^more Oblunder foreign policy. Nice legacy. Worst. President. Ever!

Posted by moy23 on 4/10/2017 10:22:00 AM (view original):
^more Oblunder foreign policy. Nice legacy. Worst. President. Ever!

Just wondering, did the symbolic bombing of one airfield force Assad to give up all his chemical weapons?

Also, what's the strategy here? Are we going to war with Syria, against Trump's own advice? And if we do, it will cause even more refugees. Are we going to let them in?

Not if they're turrurists.

BL, King of "Let's do nothing and hope for the best" AND Crowned Prince of "Situations don't evolve so what you thought several years ago cannot change".

Posted by bad_luck on 4/10/2017 12:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 4/10/2017 10:22:00 AM (view original):
^more Oblunder foreign policy. Nice legacy. Worst. President. Ever!

Just wondering, did the symbolic bombing of one airfield force Assad to give up all his chemical weapons?

Also, what's the strategy here? Are we going to war with Syria, against Trump's own advice? And if we do, it will cause even more refugees. Are we going to let them in?

The strategy? IF YOU CROSS A RED LINE AND USE CHEMICAL WARFARE AGAINST CIVILIANS WE WILL STRIKE!!

Its that simple. Has Assad launched more chemical weapons since Trump struck back? Think of the US Policy for Syria like a referee... You use chemical weapons and we will step in... otherwise, play ball.

Posted by moy23 on 4/10/2017 1:56:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 4/10/2017 12:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 4/10/2017 10:22:00 AM (view original):
^more Oblunder foreign policy. Nice legacy. Worst. President. Ever!

Just wondering, did the symbolic bombing of one airfield force Assad to give up all his chemical weapons?

Also, what's the strategy here? Are we going to war with Syria, against Trump's own advice? And if we do, it will cause even more refugees. Are we going to let them in?

The strategy? IF YOU CROSS A RED LINE AND USE CHEMICAL WARFARE AGAINST CIVILIANS WE WILL STRIKE!!

Its that simple. Has Assad launched more chemical weapons since Trump struck back? Think of the US Policy for Syria like a referee... You use chemical weapons and we will step in... otherwise, play ball.

Maybe this is too nuanced for a Trump supporter to understand?

The missile strike was symbolic. The airfield was only down for a few hours. If I'm Assad, I'm not concerned with a strike like this. So what happens now? If Assad uses chemical weapons again, do we launch an aircraft bombing? Those are much more effective but also much riskier. Do we start a ground war over this?

Posted by bad_luck on 4/10/2017 1:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 4/10/2017 1:56:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 4/10/2017 12:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 4/10/2017 10:22:00 AM (view original):
^more Oblunder foreign policy. Nice legacy. Worst. President. Ever!

Just wondering, did the symbolic bombing of one airfield force Assad to give up all his chemical weapons?

Also, what's the strategy here? Are we going to war with Syria, against Trump's own advice? And if we do, it will cause even more refugees. Are we going to let them in?

The strategy? IF YOU CROSS A RED LINE AND USE CHEMICAL WARFARE AGAINST CIVILIANS WE WILL STRIKE!!

Its that simple. Has Assad launched more chemical weapons since Trump struck back? Think of the US Policy for Syria like a referee... You use chemical weapons and we will step in... otherwise, play ball.

Maybe this is too nuanced for a Trump supporter to understand?

The missile strike was symbolic. The airfield was only down for a few hours. If I'm Assad, I'm not concerned with a strike like this. So what happens now? If Assad uses chemical weapons again, do we launch an aircraft bombing? Those are much more effective but also much riskier. Do we start a ground war over this?

We destroyed 20 jets from the airstrip they launched the chemical weapons from. Those jets cost some $150 million each and they take a long time to build. I'll do the math for you --- 20 x $150 Million = $3 Billion. To repair an airstrip in a few hours costs a couple hundred thousand dollars. Which is more effective?

If they attack civilians again with chemical weapons then we will step up our retaliation. Otherwise the US is not in this fight.

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/10/2017 1:01:00 PM (view original):
BL, King of "Let's do nothing and hope for the best" AND Crowned Prince of "Situations don't evolve so what you thought several years ago cannot change".

I'm not saying do nothing. I'm genuinely curious what the strategy is. I think it's fair to call Trump impulsive. I'm hoping he actually thought this through.

Posted by bad_luck on 4/10/2017 2:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/10/2017 1:01:00 PM (view original):
BL, King of "Let's do nothing and hope for the best" AND Crowned Prince of "Situations don't evolve so what you thought several years ago cannot change".

I'm not saying do nothing. I'm genuinely curious what the strategy is. I think it's fair to call Trump impulsive. I'm hoping he actually thought this through.

If you think Trump will tell you, the media, and the enemy his strategy you have not been listening to this president. Obama was stupid for telegraphing to the enemy exactly what he wanted to do (red lines he would not follow, sanctions on russia, troop withdrawal dates from Iraq) and that was disastrous to not just this country but to many around the world. Why would Trump do that?

Well, I think the strategy is to show Assad that chemical attacks have consequences. Does anyone think Assad is getting rid of his chemical weapons right now? I doubt it. But, if he knows he's going to pay a price for using them, don't you think he'll be more hesitant to do so?

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/10/2017 2:16:00 PM (view original):
Well, I think the strategy is to show Assad that chemical attacks have consequences. Does anyone think Assad is getting rid of his chemical weapons right now? I doubt it. But, if he knows he's going to pay a price for using them, don't you think he'll be more hesitant to do so?

^This. It's not about a plan to remove Assad... Its about demonstrating to the WORLD that chemical weapons are not tolerated.

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/10/2017 2:16:00 PM (view original):
Well, I think the strategy is to show Assad that chemical attacks have consequences. Does anyone think Assad is getting rid of his chemical weapons right now? I doubt it. But, if he knows he's going to pay a price for using them, don't you think he'll be more hesitant to do so?

I don't know. I do think it's hilarious that we warned Syria and Russian that the missile strike was coming.

I have no idea what that means^^^

Trump never tweeted that. He did tweet this though:

The reason you don't generally hit runways is that they are easy and inexpensive to quickly fix (fill in and top)!

He did tweet that. It's still up.

Posted by bad_luck on 4/10/2017 2:45:00 PM (view original):
He did tweet that. It's still up.

2014.... Who gives a ****? This one time at band camp....