Because they know the airfield the plane that delivered the gas came from which is Syrian controlled with Iranian soldiers there as well, they also know what plane it was that took off from that airfield. and if ISIS had access to chemical weapons they would surely use them on their enemies even if they might also use them on others to foster outrage at Assad.
LOL "Dealt with Russians" - Hillary's "Russian Reset"? "Removal of chemical weapons" - well we can confirm that was a complete failure
They were warned. I wouldn't say they "ok'd" it at all. I also don't put it past Putin to have Ok'ed the nerve gassing since they've assisted in worse attacks in the past like helping them bomb hospitals etc. Also the Kremlin this morning has taken steps to Flex Its Muscles at the US (upping its air defense, and backing out of anti aggression deal w/US). I'd say its mostly for show, but we are at least getting the answer to our question of how they would respond. It could all be for show. It also could be that Trump is still compromised financially and personally from Russia and this tests his loyalty to Putin. That's why its so important that we find out ASAP If and How compromised Trump is to Putin and Russian Oligarchs because it gives us clarity about what the hell is going on with our relationship or non relationship with Russia. That's why I said, on a moral high ground perspective in a vacuum... good for Trump. Assad should pay in some way. HOWEVER, this "Muscle Flexing" opens up a can of worms for Trump in so many ways. There's no way to make an accurate prediction with what happens next. Anyone giving a straight up thumbs up or thumbs down is kind of ignorant to what this really means. One thing we can predict though... priority number one is still this - Keep in mind that Trump is if nothing a "business" man. He's also a big emotional adolescent with nukes at his finger tips. Its all for show most likely, and priorities are still oil oil oil, but we still don't know what the hell is going on with Trump and Russia.
and who told Trump this? His neo con deep state intelligence community? The same ones that Trump claims were spying on him? Remember Colin Powell and his little white powder? At least the people that got him elected and who were anti war/world police have to balls to call trump out
Is the evidence for this better or worse than the evidence Colin Powell was made to present to the UN to prove that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction?
Ask Dubya who was willing to kill hundreds of thousands of Iraqis for God knows what without seemingly any second thoughts that interfere with taking up a second career as an amateur artist.. Hey most Americans are very willing to accept millions of Muslim deaths in the Middle East if that is what it takes them to have freedom and democracy. With a shout out to Henry Kissinger, Hillary's friend (sorry Deckard) who pretty much said prior to us authorizing the coup that killed Allende and overthrew the democratically elected Allende, "there is too much at stake there to let those irresponsible Chileans decide who to elect". Similarly prior to our Iraqi wars, those irresponsible Iraqis as a whole preferred (not some Iraqi exiles who wished to return to power) to live under the dictator Sadam than the destruction of our war with the hundreds of thousands of deaths and the destruction of trillions of dollars of infrastructure. . Now 50,000 deaths of Americans is a different matter for the roughly 10% say of all Americans whose family members might be involved in the "voluntary" military. For the top .001% who call the shots in America this is of course a non-issue (unless the mainstream media cannot manufacture enough consent on the issue) as they don't even know anyone except for a few beltway generals who have had any involvement in Iraq, Afghanistan. If we can just handle giving these irresponsible people democracy without any Americans being killed with drones as Obama preferred than we can maintain this for a couple of generations if necessary. Sweet. We can even make some money building the drones, the missiles they kill with and it does create some jobs for drone operators in Nevada or wherever. Also a few jobs treating a few of the more sensitive operators who might get ptsd.
Answer the question, @bigtexxx. What should the US have done differently in Syria? It's a simple question you've now been asked five times in this thread, yet you keep criticizing the Obama administration without offering alternatives. This isn't a "noob" calling you out, it's a decade-long member of the BBS (and who is it that always says "The moment you resort to name calling, you've lost the argument"? Jog my memory on that, it's hazy.)
Not disagreeing with your overall point about motives behind global action, but it's also important to note that perhaps he ran a campaign that was all BS to convince ignorant people who don't understand the world to vote for him by using easy talking points. He got into office and quickly learned that there are serious global consequences if America decides it isn't interested in being a stabilizing force in the world. As to your concern about North Korea, the attack on Syria can also be seen as a shot across the bow. The use of WMD will not be tolerated. We are in an age where quite honestly the whole world is a powder keg that we are trying to avoid dropping a match into because it will cost lives. It's hard to see what the best way to move forward is, but I can't say that Trump's actions here were wrong. I absolutely reject the idea that anyone on this message board knows the answer.
I suspect that Probably realizes that if he wants to stay in power he needs to follow the bi-partisan consensus that we need to remove Assad because our prized allies in Saudi Arabia want it. Of course his son in law who is aligned with the right in Israel wants it, too.
If this was 1940, Glynch would be furious with the world for being aligned with right wing demagogues who wanted to remove Hitler.
Better, it's more simple and direct. Not as many fudge-able parts. Honestly, I don't really know for sure. I don't think any layman could.
Russia and Syria seem to think they can undo the facts by making up their own. They do this every time something goes wrong. There is zero accountability for their own actions when something goes wrong. They just spin it and sell a different story...which is exactly what they did here. This idea that they can continue to do this without consequences is unreasonable. That said...I'm not sure if the strike was the right thing to do given the gravity of the situation. But, it feels like any inquiry into what happened would just be completely pointless because, even then, the Russians and Syrians would completely deny the outcome of such an inquiry if it was determined Syria did conduct a gas attack by blaming politics, a witch hunt, etc. . Inquiries are completely pointless. If you wait on the outcome of a useless inquiry to act, then it's already too late to strike because the window for a strike has passed. The UN wasn't going to do a damn thing about it regardless because Russia is always in the way. This idea that Russia and Syria struck a munitions depot controlled by the militants that housed chemical weapons and released the gas seems totally far-fetched and improbable. It seems to have been an idea that was dismissed by everyone else almost immediately based on eyewitness accounts, etc. . But, this would be a very good terrorist tactic to use to get the US involved militarily. The issue is we know the militants couldn't have done the air attack. There's just too many holes to believe anything other than Syria conducted a gas attack on its own citizens. And, there would never be any proof that proves Russia and Syria's story of what happened. But, I bet there is intelligence we haven't seen that shows Syria did in fact conduct the chemical attack. Or, we wouldn't have acted. As a citizen, I don't have the facts. The president has all the intelligence and must decide accordingly. I strongly believe Russia would always side with an ally over the facts. No doubt in my mind. The day Russia starts acting like a responsible world power would mean the day the world gets better overall...something Russia clearly doesn't want.
There's obvious truth in that. Hypocrisy can always be pointed out based on the situation. It's a "we said-they said" situation. That's why when facts can be established...they must be. But, then there's fake news so. I'm only in this thread to criticize Russia and Syria based on this incident. lol.
I still don't believe its Assad. I think its a combination of Israel wanting to annex a portion of Syria and everyone else wanting to destabilize the country so they can build their pipeline through it.
Assad before his brutality was more than a close ally to Gulf States and Erdogan,they abandoned him after his refusal to ease the situation http://www.reuters.com/article/us-syria-assads-email-idUSBRE82F1CD20120316
