Trump blasts Syria.

[zitothebrave]

It makes less sense for Putin to have ordered this than Assad.

I think Putin realizes that Assad is a lost cause, he'll leverage Assad to getting sanctions removed which will make him much more money. ANd he can just install a different puppet.

[Oklahomahawk]

I think Putin realizes that Assad is a lost cause, he'll leverage Assad to getting sanctions removed which will make him much more money. ANd he can just install a different puppet.

Except you're thinking like an American. What do we want Assad to do/be? We want a leader who brings stability to his country and to the region and who treats his people right. Putin wants and needs instability to the region, that's how aholes like him take over more and more lands, by using puppets who create wars (civil or otherwise) and who destabilize as much as possible, who create millions of refugees because all this changes the focus of what he's up to and puts it more on the chaos and suffering and destruction that was created by "God knows who" and even those who rightly blame him can't keep their focus on him and his deeds because of all the other bells and whistles and shiny things they see every day. Assad is exactly the kind of leader Putin wants in the region.

[Hawk]

Last year. The violent bloody year if you believe the media.

From 1970-2015 Terrorism killed 10,537 people, or about 240 a year. With most of the violence happening in the 70s and 80s.

And that is all of EUrope, including Russia.

Which even if all 10K deaths happened in 1 year, Europe, has a population of 700M. 10K deaths in 700M is insignificant.

But hey lets go bomb and destabilize other parts of the world. Because of freedom!

The fatal flaw in your logic is judging the threat of terrorism based purely on the amount of lives lost.

[57Brave]

I judge the threat of terrorism by the number of people hiding under their beds afraid to come out because of some random disjointed human half way across the earth.
But, that's just one mans opinion

[zitothebrave]

The fatal flaw in your logic is judging the threat of terrorism based purely on the amount of lives lost.

Threat of Lung Cancer isn't enough to stop people from smoking, why should the threat of terrorism lead to trillions in wasted money and hundreds of thousands of dead middle easterners?

[Hawk]

Threat of Lung Cancer isn't enough to stop people from smoking, why should the threat of terrorism lead to trillions in wasted money and hundreds of thousands of dead middle easterners?

I fail to understand how nicotine addiction is analogous to terrorism.
I fail to understand how all terrorism is Islamist.
I fail to understand how 'trillions of wasted dollars' and 'hundreds of thousands of dead middle easterners' have anything to do with your believe that terrorism isn't a threat.

Look, we all understand the path that America has chosen to subvert terrorism is nasty, costly, and hasn't in any way guaranteed our safety going forward.

But that isn't the point.

Three questions for you:

1. How would you define terrorism? Do not go to Google and copy and paste somebody else's explanation ... I just want to understand your casual interpretation of the word.

2. In the case of radical Muslim terrorists, what do you think their goal generally is (think about the recent attacks in France, Germany, Belgium, England, Sweden, etc)?

3. Assuming (as you've repeatedly stated without conclusive or relevant proof) that terrorism isn't a threat, what would your advice be for President Trump when it comes to protecting Americans from terrorist attacks going forward?

[Hawk]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-strike...190034806.html

Washington (AFP) - Last week's US strike on a Syrian air base destroyed a fifth of President Bashar al-Assad's working warplanes, Pentagon chief Jim Mattis said Monday.

"The assessment of the Department of Defense is that the strike resulted in the damage or destruction of fuel and ammunition sites, air defense capabilities, and 20 percent of Syria's operational aircraft," Mattis said in a statement.

"The Syrian government has lost the ability to refuel or re-arm aircraft at Shayrat airfield and at this point, use of the runway is of idle military interest," he added.

[sturg33]

Any evidence yet that Assad actually did this?

^

[Hawk]

https://www.apnews.com/19772be1238e49fbb62c509a5b659b3d

WASHINGTON (AP) — The United States has concluded Russia knew in advance of Syria's chemical weapons attack last week, a senior U.S. official said Monday.

The official said a drone operated by Russians was flying over a hospital as victims of the attack were rushing to get treatment. Hours after the drone left, a Russian-made fighter jet bombed the hospital in what American officials believe was an attempt to cover up the usage of chemical weapons.

[...]

Another U.S. official cautioned that no final American determination has been made that Russia knew ahead of time that chemical weapons would be used. That official wasn't authorized to speak about internal administration deliberations and spoke on condition of anonymity.

[Krgrecw]

^

Didn't Syria admit that they bombed an isis hideout which contained a supply of sarin and the sarin was released?

[Oklahomahawk]

^

Dude, did you not see the picture of the Japanese person???

[sturg33]

[sturg33]

[Hawk]

I mean, sure, given that there is an absence of 'smoking gun' evidence, it's possible that this could be a false flag (either of our own doing or by the Russians).

That being said, between the Sputnik pictures, the previous chemical attack, and the regime's attempt to blame on ISIL, I'm comfortable with the preponderance of evidence implicating Assad.

[sturg33]

I mean, sure, given that there is an absence of a 'smoking gun' evidence, it's possible that this could be a false flag (either of our own doing or by the Russians).

That being said, between the Sputnik pictures, the previous chemical attack, and the regime's attempt to blame on ISIL, I'm comfortable with the preponderance of evidence implicating Assad.

Do you mean the previous attack from 2013? Wasn't that later proven to have been done by the rebels?

[Hawk]

Do you mean the previous attack from 2013? Wasn't that later proven to have been done by the rebels?

Ironically, that's the line the Russians and the Syrians took.

The US, France, Germany, and UK (among others) concluded that it was Assad. The body of evidence is compelling.

[weso1]

If the gas attack was launched from a Syrian and Russian controlled airport then it's pretty hard to imagine it being some kind of false flag.

[weso1]

This is one of the most absurd false equivalencies I've ever seen.

[goldfly]

to call that thing in Waco a church is huge stretch

actually visited that compound last time i was in texas. weird place/area

[sturg33]

Ironically, that's the line the Russians and the Syrians took.

The US, France, Germany, and UK (among others) concluded that it was Assad. The body of evidence is compelling.

I'll confirm later, but wasn't it the UN who confirmed it was the rebels?