US attack Syrian air-base with 59 cruise missiles

[Penistone999]

I totally support Trump in bombing the Syrian air base. Where his predecessor didnt have the bottle to sort out Assad , Trump has proven he aint to be messed with.

[mossdog]

They feared the mentality of the Japanese, their apparent willingness to fight regardless but I recognise your point. The cost of lives that COULD have been lost forced the necessity for an end, the needs of the many but it was possible that surrender could have been won without the need (seeing the destruction an A-bomb could create may have tipped the balance). My view is that if there were options then maybe they should have been tried but I have the luxury of hindsight.

 

I'm no fan of Trump and it seems he relished the opportunity to flex American muscle, but his mantra was to make the USA great again so it is perhaps inevitable that it would include exercising military might.

..........do you think that more the Tabby Cat approach from Hilary had she won the election might alter Assad and Putin exercising military might?

[melthebell]

lets stop syrians killing syrians by erm killing syrians Oo

[silentP]

..........do you think that more the Tabby Cat approach from Hilary had she won the election might alter Assad and Putin exercising military might?

 

I think they're all equally as stupid and irresponsible.

[unbeliever]

lets stop syrians killing syrians by erm killing syrians Oo

 

Yeees. If you kill murderous people you save lives. That's how it works.

How is this not obvious to you?

[Guest]

lets stop syrians killing syrians by erm killing syrians Oo

 

The US attacked an airbase reducing Syria's capacity to kill. There were minimal casualties in the strike.

[mafya]

The US attacked an airbase reducing Syria's capacity to kill. There were minimal casualties in the strike.

 

If you believe that you will believe anything..

[Obelix]

If you believe that you will believe anything..

 

Do you have evidence to the contrary?

[mafya]

Do you have evidence to the contrary?

 

The Syrian army launched strikes elsewhere after the us attack so still active plus Russia has moved a big frigate into the region= http://edition.cnn.com/2017/04/08/middleeast/syria-strikes-russia-donald-trump/

Do you have evidence it was Assads forces that dropped the chemical weapons and not the rebel head choppers?

[999tigger]

They feared the mentality of the Japanese, their apparent willingness to fight regardless but I recognise your point. The cost of lives that COULD have been lost forced the necessity for an end, the needs of the many but it was possible that surrender could have been won without the need (seeing the destruction an A-bomb could create may have tipped the balance). My view is that if there were options then maybe they should have been tried but I have the luxury of hindsight.

 

I'm no fan of Trump and it seems he relished the opportunity to flex American muscle, but his mantra was to make the USA great again so it is perhaps inevitable that it would include exercising military might.

 

By the time it came to the invasion of Japan they were quite used to fighting the Japanese. They were scared of them because they had overwhelming force. Bombing them was practical.

 

It was not possible that the Japanese would have just surrendered. They were digging n and preparing for invasion. They had a targeting committee and they specifically aimed to achieve maximum psychological impact. The Japanese didnt surrender after the first and so the second was dropped to show them the US had more than one. This achieved the psychological impact as intended. Dropping a bmb on a small field would not have done that.

 

It was inevitable if you end up gassing people then some might get upset. Assad thought he could get away with it. He got a slap on the wrists, so guess he will have to stick to barrel bombing civilians instead.

 

---------- Post added 08-04-2017 at 18:52 ----------

 

The Syrian army launched strikes elsewhere after the us attack so still active plus Russia has moved a big frigate into the region= http://edition.cnn.com/2017/04/08/middleeast/syria-strikes-russia-donald-trump/

Do you have evidence it was Assads forces that dropped the chemical weapons and not the rebel head choppers?

 

It doesnt matter whether SF has evidence. Clearly the US believe they had sufficient evidence. There was really no gain for them to just randomly attack. It was a limited strike. It wasnt intended to wipe out Assad or the Syrian airforce.

 

Big deal theres a Russian Frigate near a carrier group. I doubt the US is exactly trembling. What do you think the Russians will do fire directly on the US?

 

---------- Post added 08-04-2017 at 18:55 ----------

 

lets stop syrians killing syrians by erm killing syrians Oo

 

Except thats not the point. In their minds its lets give them a slap on the wrist and a reminder not to use chemical weapons, which means its back to the barrel bombs.

 

If for some reason he started renewed chemical attacks he would get the same again.