-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Trump to address the nation on Syria tonight (UPDATE: Launching strikes)
- Thread starter ElectricBlanketFire
- Start date
- Status
We live in a world where Donald Trump can launch missiles at foreign countries.
What a time to be alive.
What a time to be alive.
It sucks, the situation is fucked on all sides. On the one hand, condoning chemical weapon strikes is not on the table. Something has to be done about it (in this case, missile strikes, which....are probably not gonna do a whole lot). But, on the other hand, It's fucking Trump and America leading the charge. Which NO ONE WANT'S. Russia is doing it's usual spiel pointing the finger at the other side and saying Syria had absolutely nothing to do with it and Russia taking the moral high ground.
I hope your history book has chapters about Guantanamo, African neocolonialism, ME interventionism and the US baked military coups in latin america during the 60s and 70s.
The US takes away the sovereignity of any country that gets between it and it's economic-political objectives. I would agree with the other guy and call it a tyrannic power, yes
Last edited:
Jones is pissed for the same reason many had been saying it would be the end of the world after the attack, WW3, etc.; because nothing happened.
OP
OP
This guy on Facebook is asking me why Trump being in charge of our military is a bad thing and I'm too hungover to respond.
Yes, that would probably cost less lives and cause less suffering.
Also, lets not act like the West cares one bit about Syrians. We care about our own interests. Financial interests, military strategic interests, political interests.
We hate Syrians. Just look whats going on in Europe just because some Syrians come here. People are losing their fucking minds. A good chunk of "civilized" Europe would be ready to re-open concentration camps for refugees.
Do we give a fuck about any of the Warlords killing people somewhere in central Africa? No, because the region isn't of interest to us.
So lets not act like we are suddenly concerned by Assads crimes against his people.
See, Russia has recognized that a continuous stream of refugee is effectively destabilizing the EU, which is Russias goal.
So Russia supports Assad and does its best to destabilize the region in order to keep up refugee streams.
The West hates Russian influence in the region, which is costly for us for several reasons.
Syria has become a play ball of international politics, just like other countries and groups before had become play ball of East and West during the cold war.
Our interests never lied with people there, not back then and not today.
And we can't blame Russia for doing what it does because we are doing exactly the same. We just support different Regimes, because we think thats better for our interests.
But whats best for the people in the middle east is never of any concern to anyone.
He did, because even his handlers aren't stupid enough to add "Mission Accomplished!"
Good for Trump and good for the allied forces for a message sent last night. Valuable buildings and materials destroyed, no casualties, and a very clear message that the developed countries won't tolerate shit like chemical warfare on innocent people.
Strategic, hit the mark, no deaths = perfectly executed strike. Now to see if Syria calms their shit down. If not, it will get worse. Also, the Allies made Putin look weak. He better get control of his precious Syria and fast.
Strategic, hit the mark, no deaths = perfectly executed strike. Now to see if Syria calms their shit down. If not, it will get worse. Also, the Allies made Putin look weak. He better get control of his precious Syria and fast.
The difference is that the CIA was actually telling the Bush Admin that Saddam did NOT have WMDs
I've never paid much attention to this guy. Is he always like that or is he just completely trashed?
Yeah, because in Chile we had a democratic elected socialist president that totally wasn't overthrown by a coup financed by the CIA
It's rich just posting a reuters article claiming Assad is using chemical weapons on his people when no one absolutely no one has proven he and his regime are responsible. The West wanted Saddam gone and we all regretted the end game, we destroyed Libya a country though with all it's faults was very peaceful and prosperous. We have armed rebels to destroy Syria and failed miserably to remove it's leader, so now we try the old he has weapons of mass destruction trick with the old crimes against humanity line. Who ever comes after him we are not going to be happy with and we are going to be telling the people running from the new regime to go back home to their country because Europe is not their home. They fucking had a home before we started our bullshit to destroy what they once called a home. But but but Muslims.
I find sad that a great country like Syria is being destroyed, a country with rich history and culture, a country with scientific and artistic inventions that affected the whole world and the lives of all human beings. and I find it sad that innocent people are being killed with their homes destroyed. you don't know and can't imagine what a destruction of this level brings to the lives of millions of people.
also, I don't believe the lies of western countries, the USA government and their collaborators are not concerned about the safety of Syrian citizens in any way. they only care about protecting their own interests. the USA government isn't trying to "solve" anything or protecting anyone, they are just trying to paint the best possible outcome to their interests using any means necessary, like they've always been.
or Iran, democratic elected president that got overthrown by the cia
lets not act as if the west did care for democracy, freedom or the people.
Its all about their own political interests
Trump won't tolerate it when it's convenient for him to do so. How many times has Assad used gas on civilans? Why was this time different? Oh, timing.
Iran had a democratically elected leader as well and because that leader wanted to take the Iranian oil industry away from the British, the UK and US overthrew him to install an authoritarian patsy who suppressed his people so much that it resulted in the rise of Ayatollah Khomeini and his extremist Islam.
Another love tap = mission accomplished? Your last strike didnt discourage them from using chemical weapons again. How is this any different?
This satirical video underlines the values of democracy in the west
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1NO5DwrQz4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1NO5DwrQz4
Alex Jones called Russians the white knights? Wtf is wrong with this world.
Even we get criticized for intervening what else should we do, just let everyone kill each other over there? Just turn a blind eye to everything? Because shit this idiot in chief would probably do that. That's what his followers want
Even we get criticized for intervening what else should we do, just let everyone kill each other over there? Just turn a blind eye to everything? Because shit this idiot in chief would probably do that. That's what his followers want
Well...not exactly. The CIA told Powell there were WMDs , approved his infamous UN speech, then the CIA publically apologized to Powell for the error (after the war began).
If you're gonna lie about your actual position at least remember to keep a consistent lie on the matter. You literally just said the following earlier.
It's too late to really do anything. If there was to be an intervention, it should've been back during the early civil war when Russia wasn't a factor.
Turkey is almost certainly going to start going after the Kurds in Eastern Syria, as will Assad. It's a disaster waiting to happen.
The Bush Admin literally created Office of Special Plans to discredit the CIA that was telling them that Saddam did NOT have WMDs.
The report Powell presented came from the Office of Special Plans.
He did it because his advisors told him to and he likes to puff his chest. It also takes away some media pressure from the investigations for the next few days, but I'm not sure Trump himself was able to think on such a long term.
UK and France, well, they are former colonial powers struggling for military relevance. Also, unfortunately, there's a real streak of kowtowing to the US. The optics of superficially being against Assad's butchery also played a part I'm sure.
I doubt France would do this just for the heck of it because USA asked (UK might). 1. Trump is not popular in their country, so helping him is not politically good for them. 2. Iraq.
So, Trump aside, how does anyone here in this thread who are against the strikes propose how to prevent Assad using chemical weapons against his own people?
and that doesn't involve something easily veto'd by Russia at the UN?
Because it's easy to see how terrible this all is, but I'd like to know what better option there is in this conflict?
(and no, standing by and doing nothing isnt a better option - especially for the hundreds of thousands of civilians who have already died).
and that doesn't involve something easily veto'd by Russia at the UN?
Because it's easy to see how terrible this all is, but I'd like to know what better option there is in this conflict?
(and no, standing by and doing nothing isnt a better option - especially for the hundreds of thousands of civilians who have already died).
Macron seems to be an egotist much in the way of Trump, only smarter. That would then move the reasoning more to aspirations of military relevance and anti-Assad optics.
- Status