Trump attacks Syria - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HotUKDeals, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HotUKDeals app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit

Trump attacks Syria

£0.00 @
Trump attacks Syria Read More
rasanh Avatar
1m, 2w agoPosted 1 month, 2 weeks ago
Trump attacks Syria
rasanh Avatar
1m, 2w agoPosted 1 month, 2 weeks ago
Options

Top Comments

(5)
11 Likes
I think we can all agree that none of us truly know for certain what is going on anywhere. The media twist and even invent stories to serve their own ends and the needs of their governments.

At the end of the day, firing more missiles is not going going to save lives, it's going to take more.

But that's the whole point, see? Living in a state of perpetual war and fear is good for the incumbent establishment, and it's great for big business.
7 Likes
Oh ye.. and they worried about human lives... they worrying only about money

Edited By: Mogolent on Apr 07, 2017 03:37: .
6 Likes
I am baffled beyond belief that the USA launched these strikes on basis that "the airfield is believed to be the source of the chemical attacks" (as quoted from BBC, AP and USA Today).

Given that the Syrian/Russian/Iranian coalition (if that's what it can be called) are winning the war, or rather conflict Assad would have to be mind bogglingly insane beyond that of Kim Jong-un to have launched this attack. It just doesn't make any sense from a military perspective and I can only assume one of the following....

1/ It was a c**k up and the wrong bombs were used.
2/ The airstrike used conventional weapons and actually blew up chemical weapons in storage at the target location.
3/ The Russians did it to draw the USA into the conflict (highly unlikely).
4/ Assad has totally lost the plot (not as unlikely as point 3 but given the conflict is going in Syria's favour still unlikely).
5/ It was actually Iran or Israel (weighing up past and present history this would be the most plausible and least surprising).

Regardless of what actually happened, launching 50 tomahawks at a Syrian airfield where there are likely Russian military personnel on the basis of a hunch that's who and where chemical weapons attacks are coming from is belligerent to the Nth degree and is asking for nothing more than all out global conflict.

If an effort had actually been made to verify where the attack came from before wiping the target off the the map, if any Russians died as a result there would be evidence of complicity in a war crime and Russia wouldn't have a leg to stand on against the international community and there would be little to no risk of reprisal. As it is however I would love to know what Def Con we are at right now.
6 Likes
Curlyman83
Predikuesi
Looks like Jeremy Corbyniski has caused more divisions in the Labour Party over this.http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/syria-attack-jeremy-corbyn-labour-party-divide-tom-watson-backlash-a7672141.html
I think Corbyn is spot on.

Agreed.

Have people forgotten all of the recent interventions in the MIddle East?

They haven't exactly worked out for the best have they!
5 Likes
So they gave the Russians plenty of warning
they are sure to have warned the Syrians
so anything valuable like a secret stash of chemical weapons easily removed

so one very dangerous and expensive piece of willy waving

All Comments

(76) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
Page:
4 Likes #1
Interesting to see how the Anti Trump Anti Assad members reply to this one.
3 Likes #2
J4GG4
Interesting to see how the Anti Trump Anti Assad members reply to this one.
he is doing this for the popular vote.
7 Likes #3
Oh ye.. and they worried about human lives... they worrying only about money

Edited By: Mogolent on Apr 07, 2017 03:37: .
#4
Chemical attack bs/ff
4 Likes #5
rasanh
J4GG4
Interesting to see how the Anti Trump Anti Assad members reply to this one.
he is doing this for the popular vote.
Bs
6 Likes #6
I am baffled beyond belief that the USA launched these strikes on basis that "the airfield is believed to be the source of the chemical attacks" (as quoted from BBC, AP and USA Today).

Given that the Syrian/Russian/Iranian coalition (if that's what it can be called) are winning the war, or rather conflict Assad would have to be mind bogglingly insane beyond that of Kim Jong-un to have launched this attack. It just doesn't make any sense from a military perspective and I can only assume one of the following....

1/ It was a c**k up and the wrong bombs were used.
2/ The airstrike used conventional weapons and actually blew up chemical weapons in storage at the target location.
3/ The Russians did it to draw the USA into the conflict (highly unlikely).
4/ Assad has totally lost the plot (not as unlikely as point 3 but given the conflict is going in Syria's favour still unlikely).
5/ It was actually Iran or Israel (weighing up past and present history this would be the most plausible and least surprising).

Regardless of what actually happened, launching 50 tomahawks at a Syrian airfield where there are likely Russian military personnel on the basis of a hunch that's who and where chemical weapons attacks are coming from is belligerent to the Nth degree and is asking for nothing more than all out global conflict.

If an effort had actually been made to verify where the attack came from before wiping the target off the the map, if any Russians died as a result there would be evidence of complicity in a war crime and Russia wouldn't have a leg to stand on against the international community and there would be little to no risk of reprisal. As it is however I would love to know what Def Con we are at right now.
#7
saw it breaking on BBC as 50 tomahawks fired.. now update saying 59 ....
will see what happens now!
2 Likes #8
Here's a summary of the fast-moving US military action so far:
• 59 Tomahawk missiles were fired from the Mediterranean at 08:40 EST (01:40 GMT)
• the missiles struck aircraft, shelters, ammunition supplies and radars at the Shayrat airfield near Homs, said officials
• the governor of Homs said several people were killed, and claimed the airbase was used to support operations against the Islamic State group
• President Trump said previous attempts at changing Assad’s behavior "failed dramatically"
• the Syria government confirmed the US actions in a statement, calling them "aggressive"
• Moscow has yet to respond but had earlier warned of "negative consequences" to military action
#9
dozstanford
I am baffled beyond belief that the USA launched these strikes on basis that "the airfield is believed to be the source of the chemical attacks" (as quoted from BBC, AP and USA Today).
Given that the Syrian/Russian/Iranian coalition (if that's what it can be called) are winning the war, or rather conflict Assad would have to be mind bogglingly insane beyond that of Kim Jong-un to have launched this attack. It just doesn't make any sense from a military perspective and I can only assume one of the following....
1/ It was a c**k up and the wrong bombs were used.
2/ The airstrike used conventional weapons and actually blew up chemical weapons in storage at the target location.
3/ The Russians did it to draw the USA into the conflict (highly unlikely).
4/ Assad has totally lost the plot (not as unlikely as point 3 but given the conflict is going in Syria's favour still unlikely).
5/ It was actually Iran or Israel (weighing up past and present history this would be the most plausible and least surprising).
Regardless of what actually happened, launching 50 tomahawks at a Syrian airfield where there are likely Russian military personnel on the basis of a hunch that's who and where chemical weapons attacks are coming from is belligerent to the Nth degree and is asking for nothing more than all out global conflict.
If an effort had actually been made to verify where the attack came from before wiping the target off the the map, if any Russians died as a result there would be evidence of complicity in a war crime and Russia wouldn't have a leg to stand on against the international community and there would be little to no risk of reprisal. As it is however I would love to know what Def Con we are at right now.
According to the Washington post the Russian personnel at the airfield were forewarned, before the missile launch!.

So surely the Russian government knew too, what was gonna go down! maybe Russian government has Switched sides now and are working with the USA and have betrayed Assad and Iran!

Looks that way to me, if not the **** going to hit the fan, I am worried for all our safety, but I honestly think Russian approval must have been sought 1st behind closed doors, by American Government.


Edited By: Moonwolf1976 on Apr 07, 2017 05:58
4 Likes #10
and don't forget Hilary Clinton is a warmonger ;)
Boris Johnson is in Moscow
Ah right so nothing to worry about then *rolleyes*

Edited By: thewongwing101 on Apr 07, 2017 07:09
#11
rasanh
J4GG4
Interesting to see how the Anti Trump Anti Assad members reply to this one.
he is doing this for the popular vote.
And Assad is killing with chemical weapons or not?
2 Likes #12
dozstanford
I am baffled beyond belief that the USA launched these strikes on basis that "the airfield is believed to be the source of the chemical attacks" (as quoted from BBC, AP and USA Today).

Given that the Syrian/Russian/Iranian coalition (if that's what it can be called) are winning the war, or rather conflict Assad would have to be mind bogglingly insane beyond that of Kim Jong-un to have launched this attack. It just doesn't make any sense from a military perspective and I can only assume one of the following....

1/ It was a c**k up and the wrong bombs were used.
2/ The airstrike used conventional weapons and actually blew up chemical weapons in storage at the target location.
3/ The Russians did it to draw the USA into the conflict (highly unlikely).
4/ Assad has totally lost the plot (not as unlikely as point 3 but given the conflict is going in Syria's favour still unlikely).
5/ It was actually Iran or Israel (weighing up past and present history this would be the most plausible and least surprising).

Regardless of what actually happened, launching 50 tomahawks at a Syrian airfield where there are likely Russian military personnel on the basis of a hunch that's who and where chemical weapons attacks are coming from is belligerent to the Nth degree and is asking for nothing more than all out global conflict.

If an effort had actually been made to verify where the attack came from before wiping the target off the the map, if any Russians died as a result there would be evidence of complicity in a war crime and Russia wouldn't have a leg to stand on against the international community and there would be little to no risk of reprisal. As it is however I would love to know what Def Con we are at right now.
yeah Assad isnt that evil, those people dying from chemical weapons couldnt have been betrayed by their leader could they - well believe what you like but Assad deserved this attack not an invite like before from Obama to "Please dispose of your chemical weapons - oh they're in the trucks - oh we dont need to check - Thank you"
#13
Hopefully Iran will stay clear of any involvement in this, otherwise it will quickly escalate. It will be interesting to see how the UN respond to Russia's complaint against the air strike.
5 Likes #14
So they gave the Russians plenty of warning
they are sure to have warned the Syrians
so anything valuable like a secret stash of chemical weapons easily removed

so one very dangerous and expensive piece of willy waving
3 Likes #15
davewave
dozstanford
I am baffled beyond belief that the USA launched these strikes on basis that "the airfield is believed to be the source of the chemical attacks" (as quoted from BBC, AP and USA Today).
Given that the Syrian/Russian/Iranian coalition (if that's what it can be called) are winning the war, or rather conflict Assad would have to be mind bogglingly insane beyond that of Kim Jong-un to have launched this attack. It just doesn't make any sense from a military perspective and I can only assume one of the following....
1/ It was a c**k up and the wrong bombs were used.
2/ The airstrike used conventional weapons and actually blew up chemical weapons in storage at the target location.
3/ The Russians did it to draw the USA into the conflict (highly unlikely).
4/ Assad has totally lost the plot (not as unlikely as point 3 but given the conflict is going in Syria's favour still unlikely).
5/ It was actually Iran or Israel (weighing up past and present history this would be the most plausible and least surprising).
Regardless of what actually happened, launching 50 tomahawks at a Syrian airfield where there are likely Russian military personnel on the basis of a hunch that's who and where chemical weapons attacks are coming from is belligerent to the Nth degree and is asking for nothing more than all out global conflict.
If an effort had actually been made to verify where the attack came from before wiping the target off the the map, if any Russians died as a result there would be evidence of complicity in a war crime and Russia wouldn't have a leg to stand on against the international community and there would be little to no risk of reprisal. As it is however I would love to know what Def Con we are at right now.
yeah Assad isnt that evil, those people dying from chemical weapons couldnt have been betrayed by their leader could they - well believe what you like but Assad deserved this attack not an invite like before from Obama to "Please dispose of your chemical weapons - oh they're in the trucks - oh we dont need to check - Thank you"

davewave
dozstanford
I am baffled beyond belief that the USA launched these strikes on basis that "the airfield is believed to be the source of the chemical attacks" (as quoted from BBC, AP and USA Today).
Given that the Syrian/Russian/Iranian coalition (if that's what it can be called) are winning the war, or rather conflict Assad would have to be mind bogglingly insane beyond that of Kim Jong-un to have launched this attack. It just doesn't make any sense from a military perspective and I can only assume one of the following....
1/ It was a c**k up and the wrong bombs were used.
2/ The airstrike used conventional weapons and actually blew up chemical weapons in storage at the target location.
3/ The Russians did it to draw the USA into the conflict (highly unlikely).
4/ Assad has totally lost the plot (not as unlikely as point 3 but given the conflict is going in Syria's favour still unlikely).
5/ It was actually Iran or Israel (weighing up past and present history this would be the most plausible and least surprising).
Regardless of what actually happened, launching 50 tomahawks at a Syrian airfield where there are likely Russian military personnel on the basis of a hunch that's who and where chemical weapons attacks are coming from is belligerent to the Nth degree and is asking for nothing more than all out global conflict.
If an effort had actually been made to verify where the attack came from before wiping the target off the the map, if any Russians died as a result there would be evidence of complicity in a war crime and Russia wouldn't have a leg to stand on against the international community and there would be little to no risk of reprisal. As it is however I would love to know what Def Con we are at right now.
yeah Assad isnt that evil, those people dying from chemical weapons couldnt have been betrayed by their leader could they - well believe what you like but Assad deserved this attack not an invite like before from Obama to "Please dispose of your chemical weapons - oh they're in the trucks - oh we dont need to check - Thank you"


False flag to justify action. Assad is winning, why would he provoke the an international response? You have no answer, so don't bother, why don't you trot on to your lodge and worship that owl thing or whatever weird depraved stuff you get up to.
suspended 4 Likes #16
That was just a punch in the face, I want to see Trump going in heavy, going in hard and wiping out just about everyone there that is affront to humanity!

That way there will be zero need for gutless, wimpy, syrians to run to another country as there will be no one left there to persecute them.

Those who have gone abroad can then return to safe and free syria.

Edited By: groenleader on Apr 07, 2017 08:09
2 Likes #17
Please just no more Syrian refugees.
#18
davewave
dozstanford
I am baffled beyond belief that the USA launched these strikes on basis that "the airfield is believed to be the source of the chemical attacks" (as quoted from BBC, AP and USA Today).
Given that the Syrian/Russian/Iranian coalition (if that's what it can be called) are winning the war, or rather conflict Assad would have to be mind bogglingly insane beyond that of Kim Jong-un to have launched this attack. It just doesn't make any sense from a military perspective and I can only assume one of the following....
1/ It was a c**k up and the wrong bombs were used.
2/ The airstrike used conventional weapons and actually blew up chemical weapons in storage at the target location.
3/ The Russians did it to draw the USA into the conflict (highly unlikely).
4/ Assad has totally lost the plot (not as unlikely as point 3 but given the conflict is going in Syria's favour still unlikely).
5/ It was actually Iran or Israel (weighing up past and present history this would be the most plausible and least surprising).
Regardless of what actually happened, launching 50 tomahawks at a Syrian airfield where there are likely Russian military personnel on the basis of a hunch that's who and where chemical weapons attacks are coming from is belligerent to the Nth degree and is asking for nothing more than all out global conflict.
If an effort had actually been made to verify where the attack came from before wiping the target off the the map, if any Russians died as a result there would be evidence of complicity in a war crime and Russia wouldn't have a leg to stand on against the international community and there would be little to no risk of reprisal. As it is however I would love to know what Def Con we are at right now.
yeah Assad isnt that evil, those people dying from chemical weapons couldnt have been betrayed by their leader could they - well believe what you like but Assad deserved this attack not an invite like before from Obama to "Please dispose of your chemical weapons - oh they're in the trucks - oh we dont need to check - Thank you"
I absolutely agree with you.
#19
dozstanford
2/ The airstrike used conventional weapons and actually blew up chemical weapons in storage at the target location.
I think that's what may have happened, the Syrians did say they had targeted an arms dump in the area, however, they would say that wouldn't they.
3 Likes #20
let's hope this doesn't go much further. War rarely brings peace. It just adds to the disunity in an already dysfunctional world.
1 Like #21
One angle not covered here yet is the timing. There are much bigger geopolitical chips on the table, and this being launched as the Chinese leadership arrived in Florida is not without significance. Imagine the scene, Donald Trump excuses himself from a tete-a-tete by saying "Oh please excuse me for a short while, Xi Jinping, I'm just going to authorise the launch 50 - 60 missiles at Syria". That is of course a 'canape' compared to what else they are capable of militarily, and Trump's team will know that this seemingly unrelated action will register in Chinese minds in future relations. This is a psychological marker laid down before China, as much as it is a response to recent events in Syria.
1 Like #22
The source of the chemical is naturally being disputed, however there are reports, from people on the ground, that the hospitals treating the injured were then attacked by Syrian/ Russian jets.

I have no problem with what America has done, I see it as a warning to Assad to fight fair.
#23
thewongwing101
and don't forget Hilary Clinton is a warmonger ;)
Boris Johnson is in Moscow
Ah right so nothing to worry about then *rolleyes*


Yeah and Trump is a Russian puppet!
11 Likes #24
I think we can all agree that none of us truly know for certain what is going on anywhere. The media twist and even invent stories to serve their own ends and the needs of their governments.

At the end of the day, firing more missiles is not going going to save lives, it's going to take more.

But that's the whole point, see? Living in a state of perpetual war and fear is good for the incumbent establishment, and it's great for big business.
1 Like #25
Curlyman83
I think we can all agree that none of us truly know for certain what is going on anywhere. The media twist and even invent stories to serve their own ends and the needs of their governments.

At the end of the day, firing more missiles is not going going to save lives, it's going to take more.

But that's the whole point, see? Living in a state of perpetual war and fear is good for the incumbent establishment, and it's great for big business.


totally agree with you.
#26
davewave
dozstanford
I am baffled beyond belief that the USA launched these strikes on basis that "the airfield is believed to be the source of the chemical attacks" (as quoted from BBC, AP and USA Today).

Given that the Syrian/Russian/Iranian coalition (if that's what it can be called) are winning the war, or rather conflict Assad would have to be mind bogglingly insane beyond that of Kim Jong-un to have launched this attack. It just doesn't make any sense from a military perspective and I can only assume one of the following....

1/ It was a c**k up and the wrong bombs were used.
2/ The airstrike used conventional weapons and actually blew up chemical weapons in storage at the target location.
3/ The Russians did it to draw the USA into the conflict (highly unlikely).
4/ Assad has totally lost the plot (not as unlikely as point 3 but given the conflict is going in Syria's favour still unlikely).
5/ It was actually Iran or Israel (weighing up past and present history this would be the most plausible and least surprising).

Regardless of what actually happened, launching 50 tomahawks at a Syrian airfield where there are likely Russian military personnel on the basis of a hunch that's who and where chemical weapons attacks are coming from is belligerent to the Nth degree and is asking for nothing more than all out global conflict.

If an effort had actually been made to verify where the attack came from before wiping the target off the the map, if any Russians died as a result there would be evidence of complicity in a war crime and Russia wouldn't have a leg to stand on against the international community and there would be little to no risk of reprisal. As it is however I would love to know what Def Con we are at right now.
yeah Assad isnt that evil, those people dying from chemical weapons couldnt have been betrayed by their leader could they - well believe what you like but Assad deserved this attack not an invite like before from Obama to "Please dispose of your chemical weapons - oh they're in the trucks - oh we dont need to check - Thank you"


Finally some physical force against this brutal dictator who has been killing his own people for years while hiding behind the superpower of Russia, and displacing thousand of his own people, hopefully Russia are turning there back on this evil man as well. I like this Unpredictable trump
#27
Saturn
One angle not covered here yet is the timing. There are much bigger geopolitical chips on the table, and this being launched as the Chinese leadership arrived in Florida is not without significance. Imagine the scene, Donald Trump excuses himself from a tete-a-tete by saying "Oh please excuse me for a short while, Xi Jinping, I'm just going to authorise the launch 50 - 60 missiles at Syria". That is of course a 'canape' compared to what else they are capable of militarily, and Trump's team will know that this seemingly unrelated action will register in Chinese minds in future relations. This is a psychological marker laid down before China, as much as it is a response to recent events in Syria.
Yeah the timing is amazingly close to Assad killing his own people with a chemical attack - uncanny!
#28
davewave
Saturn
One angle not covered here yet is the timing. There are much bigger geopolitical chips on the table, and this being launched as the Chinese leadership arrived in Florida is not without significance. Imagine the scene, Donald Trump excuses himself from a tete-a-tete by saying "Oh please excuse me for a short while, Xi Jinping, I'm just going to authorise the launch 50 - 60 missiles at Syria". That is of course a 'canape' compared to what else they are capable of militarily, and Trump's team will know that this seemingly unrelated action will register in Chinese minds in future relations. This is a psychological marker laid down before China, as much as it is a response to recent events in Syria.
Yeah the timing is amazingly close to Assad killing his own people with a chemical attack - uncanny!

You misunderstand the point again, dave' - never mind.
#29
Somebody said you sound like an owl!
davewave
Who?
#30
So whats the message, kill innocent people but not with chemical weapons!
#31
Very well blowing up the airfield but whatabout the helicopters
#32
123thisisme
Somebody said you sound like an owl!
davewave
Who?


i didn't say that in this thread. stop trolling me.
1 Like #33
Seeing as Trump has seen fit to launch this attack based on no evidence to link the alleged chemical attack to Assad's forces, will he be launching similar attacks against those in his coalition who were responsible for the deaths of over 200 civilians (pause for Nikki Haley to hold up photos of Mosul victims......................................................... still waiting) in a coalition attack on 17 March?

Edited By: qbs on Apr 07, 2017 11:02
#34
davewave
123thisisme
Somebody said you sound like an owl!
davewave
Who?
i didn't say that in this thread. stop trolling me.
It was a joke. Dumb joke but a joke.

Edited By: 123thisisme on Apr 07, 2017 11:04
#35
qbs
Seeing as Trump has seen fit to launch this attack based on no evidence to link the alleged chemical attack to Assad's forces, will he be launching similar attacks against those in his coalition who were responsible for the deaths of over 200 civilians (pause for Nikki Haley to hold up photos of Mosul victims......................................................... still waiting) in a coalition attack on 17 March?

The accidental one? which unfortunately happens in conflicts. ISIS positioned themselves where civilians were hiding. How exactly do you think any air force in the world can work out if civilians are inside a building when the target is on the roof of it?.

Also the evidence is obvious, no? Assad has used chemical weapons before plenty of times.
#36
So long as Russia don't retaliate WW3 should be avoided.
#37
Russia wouldn't escalate in Syria now they know Trump's trigger finger is a tad on the itchy side. By that I mean they wouldn't go after US ships/Aircraft or similar. They'll go for a much softer target, they'll start something new in Eastern Europe or take another slice of Ukraine. While I'm on the fence regarding Assad being the lesser of two evils by using these weapons (again) he's basically signed his own death warrant.
#38
cowsindahouse
Chemical attack bs/ff


because Assad is too fair a leader.
#39
J4GG4
qbs
Seeing as Trump has seen fit to launch this attack based on no evidence to link the alleged chemical attack to Assad's forces, will he be launching similar attacks against those in his coalition who were responsible for the deaths of over 200 civilians (pause for Nikki Haley to hold up photos of Mosul victims......................................................... still waiting) in a coalition attack on 17 March?
The accidental one? which unfortunately happens in conflicts. ISIS positioned themselves where civilians were hiding. How exactly do you think any air force in the world can work out if civilians are inside a building when the target is on the roof of it?.
Also the evidence is obvious, no? Assad has used chemical weapons before plenty of times.
Typical mindless response. Evidence of previous use? UN said no evidence of delivery method of current alleged attack.

Edited By: qbs on Apr 07, 2017 13:01
2 Likes #40
J4GG4
qbs
Seeing as Trump has seen fit to launch this attack based on no evidence to link the alleged chemical attack to Assad's forces, will he be launching similar attacks against those in his coalition who were responsible for the deaths of over 200 civilians (pause for Nikki Haley to hold up photos of Mosul victims......................................................... still waiting) in a coalition attack on 17 March?

The accidental one? which unfortunately happens in conflicts. ISIS positioned themselves where civilians were hiding. How exactly do you think any air force in the world can work out if civilians are inside a building when the target is on the roof of it?.

Also the evidence is obvious, no? Assad has used chemical weapons before plenty of times.


Ah, right! Now I get it. When we, the West, launch vicious attacks on innocent civilians, it's "accidental" - yet when others are accused (I've yet to see any conclusive evidence the Syrian Government were responsible) it's an atrocity that must be met with swift reprisal attacks.

Got it. Thanks for clearing that up.

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!