Trump Bombs Syria

[Two Professors]

Wonder what this chap was talking to the Saudis about?

 

[Insel affe]

Wonder what this chap was talking to the Saudis about?

View attachment 83705

I can tell you what it won't be about...

Their appalling human rights record and funding of Jihadist states and organisations..

 

[Two Professors]

I expect it had already been raised by this chap;

 

[portlock seagull]

Tin Helmets on everyone. Things are about to get messy.

 

[dingodan]

I can tell you what it won't be about...

Their appalling human rights record and funding of Jihadist states and organisations..

The West don't care about wrongdoing by Saudi Arabia. UK Police forces have a deal to train Saudi Police, despite their human rights record.

Saudi Arabia were implicated in the redacted (and recently declassified) "28 Pages" of the 9/11 report.

Further proof, if any was needed, that we don't go to war with the bad guys, we go to war with our adversaries, and the two are not neccessarily the same thing.

 

[Boys 9d]

It has been reported that 59 cruise missiles were launched and 23 hit their target. What happened to the other 36?

 

[portlock seagull]

50 missles 'only' killed 6 people...Hmm, expect it was more than that!

 

[symyjym]

I misunderstood your post. I thought you were saying that "if Syria did use chemical weapons, then them using those chemical weapons was proportional". I realise now that you meant the US actions were proportional IF Syria used them, which is fair enough.

That is the hope, but we can't be certain. Will the US's strike have even hurt Assad? He will deny it was ever him in the first place, and could be the type of man to just work out how to make the next attack look like it was rebels/ISIS, rather than not carry out another. Equally you can imagine Assad's enemies thinking how they can carry out a chemical attack and make it look like it was Assad - something Assad will know and could use as his cover. We can't be certain.

Yes my comment could read like that.

I can't see it hurting Assad, yes he probably would deny it if used chemical weapons but he would also deny it if he didn't. The problem is the crying wolf issue that we have lived with since Iraq and currently I would ask the question why Assad would risk using chemical weapons when he is winning on the ground and had gained some luke warm backing where the he must go has been toned down.

 

[symyjym]

50 missles 'only' killed 6 people...Hmm, expect it was more than that!

Why? Russia was informed in advance to avoid aircraft being shot down so Assad would have been tipped off to get his troops the hell out of there.

 

[NooBHA]

well, regardless of whose president I don't think you can let someone get away with a chemical weapons attack.

I somewhat agree but this is not about that Chemical Attack. This is about the US and their hunger for ''Regime Change'' in Syria. Do the Americans never learn. Look at what their desire for ''Regime Change'' in Iraq and Afghanistan has brought us. More people dying . ''Different'' people I grant you but more of them. Not to mention terrorism to our own doorstep.

I only hope he waits till after we win the League before blowing us all to ****.

 

[dingodan]

Did Assad really order a biological weapons attack? Wouldn't the consequences of that be kind of predictable and unfavorable for him?

Cui bono?

 

[scamander]

It had crossed my mind but how does Trump organise anything like this with Putin? There is nowhere he can go in the US where he can't be listened to but otherwise as a plan it does do what you say.

This wouldn't require one to one communication. De-conflict procedures involve relatively low level staff, it'd only take the proverbial two men on a bench with a cliche password. Information about the SAMs on the coast could have been leaked (e.g. down for system maintenance or something more obvious). You've seen the scene in a film where the chap with the information says "I cannot tell you but I'm going to leave these documents on my desk and look out the window for a few minutes,now if you were to look at them...".

Imagine that sort of thing but within this context. Once they know the airspace is safe (or suspect it's being deliberately left open) they then initiate the standard de-conflict procedure and flag with the Russians where they will be striking. The Russians say 'OK'. Then the strike happens.

The question I'm left (if we assume my theory is correct) is whether Trump knew it was being deliberately left open and what the consequences would be (e.g. consolidation of Russia with Assad).

 

[portlock seagull]

Why? Russia was informed in advance to avoid aircraft being shot down so Assad would have been tipped off to get his troops the hell out of there.

But 6 didn't. Ow, and because they're proven lying *******s that's all.

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

I somewhat agree but this is not about that Chemical Attack. This is about the US and their hunger for ''Regime Change'' in Syria. Do the Americans never learn. Look at what their desire for ''Regime Change'' in Iraq and Afghanistan has brought us. More people dying . ''Different'' people I grant you but more of them. Not to mention terrorism to our own doorstep.

I only hope he waits till after we win the League before blowing us all to ****.

Well, yeah, its all a big cluster****. I mean, I think we all desire regime change in Syria, and we desire it in Zimbabwe, and we desired it in Iraq and Afghanistan. How to get it is the tricky thing, and clearly at times the government got too impatient and its got worse. Sometimes it gets better, of course, usually when left to its own devices

 

[wellquickwoody]

No oil in North Korea. That simple really.

And oil is the reason why our PM has been off kowtowing to the Saudis who are a really nasty bunch of ********s when she has other things she should be doing. We, as a country, can't be taking the moral high ground on -anything- all the time we keep doing business with the Saudis.

Why do we think oil is an issue ALL the time? It is sold on the worlds commodity markets, the UK pays the current market rate, no more no less, end. That TM has been pressing flesh in Saudi this week makes no difference to the price paid by traders.

 

[scamander]

Why do we think oil is an issue ALL the time? It is sold on the worlds commodity markets, the UK pays the current market rate, no more no less, end. That TM has been pressing flesh in Saudi this week makes no difference to the price paid by traders.

The reason North Korea is not truly appetising is that China doesn't want anyone next door it cannot control. One of the reasons Kim can act the way he can is that he has the option of flooding the border with those seeking to flee to China and he holds border control as a bargaining chip (in the same way that Turkey does with the EU). As irksome as he is to the Chinese, he is by the way and recently they've slowed down on coal imports to try and bring him into line, there's no way Beijing wants a democracy next door. Kim is the ultimate kid in at school with the bully as his older brother.

The only real issue for him is regime change via China or his generals, hence why his half brother was assassinated. The fact that he had no interest in politics is irrelevant as he could have been used as a token by either China or Kim's generals.

 

[symyjym]

This wouldn't require one to one communication. De-conflict procedures involve relatively low level staff, it'd only take the proverbial two men on a bench with a cliche password. Information about the SAMs on the coast could have been leaked (e.g. down for system maintenance or something more obvious). You've seen the scene in a film where the chap with the information says "I cannot tell you but I'm going to leave these documents on my desk and look out the window for a few minutes,now if you were to look at them...".

Imagine that sort of thing but within this context. Once they know the airspace is safe (or suspect it's being deliberately left open) they then initiate the standard de-conflict procedure and flag with the Russians where they will be striking. The Russians say 'OK'. Then the strike happens.

The question I'm left (if we assume my theory is correct) is whether Trump knew it was being deliberately left open and what the consequences would be (e.g. consolidation of Russia with Assad).

Well, the US certainly gave Russia a warning about bombing the runway so hypothetically if that was all that was being targeted it would makes some sense to let them in and save using an expensive defense system to meet 50 plus tomahawks. I think they are saying that those tomahawks cost $£12m so it would probably cost considerably more to intercept them. It could just be economics because the strike would have only caused superficial damage. I like your plot though.

 

[scamander]

Well, the US certainly gave Russia a warning about bombing the runway so hypothetically if that was all that was being targeted it would makes some sense to let them in and save using an expensive defense system to meet 50 plus tomahawks. I think they are saying that those tomahawks cost $£12m so it would probably cost considerably more to intercept them. It could just be economics because the strike would have only caused superficial damage. I like your plot though.

If it was cost and the Russians genuinely didn't want the strike they would have stayed put in the airfield. They were doing this continually early on, leaving their military advisers in key Assad points knowing that the US wouldn't dare risk it. Moving their assets away from the airfield was inviting the US to hit it and this is something they've previously not done.

It might all be coincidence, but Putin has strengthened his hand considerably here and I don't believe it's a happy accident for him.

 

[symyjym]

If it was cost and the Russians genuinely didn't want the strike they would have stayed put in the airfield. They were doing this continually early on, leaving their military advisers in key Assad points knowing that the US wouldn't dare risk it. Moving their assets away from the airfield was inviting the US to hit it and this is something they've previously not done.

It might all be coincidence, but Putin has strengthened his hand considerably here and I don't believe it's a happy accident for him.

Maybe. And because of all this Trump fly's out to Moscow urgently so him and Putin can do busines in private.

 

[Triggaaar]

currently I would ask the question why Assad would risk using chemical weapons when he is winning on the ground

Yes I can see the logic, and I certainly don't know for sure who carried out the attack. But we can't be certain either he or his opposition would use them again.