• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: tryptakid | Foreigner

U.S. Cruise Missile Attack On Syrian Air Base

Yourbaker said:
Why would Syrian forces have used chemical weapons? This makes absolutely no sense.
Click to expand...

Why not? Russia isn't going to do anything about Syrian chemical weapon use. The EU probably would't do anything.

About the only one that is probably willing to do anything is the US - but that was under Obama's bungled diplomacy. US just got a new president, one that has campaigned on the idea that it's Hillary that's a warmonger. One that's on record for basically saying that whatever happens in Syria isn't worth dragging America into.

I see it plausible that Assad believed Trump wouldn't do anything.
 
"Nice" timing :|

The bloody quagmire is just a whole lot deeper and a shittier now.
The thing that bothers me about all of this is that the thousands and thousands of innocent children have been blown to bits with various missiles, drone attacks and other "conventional" methods of mass-killing (by all sides) - yet the children killed by sarin gas are treated like some kind of anomaly.

Obviously chemical warfare is fucking wrong, but so is killing civilians with missiles.
Really, what's the difference?

Dead kids are dead kids - but gruesome pictures of dying kiddies aren't generally beamed across the western world's tv sets, newspapers and social media feeds in this way.
Like, showing babies that have been blown up is somehow distasteful. Why? I guess because that's the "acceptable" way of killing kids.

Remember that Médecins sans Frontières hospital that US forces deliberately bombed in Afghanistan in late 2015?

That was the very definition of a war crime.

War is hell and war kills innocent men, women and particularly, disproportionately, children (especially in developing nations).

Really this is all a fucking sick game by a bunch of sick men (regardless of their national, tribal, theological or political allegiances.
I find the MSM war drum cheer-squad truly sickening.

:(
 
Last edited:
59 missiles and that air base is still functional and there are planes that are flying in and out so technically the whole thing was just Trump stomping around being as useless as tits on a bull anyway.


Its no big deal. Nothing is going to change in a hurry on Syria. Its a shame that US and Russia cant just man up and sort out this stupid regime, clean up the place and spend more time and effort on their own countries
 
zephyr said:
59 missiles and that air base is still functional and there are planes that are flying in and out so technically the whole thing was just Trump stomping around being as useless as tits on a bull anyway.


Its no big deal. Nothing is going to change in a hurry on Syria. Its a shame that US and Russia cant just man up and sort out this stupid regime, clean up the place and spend more time and effort on their own countries
Click to expand...

The airstrike, i agree, was strategically inconsequential - probably deliberately so.
But i would suggest the political implications are anything but.

Their true implications are yet to play out though. What a fucking mess.
 
Escher's Waterfall said:
Why not? Russia isn't going to do anything about Syrian chemical weapon use. The EU probably would't do anything.

About the only one that is probably willing to do anything is the US - but that was under Obama's bungled diplomacy. US just got a new president, one that has campaigned on the idea that it's Hillary that's a warmonger. One that's on record for basically saying that whatever happens in Syria isn't worth dragging America into.

I see it plausible that Assad believed Trump wouldn't do anything.
Click to expand...


What possible gain could the Assad regime gain from killing some random people with chemical weapons? How was this attack more successful for them because it was chemical? Do you think the massive gain in popular support from being blamed of using chemical weapons was a draw?

Looks like a well played propaganda stunt to bait America into a knee jerk reaction. Done and done.
 
Ryan01 said:
Now we know the real reason cuckservatives are against abortion
Click to expand...

Off topic and inflammatory nonsense tbh .

A lot of your contributions just seem like shit stirring and its annoying to read and although Ill probably miss some incredulous laughable gems its off to the ignore list for you.
 
Ms Ryan was vaguely funny the first time but it got old fast. :\

zephyr said:
A lot of your contributions just seem like shit stirring and its annoying to read and although Ill probably miss some incredulous laughable gems its off to the ignore list for you.
Click to expand...

Don't worry, I'll quote them for you. ;)
 
Yourbaker said:
What possible gain could the Assad regime gain from killing some random people with chemical weapons? How was this attack more successful for them because it was chemical? Do you think the massive gain in popular support from being blamed of using chemical weapons was a draw?
Click to expand...

We've had a long history of using chemical weapons in warfare, presumably they have some use, considering the hazards and drawbacks of chemical weapons compared to conventional weapons.

Perhaps it was intended to diminish the civilians' support for rebel fighters. Perhaps it was to target fighters in bunkers. Perhaps it was intended to injure, not kill, tying up medical facilities, supplies, and manpower.

As for the result, I don't know what US leadership intends. If we wanted to show that the US will retaliate after a country was warned, the missile attack was likely a predictable but effective way to accomplish it, even if it had limited effect on Assad's capability to wage war.

If we are really seeking the removal of Assad, I think we could do better based on a multi-prong approach.
 
Because I think it is funny to say " soviets" instead of "russians" and what's the difference? putin is KGB!

Also, really?

http://nypost.com/2017/04/07/russian-warship-heads-toward-us-destroyers-after-strike-on-syria/

It was that hard to google this, no need to knock my newssource. I try to make it clear if Im posting fake news. The story is legit.


spacejunk said:
Why do you say "Soviets"?

Interesting that this "story" hasn't been reported anywhere else, that i can see.
What do the Trump crowd call this? Fake news, right?

I just call it warmongering propaganda - but that's what Fox News is, for the most part; a mouthpiece for the US war machine and its narrow, deeply nefarious interests.
Disturbing stuff.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top