Trump now considering military action against Syria

[Ordinarygamer96 785]

So now after the gas attack Trump and his people are apparently now considering action against Assad. This goes against basically a giant part of his original platform considering he attacked Hillary for even considering a no fly zone in Syria and also publicly attacked Obama for considering the same years  ago

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/04/06/politics/donald-trump-syria-options/index.html

 

[Ironic 2278]

The fact that stuff like this makes the news is so utterly retarded in my opinion. If you're going to plan to attack someone or another country, why don't we do it under the radar? What ever happened to the element of surprise?

 

Anyways, I definitely agree that America should take a stand against this, if more proof comes out that it was Assad for sure. I don't like America getting involved in too many outside of our country things, but stuff like this needs to be put to an end.

[Ordinarygamer96 785]

Just now, Ironic said:

The fact that stuff like this makes the news is so utterly retarded in my opinion. If you're going to plan to attack someone or another country, why don't we do it under the radar? What ever happened to the element of surprise?

 

Anyways, I definitely agree that America should take a stand against this, if more proof comes out that it was Assad for sure. I don't like America getting involved in too many outside of our country things, but stuff like this needs to be put to an end.

This stuffs been happening for years and when Hillary suggested a no fly zone to stop it Trump and the republicans tried to pass her off as a warmonger. Now that he's President he's perfectly willing to casually mention we might need to take the guy out. Also there's really no chance to achieve the element of surprise in modern warfare when everyone has surveillance on everything 

[Ironic 2278]

Just now, Ordinarygamer96 said:

Also there's really no chance to achieve the element of surprise in modern warfare when everyone has surveillance on everything 

True, but if the surveillance all countries have were really that good, then I don't understand how surprise attacks still happen. We don't know everything that's going on in other countries, as they don't know everything that's going on here in the United States of America.

But no, I would still totally be okay if the government kept this plans of attacking a secret, and we knew nothing about it. It would still be better than just straight up telling everybody "Hey guys, we plan on attacking Syria's leader".

[Ian 325]

We need to get the hell out of Syria. Let Russia take all the blame and get all of the jihad.

[Ordinarygamer96 785]

Just now, Ironic said:

True, but if the surveillance all countries have were really that good, then I don't understand how surprise attacks still happen. We don't know everything that's going on in other countries, as they don't know everything that's going on here in the United States of America.

But no, I would still totally be okay if the government kept this plans of attacking a secret, and we knew nothing about it. It would still be better than just straight up telling everybody "Hey guys, we plan on attacking Syria's leader".

Name a time in recent memory that two modern countries were able to launch full scale attacks against eachother  with surprise. Maybe where the attacks are going is a secret sometimes but it's impossible to cover up carrier movements. Your criticism in the end still targets Trump and his people because they were the ones who casually said they might take out Assad to reporters when they ran against Hillary's much less dangerous no fly zone idea 

[Ironic 2278]

Just now, Ordinarygamer96 said:

Maybe where the attacks are going is a secret sometimes

This is exactly what this is, an attack. Could it lead to war? Yes, but as of right now it's just an attack, not a war. And America, being as dumb as we are, decided to let the whole world know about the possible attack by shoving it all throughout the media.

[Don Juan 679]

If Mr. Donald J. Trump gets himself involved in Syria, my unbiased opinion is that I feel that it would be a good thing. If his interests was to help the people in Syria, which I believe it isn't. I would like to believe that there is more to gain for the U.S to get involved other than helping the civilian population in Syria. Maybe it is to get the upper hand, because if the U.S helps, the Russians won't and if the Russian do the U.S will. So I am thinking it has something to do with showing force and presence. Other than that I see no problem if the Syrians AGREE and CONSENT to the help that they feel the need and want for.

[MistaChang 2023]

Full bias: Assad needs to be stopped, and so does ISIS.  

[Carl Sagan 2577]

[chaos4499 198]

No longer considering action, the USA just targeted an airbase outside of Homs, Syria with 59 cruise missiles.

 

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/06/us-military-has-launched-more-50-than-missiles-aimed-at-syria-nbc-news.html

[Dr. NarwhalsNumbNuts IV 2291]

1 hour ago, Ian Kinsler said:

We need to get the hell out of Syria. Let Russia take all the blame and get all of the jihad.

Hey friend

"Jihad" is arabic for "struggle". Studying for an exam is jihad. Admining a server is jihad. ect

 

It doesn't mean anything relating to terrorism in it's true meaning. Extremists can claim holy jihad but most people have made the connection between jihad and terrorism. This is not so. 

[JFK 546]

So the first memorable thing Trump goes through with in his 100 days with that isn't rejected is to launch an attack against Assad after campaigning on "America First" and withdrawing from the Middle East. Still think you guys haven't been duped by Trump?

 

To be fair, I was always for intervention in Syria. It's still ridiculous to see him immediately change his foreign policy after lambasting his opponents for wanting to do so without a shred of irony.

 

2 hours ago, Ironic said:

Anyways, I definitely agree that America should take a stand against this, if more proof comes out that it was Assad for sure. I don't like America getting involved in too many outside of our country things, but stuff like this needs to be put to an end.

 

Weren't you against intervention in Syria during the campaign on the basis Hillary was supposedly going World War III with a no fly zone, much less than outright attacking Assad directly? It's not a surprise Assad had chemical weapons considering he already used them against his own people awhile back so it's strange to see you change your opinion.

[Ordinarygamer96 785]

I've seen about 15 Trump supporters who said Hillary was dangerous because she wanted a no fly zone but are cheering Trump literally leaving a base that potentially had Russians in it a crater 

[Ironic 2278]

Just now, JFK said:

Weren't you against intervention in Syria during the campaign on the basis Hillary was supposedly going World War III with a no fly zone, much less than outright attacking Assad directly? It's not a surprise Assad had chemical weapons considering he already used them against his own people awhile back so it's strange to see you change your opinion.

Nope. I don't recall every saying any of that, so I don't see why you're so quick to think I "changed my opinion" lol

[JFK 546]

Just now, Ordinarygamer96 said:

I've seen about 15 Trump supporters who said Hillary was dangerous because she wanted a no fly zone but are cheering Trump literally leaving a base that potentially had Russians in it a crater 

 

From what I can tell, there is actually quite a bit of uproar on /pol/, InfoWars, Breitbart and Trump subreddits about this.

 

He literally campaigned against the very thing he is doing tonight and even claimed the U.S. was overreacting to Saddam's chemical attacks against the Kurds at a campaign rally. It's almost as if he had no attachment to anything he was talking about while he was campaigning.

 

Just now, Ironic said:

Nope. I don't recall every saying any of that, so I don't see why you're so quick to think I "changed my opinion" lol

 

I just searched Syria and saw you upvoting a comment condemning Hillary for wanting to intervene. Getting out of the middle east was a big part of his platform so it's really strange to see you claim you never had an opinion on it.

[Ordinarygamer96 785]

I remember @Ian Kinsler and tuxedo arguing that they didn't trust Hillary because of her no fly zone stance. Now we're actually bombing bases Russians might be based at. And over at fox news they've got some serious double think going on . I'm not entirely against removing Assad but the fact this goes against one of his  only consistent campaign stances but is being played off by conservatives as success before the damage is even assessed is baffling to me

[Dr Pepper 1491]

 

[Ironic 2278]

7 hours ago, JFK said:

I just searched Syria and saw you upvoting a comment condemning Hillary for wanting to intervene. Getting out of the middle east was a big part of his platform so it's really strange to see you claim you never had an opinion on it.

Even though I still don't remember upvoting anything like that, I would pretty much up vote anything that went against Hillary back then lmao

 

Edit: I just looked up and the only thing I found was when I upvoted Ian for giving all his reasons why he believed Trump was the better candidate, because for the most part I did agree with his points, hence why I gave him his upvote.

[Ian 325]

7 hours ago, Ordinarygamer96 said:

I remember @Ian Kinsler and tuxedo arguing that they didn't trust Hillary because of her no fly zone stance. Now we're actually bombing bases Russians might be based at. And over at fox news they've got some serious double think going on . I'm not entirely against removing Assad but the fact this goes against one of his  only consistent campaign stances but is being played off by conservatives as success before the damage is even assessed is baffling to me

 

....okay. There is not a no fly zone in Syria and Trump still doesn't the implementation of one. At least we don't have boots on the ground.

[xmen 983]

8 hours ago, JFK said:

It's almost as if he had no attachment to anything he was talking about while he was campaigning.

Lmao what a shocker

[Ordinarygamer96 785]

2 hours ago, Ian Kinsler said:

 

....okay. There is not a no fly zone in Syria and Trump still doesn't the implementation of one. At least we don't have boots on the ground.

Pretty sure cruise missiles at bases that can have Russians in them are still a bigger escalation than a no fly zone. Which invalidates  another reason you voted for him along with obamacare

[Dakota 4722]

Russia was warned before the attack. 

[Ordinarygamer96 785]

Just now, Beerman said:

Russia was warned before the attack. 

Pretty much my primary opposition to it is the hypocrisy of it. Trumps built up such a crazy cult of personality that his supporters screamed Hillary would start a war but cheer literally as missiles are flying. Personally I was calling for intervention years  ago in support of friendly rebels

[centran 4457]

19 minutes ago, Ordinarygamer96 said:

Pretty sure cruise missiles at bases that can have Russians in them are still a bigger escalation than a no fly zone. Which invalidates  another reason you voted for him along with obamacare

 

Just now, Beerman said:

Russia was warned before the attack. 

 

Yep and they have 5 more airfields.

 

This was basically a slap on the wrist and a show of power. Pretty much... "Listen up Syria! Also, North Korea you may want to hear this as well. Russia... you know what we are capable of but it's been awhile. Enjoy the fireworks. So, yeah. Syria? This is what happens when we push a button. We have a lot of buttons. Don't make us push buttons."