After Syria Gas Attack, World Awaits What Kind of Leader Trump Will Be

[smilesammich 10,727]

3 minutes ago, OriZ said:

I personally don't see the US killing hundreds of thousands of innocents in Syria but maybe that's just me.

you said there was no way the civilian deaths could get any higher. i think the us track record speaks for itself..we're perfectly capable of adding to assad's tally.

[ready4ONE 5,400]

3 hours ago, OriZ said:

Exactly, I'm not sure though what better options Trump really has either, so the world might as well be watching paint dry...

Syria is largely the Assad, Putin and Khamenei show at this point. Nothing will make it better short of full invasion and that might not do it either.

[OriZ 3,165]

3 hours ago, smilesammich said:

you said there was no way the civilian deaths could get any higher. i think the us track record speaks for itself..we're perfectly capable of adding to assad's tally.

What I meant was the US wouldn't kill more than Assad has, not that the total toll wouldn't be higher. It was in response to Calicat's comment which in retrospect may have meant what you mean and not what I thought it meant but either way. 

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

Who knew Syria could be so complicated?????

 

http://www.vox.com/world/2017/4/5/15189820/trump-response-atrocity-syria-blame-obama

 

During a Wednesday press conference, President Trump gave some uncharacteristically harsh comments about Bashar al-Assad’s government in Syria. The president claimed Assad’s gas attack on Tuesday, which killed at least 74 people, “had a big impact on me,” and that “it’s very possible…that my attitude toward Syria and Assad has changed.”

This paired well with tough talk from his ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley, who gave an impassioned speech at the UN on Wednesday asking "how many more children have to die before Russia cares?” — a clear dig at Russian President Vladimir Putin, Assad’s primary overseas backer (and an autocrat Trump openly admires).

"It crossed a lot of lines for me," Trump told reporters at the White House at the White House. "When you kill innocent children, innocent babies, babies, little babies, with a chemical gas that is so lethal, people were shocked to hear what gas it was, that crosses many, many lines, beyond a red line. Many, many lines."

But Trump’s harsh condemnation of Assad came with an important caveat: a new dig at President Barack Obama, who Trump blamed for setting the stage for the new attack by failing to use force against Assad after the Syrian dictator first used chemical weapons in 2013.

 

"I think the Obama administration had a great opportunity to solve this crisis a long time ago when he said the red line in the sand," Trump said at the White House. "And when he didn't cross that line after making the threat, I think that set us back a long ways, not only in Syria, but in many other parts of the world, because it was a blank threat. I think it was something that was not one of our better days as a country

[smilesammich 10,727]

27 minutes ago, OriZ said:

What I meant was the US wouldn't kill more than Assad has, not that the total toll wouldn't be higher. It was in response to Calicat's comment which in retrospect may have meant what you mean and not what I thought it meant but either way. 

either way, we can always add to the body count.

doesn't change the fact that trump never wanted obama to go into syria - he didn't believe it was our problem before when innocent children were being killed. now he claims to care as if he suddenly was informed that innocent children are dying - like whoa brand new information "big impact", and blames obama for the whole thing. 

 

[eieio 1,594]

I suspect the chemical weapons were not done by Assad. Hard to say though. I hope we have good evidence that the chemicals weapons were launched by the Assad regime, rather than another false flag.

 

 

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

55 minutes ago, eieio said:

I suspect the chemical weapons were not done by Assad. Hard to say though. I hope we have good evidence that the chemicals weapons were launched by the Assad regime, rather than another false flag.

 

 

Then who should we suspect?  You think that opposition forces did them to themselves?  It is obvious, Assad will stop at nothing to stay in power, and Iran and Putin are complicit in his crimes.

[ready4ONE 5,400]

3 hours ago, ccneat said:

Then who should we suspect?  You think that opposition forces did them to themselves?  It is obvious, Assad will stop at nothing to stay in power, and Iran and Putin are complicit in his crimes.

Alex Jones knows. Tune in!

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

Maybe Trump should just draw a red line and dare him to go over it. OMG LOL

[yuna628 9,917]

10 hours ago, eieio said:

I suspect the chemical weapons were not done by Assad. Hard to say though. I hope we have good evidence that the chemicals weapons were launched by the Assad regime, rather than another false flag.

 

 

Oh what is the culprit excuse to give ruthless dictators a pass this time, murdering carrier pigeons?

 

 

[eieio 1,594]

Looks like my guess that Assad was not responsible was wrong....at least I hope I was wrong. Trump does not fool around when it comes to bad guys. 

[Dashinka 26,244]

On 4/6/2017 at 0:01 AM, ccneat said:

Then who should we suspect?  You think that opposition forces did them to themselves?  It is obvious, Assad will stop at nothing to stay in power, and Iran and Putin are complicit in his crimes.

What is interesting is that the NSA Director came out an specifically said they avoided hitting a weapons dump at the base that was suspected of containing chemical weapons which means the Russians were not keeping up their end of the bargain regarding Assad's chemical weapons (the Russians were using that base from time to time).  Publicly of course, the Russians are condemning the action, but I think it will be more telling if Tillerson's trip to Moscow still takes place early next week.  The Kremlin did signal some softening of support for Assad earlier this week (paraphrased 'our support of the Assad regime is not unconditional') which may have helped make the decision to conduct the misleading strike.  It would be interesting to know what is being said away from the rhetoric.

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

5 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

What is interesting is that the NSA Director came out an specifically said they avoided hitting a weapons dump at the base that was suspected of containing chemical weapons which means the Russians were not keeping up their end of the bargain regarding Assad's chemical weapons (the Russians were using that base from time to time).  Publicly of course, the Russians are condemning the action, but I think it will be more telling if Tillerson's trip to Moscow still takes place early next week.  The Kremlin did signal some softening of support for Assad earlier this week (paraphrased 'our support of the Assad regime is not unconditional') which may have helped make the decision to conduct the misleading strike.  It would be interesting to know what is being said away from the rhetoric.

Speculation: Putin pulling back from Assad triggered this cowardly attack. Assad is feeling cornered. 

 

More speculation: Until ISIL is gone, gone from the region, the US will wound but not depose Assad.

[Dashinka 26,244]

1 hour ago, ccneat said:

Speculation: Putin pulling back from Assad triggered this cowardly attack. Assad is feeling cornered. 

 

More speculation: Until ISIL is gone, gone from the region, the US will wound but not depose Assad.

My speculation is that the US is trying to shame Putin to remove Assad.  Of course, I may be wrong, but the strike by Syria this week and the US response is going to put pressure on Russia to either put up or shut up or they will look as condoning the use of chemical weapons.

[OriZ 3,165]

55 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

My speculation is that the US is trying to shame Putin to remove Assad.  Of course, I may be wrong, but the strike by Syria this week and the US response is going to put pressure on Russia to either put up or shut up or they will look as condoning the use of chemical weapons.

What use of chemical weapons? According to Putin there wasn't any lol.

 

I find it interesting though that Israel has attacked in Syria about a dozen times over the past few years and the Syrians and Russians for the most part did nothing(usually Israel does not announce it though so the Syrians actually try and hide it, because they don't want to appear weak by not retaliating, but obviously it's alot easier for them to attack women and children than have to deal with the IDF). Israel and the Russians have some kind of mechanism in order to avoid conflict, but who knows if it's always going to work. As I posted in a different thread a few weeks ago - it's even more true now that the US is more involved - this could definitely go in a pretty bad direction if the Russians decide to get involved in what Israel and/or the US is/are doing.

Edited April 7, 2017 by OriZ