World reacts to new chemical weapon attack in Syria

[Doc Savage Fan]

ISIS has nothing to do with this. Assad has been targeting resistance fighters which are distinct from ISIS. Since there is no longer any concern on the part of Assad that the US wants him out so he no longer has any constraints. After all we did leave the option of removal hanging out there.

That leaves leaving him to do whatever he wants or committing to another power vacuum in a situation that's already shit.

We had no options before or after Trump said that taking out ISIS was a higher priority than taking out Assad....the options available to us have not changed.

But again, I'm open to hearing your suggestions. Should we have bombed Assad's troops? Just what is it that you want Trump to do about Assad? Make taking Assad out his #1 priority?

It's a shit situation for sure...but it's not Trump's creation. It's just one more shit sandwich handed to him by Obama.

 

[woolfe9998]

It creates more fear than bullets. War is fought on many fronts and psychology has been one tool used for centuries. The message is "you won't just die you will suffer horrifically of you persist in your opposition". The fact that this attack dominates the news is proof that contention.

Yes, I suspect that is the correct answer. I think when you use fear on civilian populations to undermine enemy morale, it's essentially an act of terrorism. Not dissimilar to some of the allied bombings during WWII.

I also agree with your hypothesis that Assad feels emboldened because we had one POTUS who drew a line and did nothing when it was crossed, and now another who has signaled that we do not oppose his regime. That, and he has Russia right there with him. It seems as though the powerful nations of the world have little help for the people of Syria. All we can do is take in their refugees, or not take them in, depending on which side of the political spectrum we're on.

 

[nakedfrog]

You mean like Obama asking for Congress to authorize the use of military force?

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/09/01/world/middleeast/syria.html

Funny how a military man has no fucking clue how that's supposed to work.

Even more ironic is that this piece of shit poster, outhouse, has the gall to complain about Obama when he was one of the biggest critics of Obama if Obama did anything in Syria.

as a vet of panama and kosovo i can tell you this. people die and those people had done nothing to the US to warrant a GBU-24, 15's dropped on their heads.

its nothing but posturing and if Obama attacks Syria not only is that a war crime but i will for the first time ever in my life stand on the street and protest.

im sick of our country being in a constant state of conflict. we are the most war mongering nation on this planet and its time for it to stop.

Daaaaaaamn.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Yes, I suspect that is the correct answer. I think when you use fear on civilian populations to undermine enemy morale, it's essentially an act of terrorism. Not dissimilar to some of the allied bombings during WWII.

I also agree with your hypothesis that Assad feels emboldened because we had one POTUS who drew a line and did nothing when it was crossed, and now another who has signaled that we do not oppose his regime. That, and he has Russia right there with him. It seems as though the powerful nations of the world have little help for the people of Syria. All we can do is take in their refugees, or not take them in, depending on which side of the political spectrum we're on.

Where did Trump say that he doesn't oppose Assad's regime? What should we do? Continue to spout meaningless rhetoric and do nothing?

 

[woolfe9998]

Where did Trump say that he doesn't oppose Assad's regime?

Spicer and Tillerson both made comments to that effect within the past week.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/spicer-u-s-must-face-political-reality-of-assad-in-syria-194540233.html

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Spicer and Tillerson both made comments to that effect within the past week.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/spicer-u-s-must-face-political-reality-of-assad-in-syria-194540233.html

What should we do? Continue to spout meaningless rhetoric and do nothing like Obama did since 2011? Or face reality and move on focusing on real issues that actually affect our national security (i.e. ISIS)?

 

[Sunburn74]

What should we do? Continue to spout meaningless rhetoric and do nothing like Obama did since 2011? Or face reality and move on focusing on real issues that actually affect our national security (i.e. ISIS)?

Look up Ghouta attack. Lots of worldwide hand wringing on what to do with many individual countries voting to not authorize military intervention, including the UK, france, etc. Obama asked congress to authorize US military action in Syria. Some debate in congress was started. Assad and Russia saw this and started negotiating. Military action request was withdrawn.

You're blaming Obama for a travesty the entire world sat by and watched. I am not happy with his response, but damn it every civilized country in the world did nothing whilst people were dying and fleeing and drowning in oceans. At the very least the Russians stepped in and sped up the resolution.

Syria is just a ridiculous quagmire right now. No one knows what to do. I would like to see NATO just say look this migrant crisis is affecting us all and step in as a collective force and put an end to it all. Wasn't Assad already convicted of war crimes in the UN or something to that effect?

I also find it crazy that people are going crazy over chemical weapons but have no outrage over allegations of death prisons in Syria where mass executions for dissenters are occurring.

 

[VRAMdemon]

Obama drew a line and Assad crossed it. Obama failed to respond. The Obama haters roasted him for it.

Assed crossed the line again. Trump sort of forgot about Assad and is making nice with him. The Obama haters are still roasting him for it.

Obama asked Congress to authorize military force and Republicans said no. So did the Democrats. And the British. Obama was out there alone on that one. Maybe he had McCain behind him. But no worries, it would have been worse if we had intervened right? We can always say that no matter what. What do the Trump supporters want him to do?

can you guess who made the following tweets?


Obama wants to unilaterally put a no-fly zone in Syria to protect Al Qaeda Islamists http://thebea.st/143tmfM Syria is NOT our problem.
11:58 AM - 29 May 2013

We should stay the hell out of Syria, the "rebels" are just as bad as the current regime. WHAT WILL WE GET FOR OUR LIVES AND $ BILLIONS?ZERO
5:33 PM - 15 Jun 2013

What will we get for bombing Syria besides more debt and a possible long term conflict? Obama needs Congressional approval.
11:14 AM - 29 Aug 2013

If Obama attacks Syria and innocent civilians are hurt and killed, he and the U.S. will look very bad!
12:26 PM - 30 Aug 2013

How would you treat the Syria situation if president ?" I'd let them all fight with each other-focus on US!
4:09 AM - 1 Sep 2013

If the U.S. attacks Syria and hits the wrong targets, killing civilians, there will be worldwide hell to pay. Stay away and fix broken U.S.
6:55 PM - 2 Sep 2013

"@BigSexyBDAvis: @realDonaldTrump mr trump would attack Syria or no?" No, lets make our country great again as they fight their war!
6:45 PM - 3 Sep 2013

What I am saying is stay out of Syria.
7:00 PM - 3 Sep 2013

The only reason President Obama wants to attack Syria is to save face over his very dumb RED LINE statement. Do NOT attack Syria,fix U.S.A.
4:13 AM - 5 Sep 2013

AGAIN, TO OUR VERY FOOLISH LEADER, DO NOT ATTACK SYRIA - IF YOU DO MANY VERY BAD THINGS WILL HAPPEN & FROM THAT FIGHT THE U.S. GETS NOTHING!
6:20 AM - 5 Sep 2013

President Obama, do not attack Syria. There is no upside and tremendous downside. Save your "powder" for another (and more important) day!
6:21 AM - 7 Sep 2013

Don't attack Syria - an attack that will bring nothing but trouble for the U.S. Focus on making our country strong and great again!
4:59 AM - 9 Sep 2013

Obama must now start focusing on OUR COUNTRY, jobs, healthcare and all of our many problems. Forget Syria and make America great again!
6:19 AM - 11 Sep 2013

We should stop talking, stay out of Syria and other countries that hate us, rebuild our own country and make it strong and great again-USA!
10:29 PM - 12 Sep 2013

 

[kage69]

You're only going to confuse the trumptards with facts...

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Lol holy shit infoWars is actually blaming the attack on.... any guesses?????










George Soros!

 

[IronWing]

Obama drew a line and Assad crossed it. Obama failed to respond. The Obama haters roasted him for it.

Assed crossed the line again. Trump sort of forgot about Assad and is making nice with him. The Obama haters are still roasting him for it.

Obama asked Congress to authorize military force and Republicans said no. So did the Democrats. And the British. Obama was out there alone on that one. Maybe he had McCain behind him. But no worries, it would have been worse if we had intervened right? We can always say that no matter what. What do the Trump supporters want him to do?

can you guess who made the following tweets?


Obama wants to unilaterally put a no-fly zone in Syria to protect Al Qaeda Islamists http://thebea.st/143tmfM Syria is NOT our problem.
11:58 AM - 29 May 2013

We should stay the hell out of Syria, the "rebels" are just as bad as the current regime. WHAT WILL WE GET FOR OUR LIVES AND $ BILLIONS?ZERO
5:33 PM - 15 Jun 2013

What will we get for bombing Syria besides more debt and a possible long term conflict? Obama needs Congressional approval.
11:14 AM - 29 Aug 2013

If Obama attacks Syria and innocent civilians are hurt and killed, he and the U.S. will look very bad!
12:26 PM - 30 Aug 2013

How would you treat the Syria situation if president ?" I'd let them all fight with each other-focus on US!
4:09 AM - 1 Sep 2013

If the U.S. attacks Syria and hits the wrong targets, killing civilians, there will be worldwide hell to pay. Stay away and fix broken U.S.
6:55 PM - 2 Sep 2013

"@BigSexyBDAvis: @realDonaldTrump mr trump would attack Syria or no?" No, lets make our country great again as they fight their war!
6:45 PM - 3 Sep 2013

What I am saying is stay out of Syria.
7:00 PM - 3 Sep 2013

The only reason President Obama wants to attack Syria is to save face over his very dumb RED LINE statement. Do NOT attack Syria,fix U.S.A.
4:13 AM - 5 Sep 2013

AGAIN, TO OUR VERY FOOLISH LEADER, DO NOT ATTACK SYRIA - IF YOU DO MANY VERY BAD THINGS WILL HAPPEN & FROM THAT FIGHT THE U.S. GETS NOTHING!
6:20 AM - 5 Sep 2013

President Obama, do not attack Syria. There is no upside and tremendous downside. Save your "powder" for another (and more important) day!
6:21 AM - 7 Sep 2013

Don't attack Syria - an attack that will bring nothing but trouble for the U.S. Focus on making our country strong and great again!
4:59 AM - 9 Sep 2013

Obama must now start focusing on OUR COUNTRY, jobs, healthcare and all of our many problems. Forget Syria and make America great again!
6:19 AM - 11 Sep 2013

We should stop talking, stay out of Syria and other countries that hate us, rebuild our own country and make it strong and great again-USA!
10:29 PM - 12 Sep 2013

Trump did a great job parroting the Russian line. It's uncanny how close his comments track with those of the Russian internet trolls.

 

[piasabird]

These weapons probably came from Russia.

 

[dainthomas]

Obama drew a line and Assad crossed it. Obama failed to respond. The Obama haters roasted him for it.

Assed crossed the line again. Trump sort of forgot about Assad and is making nice with him. The Obama haters are still roasting him for it.

Obama asked Congress to authorize military force and Republicans said no. So did the Democrats. And the British. Obama was out there alone on that one. Maybe he had McCain behind him. But no worries, it would have been worse if we had intervened right? We can always say that no matter what. What do the Trump supporters want him to do?

can you guess who made the following tweets?


Obama wants to unilaterally put a no-fly zone in Syria to protect Al Qaeda Islamists http://thebea.st/143tmfM Syria is NOT our problem.
11:58 AM - 29 May 2013

We should stay the hell out of Syria, the "rebels" are just as bad as the current regime. WHAT WILL WE GET FOR OUR LIVES AND $ BILLIONS?ZERO
5:33 PM - 15 Jun 2013

What will we get for bombing Syria besides more debt and a possible long term conflict? Obama needs Congressional approval.
11:14 AM - 29 Aug 2013

If Obama attacks Syria and innocent civilians are hurt and killed, he and the U.S. will look very bad!
12:26 PM - 30 Aug 2013

How would you treat the Syria situation if president ?" I'd let them all fight with each other-focus on US!
4:09 AM - 1 Sep 2013

If the U.S. attacks Syria and hits the wrong targets, killing civilians, there will be worldwide hell to pay. Stay away and fix broken U.S.
6:55 PM - 2 Sep 2013

"@BigSexyBDAvis: @realDonaldTrump mr trump would attack Syria or no?" No, lets make our country great again as they fight their war!
6:45 PM - 3 Sep 2013

What I am saying is stay out of Syria.
7:00 PM - 3 Sep 2013

The only reason President Obama wants to attack Syria is to save face over his very dumb RED LINE statement. Do NOT attack Syria,fix U.S.A.
4:13 AM - 5 Sep 2013

AGAIN, TO OUR VERY FOOLISH LEADER, DO NOT ATTACK SYRIA - IF YOU DO MANY VERY BAD THINGS WILL HAPPEN & FROM THAT FIGHT THE U.S. GETS NOTHING!
6:20 AM - 5 Sep 2013

President Obama, do not attack Syria. There is no upside and tremendous downside. Save your "powder" for another (and more important) day!
6:21 AM - 7 Sep 2013

Don't attack Syria - an attack that will bring nothing but trouble for the U.S. Focus on making our country strong and great again!
4:59 AM - 9 Sep 2013

Obama must now start focusing on OUR COUNTRY, jobs, healthcare and all of our many problems. Forget Syria and make America great again!
6:19 AM - 11 Sep 2013

We should stop talking, stay out of Syria and other countries that hate us, rebuild our own country and make it strong and great again-USA!
10:29 PM - 12 Sep 2013

Facts confuse DSF.

 

[ivwshane]

Facts confuse DSF.

In order to be confused by facts you'd first have to at least acknowledge their existence. Dsf simply ignores facts that are presented to him.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Well colour me impressed for a change. Trump today.

"I now have responsibility, and I will have that responsibility and carry it very proudly," Trump said responding to a question about a White House statement Tuesday that blamed the attack in part on President Barack Obama.

"It is now my responsibility. It was a great opportunity missed," Trump said.

This is the exact right answer he should have given immediately instead of blaming everyone else.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Obama drew a line and Assad crossed it. Obama failed to respond. The Obama haters roasted him for it.

Assed crossed the line again. Trump sort of forgot about Assad and is making nice with him. The Obama haters are still roasting him for it.

Obama asked Congress to authorize military force and Republicans said no. So did the Democrats. And the British. Obama was out there alone on that one. Maybe he had McCain behind him. But no worries, it would have been worse if we had intervened right? We can always say that no matter what. What do the Trump supporters want him to do?

can you guess who made the following tweets?


Obama wants to unilaterally put a no-fly zone in Syria to protect Al Qaeda Islamists http://thebea.st/143tmfM Syria is NOT our problem.
11:58 AM - 29 May 2013

We should stay the hell out of Syria, the "rebels" are just as bad as the current regime. WHAT WILL WE GET FOR OUR LIVES AND $ BILLIONS?ZERO
5:33 PM - 15 Jun 2013

What will we get for bombing Syria besides more debt and a possible long term conflict? Obama needs Congressional approval.
11:14 AM - 29 Aug 2013

If Obama attacks Syria and innocent civilians are hurt and killed, he and the U.S. will look very bad!
12:26 PM - 30 Aug 2013

How would you treat the Syria situation if president ?" I'd let them all fight with each other-focus on US!
4:09 AM - 1 Sep 2013

If the U.S. attacks Syria and hits the wrong targets, killing civilians, there will be worldwide hell to pay. Stay away and fix broken U.S.
6:55 PM - 2 Sep 2013

"@BigSexyBDAvis: @realDonaldTrump mr trump would attack Syria or no?" No, lets make our country great again as they fight their war!
6:45 PM - 3 Sep 2013

What I am saying is stay out of Syria.
7:00 PM - 3 Sep 2013

The only reason President Obama wants to attack Syria is to save face over his very dumb RED LINE statement. Do NOT attack Syria,fix U.S.A.
4:13 AM - 5 Sep 2013

AGAIN, TO OUR VERY FOOLISH LEADER, DO NOT ATTACK SYRIA - IF YOU DO MANY VERY BAD THINGS WILL HAPPEN & FROM THAT FIGHT THE U.S. GETS NOTHING!
6:20 AM - 5 Sep 2013

President Obama, do not attack Syria. There is no upside and tremendous downside. Save your "powder" for another (and more important) day!
6:21 AM - 7 Sep 2013

Don't attack Syria - an attack that will bring nothing but trouble for the U.S. Focus on making our country strong and great again!
4:59 AM - 9 Sep 2013

Obama must now start focusing on OUR COUNTRY, jobs, healthcare and all of our many problems. Forget Syria and make America great again!
6:19 AM - 11 Sep 2013

We should stop talking, stay out of Syria and other countries that hate us, rebuild our own country and make it strong and great again-USA!
10:29 PM - 12 Sep 2013

For me Tweets are noise. Were then and are now. Useful in gaining insight on the messenger but useless for content itself.

Obama made a serious mistake. If you are going to draw a line which is generally a bad idea, then you must already have the assets to respond in place. That did not happen. What would the response have been? Talk had been of regime change, and no. Bad bad idea. So what then? Heaven knows. With an ill defined agenda, Congress should have been wary.

So we have Assad crossing that line but scurrying back over because he knew that vague threats could materialize at some point.

Yeah that was a pretty dumb thing.

But it happened and one office holder has to play the hand he gets. Trump could not undo the Red Line, but he could allow Assad to operate without knowing just what might happen. Trump helps Assad out by letting him know he's not on our list of people to rid the world of.

Making more dumb moves is not a proper solution.

 

[K1052]

Well colour me impressed for a change. Trump today.

This is the exact right answer he should have given immediately instead of blaming everyone else.

I think it's probably more a result of his interaction with Abdullah leading up to that moment.

 

[HomerJS]

Neither Obama or Trump is responsible for this.

Obama should not have created the "red line". He didn't want us bogged down in another war and create a vacuum even if we got Assad.

Trump spouts out useless accusations against Obama without any ideas of his own.

 

[Fern]

These weapons probably came from Russia.

I'm wondering if destruction of Syrian stockpiles of poison gas back in 2014 (when Putin stepped in) was incomplete as feared by some back then.

Fern

 

[hal2kilo]

Neither Obama or Trump is responsible for this.

Obama should not have created the "red line". He didn't want us bogged down in another war and create a vacuum even if we got Assad.

Trump spouts out useless accusations against Obama without any ideas of his own.

It's amazing how short people memories are, there also was no outpouring from the American people to send troops back to that horrible part of the world that will never be fixed by us.

 

[Jaskalas]

I opposed invading Syria then, as I oppose invading Syria now. There are other forms of response that may prove useful.

As it stands, US driven regime change has only proven to... at best, turn Libya into a second Afghanistan or... worse, cause a genocidal purge over half of Iraq as ISIS carried out in the wake of our invasion. Assad's violence has long been part of his war to maintain control against the "Arab Spring", a spat of violence that would see the likes of ISIS rule the Middle East.

Even if Assad went straight to genocide against his people, they'd be no worse off than if we invaded and let the terrorists win.

This is a contest between two devils. At least this devil is a military state / dictator that places value in its own life, and has strings that Russia can pull. The primary issue then is how we convince Russia to pull the right strings. How does the world negotiate to bring an end to the violence, and return stability to Syria? Not with military action against the Syrian government. Not by dismantling the Syrian army. Not by plunging that country into further anarchy.

Terrible things are happening, but no one has convinced me that we know how to help.

 

[Sunburn74]

Neither Obama or Trump is responsible for this.

Obama should not have created the "red line". He didn't want us bogged down in another war and create a vacuum even if we got Assad.

Trump spouts out useless accusations against Obama without any ideas of his own.

Well there was a window for Obama to intervene, demilitarize assad, allow the UN to follow, and then force Assad or whatever faction you want to function under tight international control without a real military to support. Window was probably the 12 months before the Russians entered the conflict.

 

[ivwshane]

Well there was a window for Obama to intervene, demilitarize assad, allow the UN to follow, and then force Assad or whatever faction you want to function under tight international control without a real military to support. Window was probably the 12 months before the Russians entered the conflict.

Was this the same window of time that Congress had the ability to authorize use force that Obama had requested?

 

[bshole]

I opposed invading Syria then, as I oppose invading Syria now. There are other forms of response that may prove useful.

As it stands, US driven regime change has only proven to... at best, turn Libya into a second Afghanistan or... worse, cause a genocidal purge over half of Iraq as ISIS carried out in the wake of our invasion. Assad's violence has long been part of his war to maintain control against the "Arab Spring", a spat of violence that would see the likes of ISIS rule the Middle East.

Even if Assad went straight to genocide against his people, they'd be no worse off than if we invaded and let the terrorists win.

This is a contest between two devils. At least this devil is a military state / dictator that places value in its own life, and has strings that Russia can pull. The primary issue then is how we convince Russia to pull the right strings. How does the world negotiate to bring an end to the violence, and return stability to Syria? Not with military action against the Syrian government. Not by dismantling the Syrian army. Not by plunging that country into further anarchy.

Terrible things are happening, but no one has convinced me that we know how to help.

Hey we "fixed" Iraq and Libya. Perhaps it is time to "fix" Syria. At this point I am relatively confident that more American kids will be sent into a meatgrinder and when they are done, the region will be in significantly worse shape, billions will have been wasted and thousands of new potential terrorists will be freshly minted because of it.

Who are the people behind the scenes who are constantly able to bait our presidents to engage in tar babies that do nothing but harm American interests when we intervene? It appears that Trump is going to engage and the vast majority of Americans will be cheerleading the debacle.



https://www.forbes.com/sites/dougba...her-middle-eastern-ground-war/3/#423986db45a1

 

[Sunburn74]

Was this the same window of time that Congress had the ability to authorize use force that Obama had requested?

Force authorizations are not needed for conflicts less than 60 days and if it drags on beyond that then congress gets involved. In general, historically once a president begins a military conflict, congress almost always has followed through and its much easier for other countries to join in and support you in a conflict than to start the conflict with you.

it sounds like I'm saying Obama should have gone in unilaterally, but honestly I think what he did was right (in the sense that there was no clear right or good answer though there certainly was a window for easy and expedited US intervention which closed rapidly). I'm more or less just saying the war powers resolution is designed to allow presidents to quickly and with flexibility deal with emerging issues without needed to go through the deliberative process that congress involves. In fact, at the time by even going to congress, it was felt that Obama was pretty much showing his true intentions which was never intervening militarily at all since there was no chance congress would move or do anything in any sort of timely fashion.

its like knowing a burglar is in the house immediately and is trying to shoot your wife whom dislike for whatever reason, and so to address the issue you call your deaf, memory impaired, and blind grandma in florida for advice. Yes technically that is doing something, but it betrays your true intentions entirely which is to let your wife be shot.