

Oh and the policy was written by the National Security Council Staff and the Pentagon. McMaster and Mattis were the joint authors. John Bolton loved it. Trump, because he is a do-nothing, had no hand in it. Friendly reminder the US defense establishment is fervently anti-Russian. They don't want to talk about ISIS anymore. They want to talk about stealth bombers and heavy armor brigades. And rightly so. Because the world has changed and ISIS is over.

[Deleted]

[Torto]

I really hope when the likes of you and your kind look at the face of the gassed children are somehow satisfied with yourselves. who were only gassed because the US didn't do what is necessary in 2013, and then in 2017, while you obsessed with ISIS. Your ongoing moral harlotry in the face of this unspeakable evil.... why? To pursue a vanquished enemy? To secure a domestic political agenda? I hope it is worth it. The muslim rapist army you're worried about is yesterday's news. Today, it's all about state-level warfare.

Yeah no, you don't get to moralise and throw that in peoples face. The US isn't responsible for gassing children, regardless of what they did or didn't do.

Both sides in this war are unspeakably evil, and amongst the carnage there is a lot of misdirection and lies. Trump should wait for more evidence before making a decision. It would surprise no one if it turns out ISIL gassed the civilians to try and fool the US into doing exactly what you want them to do, bomb Syrian forces.

[Skroe]

The above video is brought to you by....



your friendly internet British Nutcase with a Webcam.

You Russian apologists are getting worse and worse at this.

[Deleted]

Skroe, you can't confront anything he said, and why should you? Aren't you the one who keeps saying the US is wasting money in the middle east n should focus on China? You don't seem to know what you want? One day you want intervention and the next nope.

Oh btw, reported, you replied faster than the run time of the video.

[bigsav1]

Skroe, you can't confront anything he said, and why should you? Aren't you the one who keeps saying the US is wasting money in the middle east n should focus on China? You don't seem to know what you want? One day you want intervention and the next nope.

Oh btw, reported, you replied faster than the run time of the video.

But he linked wikipedia, clearly he is in the right and you're in the wrong here bruh.

[Deleted]

France is ready to bomb them themselves.
Most of the EU will go along with it.

Not with what you are proposing.

The refugee "crisis" has long since abated.

No, it hasn't.

But let's keep in mind something with Europe and it's "refugee crisis". We're talking about 1.5 million people in a Union of... what... 600 million? More than half the refugee crisis has been opportunistic politicians exploiting Europe's latent racism and ever present (and entirely unfounded) fears about decline of their unique cultural identities.

Really don't - You continuously compare this with your experience, problem is, The Hispanic world has functional educational systems, and you don't have a welfare system.

Merkel was the one European who got it right by saying Europe should throw its doors open. She had the courage to speak to Europeans like adults. Essentially every other politician did the opposite.

You get that the majority of the 'refugees' weren't actually you know, Refugees?

[Deleted]

You can't report someone for not watching a video...

Yes I can, he replied faster than the run time, which means he didn't watch it, unless he has a time machine, and he is "replying" to a post where the only thing that was on it, was that video. So yeah, I should report him for trolling.

[Elegiac]

The Hispanic world has functional educational systems, and you don't have a welfare system.

Who knew that utter ignorance of the rest of the world happened in Europe, too.

[Skroe]

Yeah no, you don't get to moralise and throw that in peoples face. The US isn't responsible for gassing children, regardless of what they did or didn't do.

Both sides in this war are unspeakably evil, and amongst the carnage there is a lot of misdirection and lies. Trump should wait for more evidence before making a decision. It would surprise no one if it turns out ISIL gassed the civilians to try and fool the US into doing exactly what you want them to do, bomb Syrian forces.

Yes. I actually do get to moralize. And I'll tell you why. Because I've been dead-right on this policy for four and a half years now. Really. Go look at my Syria posts from 2012 and 2013. And see how I've "evolved".

2012, I said, the Syrian conflict was not our responsibility. We need to be more worried about Afghanistan, and Chinese aggression in the South China Sea (another problem Obama let fester until 2016).

2013, I said much the same. Until Obama *stupidly* laid his red line, and then, even worse, when he allowed Assad to waltz over it, and Putin to bail him out. I said at that point, Obama needed to bomb Assad, to defend American credibility that Obama foolishly put on the line, and that upholding the international prohibition against the use of chemical weapons demanded a strong and stern response. My strong non-interventionism, turned into a principled limited intervention, about very specific goals.

The rightness of that position has been confirmed time and time again as Obama saw his international credibility collapse and saw fear of American power dissipate. It's rightness has been confirmed time and again by Assad's ONGOING use of chemical weapons. Not one episode but many now. And it was lastly confirmed by Russia intervening when Assad was about to collapse, to prop him up, and then expanding their foot print.

All of these things could have been avoided... ALL OF THEM.... if we nipped this problem in the bud in August/September 2013.

So no. I get to moralize, because there hasn't been a day in the past 5 years I've been anything less than completely in the right about Syria. And now we have an even larger and far more dangerous mess on our hands.

So what's it going to be dude? We going to live in this fantasy you constructed that's very convenient to America's Russian adversary, where it somehow (implausibly) isn't Assad's doing, only to do nothing and find ourselves here, yet again, the next time you do it?

I'm going to be very blunt with you people. Your quaint and obsolete obsession with terrorism is not worth

(A) allowing a country to use chemical weapons unmolested.
(B) tolerating crimes against humanity when we have the power to stop them
(C) Russia and Syria challenging American power.

We don't need Russia's help with squat. They aren't a friend worth having, and the norms that must be defended in Syria have basically no maximum cost.

[Elegiac]

Yes I can, he replied faster than the run time, which means he didn't watch it, unless he has a time machine, and he is "replying" to a post where the only thing that was on it, was that video. So yeah, I should report him for trolling.

Aw, did he hurt your fee fees because he didn't watch a youtube hot take by a known conspiracy theorist? I'm so sorry.

[Skroe]

Skroe, you can't confront anything he said, and why should you? Aren't you the one who keeps saying the US is wasting money in the middle east n should focus on China? You don't seem to know what you want? One day you want intervention and the next nope.

Oh btw, reported, you replied faster than the run time of the video.

The US should focus on Russia, then China.

This falls squarely under "Russia".

And you're right, I'm never going to watch some ridiculous conspiracy theorist video. The fact the mods haven't IP banned the lot of you Russian Internet Research Agency-type folks makes an ongoing mockery of to their so-called "moderation".

Frankly I should be reporting you for posting that.

[Elegiac]

So you didn't actually report him for trolling, even though you said you did, thus lying?

I should report you for trolling.

Trollception?

[Skroe]

I mean there is so much to respond to here I'm not going to waste my time with all of it... I am just going to pick my favorite part.

Of course you insinuate I hate America, because the conservative response to advocation of peace is literally always insinuating that the person advocating for it hates America. It's never "Well I disagree with your criticism of American foreign policy" it is instead "SORRY YOU COULDN'T BE BORN IN EUROPE, YOU AMERICA HATING COMMIE"

It's exhausting, honestly.

No. I don't think you hate America. Quite the contrary.

But I think there is a key difference between you and me. I respect America's responsibilities, even the parts I personally feel no attachment to or are think are unwise and wasteful. A responsibility, especially one brought on by decades or centuries of history, is a responsibility.

You have shown on an ongoing basis you want to live in some fictional universe (and let's be clear, it is a fiction), where we are somehow free of those responsibilities.

You don't have to love America's interventionism around the world. You can even detest it. That is your right. But you must recognize it's responsibility to the very order it built and said "we will defend". An obligation is an obligation. We do not get to pick and choose. That is the stuff of fantasy.

You don't get to call me a war monger, even though I'm not, and then whine when you think (wrongly), I say you don't love America. You can give it Boomzy, but you never can take it.

Have a nice day.

- - - Updated - - -

Not with what you are proposing.

No, it hasn't.

Really don't - You continuously compare this with your experience, problem is, The Hispanic world has functional educational systems, and you don't have a welfare system.
You get that the majority of the 'refugees' weren't actually you know, Refugees?

I'll be blunt because the European obsession with refugees has become the most eye-rollingest of episodes: you'll be okay champ.

The US will do something. You will probably hate it. And that's the way it's going to be.

- - - Updated - - -

I hate Trump, and I have never thought that terrorists in the middle east were a legitimate threat to American existence.

So I don't know who you are directing all of that towards, but you quoted me, so...

I honestly can't keep track anymore.

[munkeyinorbit]

Haven't you heard? That doesn't matter any more these days. The US has said that ANY gas attack performed by ANYONE in Syria, is Russia's fault by default. More generally, any chemical attack performed anywhere in the world is Russia's fault automatically, regardless of the facts or actual culprits.

This approach is a much more convenient one for the west than the outdated fact-based/guilt-based approaches: it allows for the west to have all the excuses they need to continue with and escalate their anti-Russian campaign, while the pro-west drones cheer and happily agree.

I remember the media conference when Trump said that on 17th ItDidntHappen, 20WhyAreYouLying. Maybe if your comrades could put together a covert operation without fucking it up you would have more credibility.