Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/04/06/politics/donald-trump-syria-military/index.html

So, is this gonna end up WWIII?

Russia mustn't be too happy.

At least the Media will have to admit the Russia collusion was complete bull.

Originally posted by chingchangwalla
At least the Media will have to admit the Russia collusion was complete bull.

Not if it is evidence of further collusion.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Not if it is evidence of further collusion.
For there to be 'further collusion' there needs to be collusion in the first place.

Originally posted by chingchangwalla
For there to be 'further collusion' there needs to be collusion in the first place.

https://media.giphy.com/media/1yLdy3t1xr5Bu/giphy.gif

Wait? The investigation has been going on for 8 months.

**** Trump

Remember when all the Trump supporters used the argument that Hillary was a hawk and her putting up a no-fly zone would escalate things with Syria/Russia?

Oops.

^ Just repeating what I and everyone is saying. You are of no use here, leave.

Says literally the most worthless and irrelevant KMC member in its history. And no one has mentioned what I said in this thread anyways, lmfao.

Originally posted by |King Joker|
Says literally the most worthless and irrelevant KMC member in its history. And no one has mentioned what I said in this thread anyways, lmfao.
What a fool

Trump continued Obama's airstrikes in Yemen and Syria even prior to using these 60 missiles, Trump slaughtered 200 people in Mosul:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/24/world/middleeast/us-iraq-mosul-investigation-airstrike-civilian-deaths.html?_r=

Again loling @ the false tears for innocence killed

^ Who is 'loling' the deaths of innocence? That's ****ing terrible.

Originally posted by chingchangwalla
^ Who is 'loling' the deaths of innocence? That's ****ing terrible. https://media.giphy.com/media/OWpMbuG5W4r4Y/giphy.gif

Originally posted by chingchangwalla
^ Who is 'loling' the deaths of innocence? That's ****ing terrible.
Originally posted by |King Joker|
https://media.giphy.com/media/OWpMbuG5W4r4Y/giphy.gif

Originally posted by |King Joker|
https://media.giphy.com/media/OWpMbuG5W4r4Y/giphy.gif
Originally posted by chingchangwalla
^ Who is 'loling' the deaths of innocence? That's ****ing terrible.

I'm sure Russia/Putin will be openly upset over Trump unilaterally attacking and then business will go on.

Originally posted by Robtard
I'm sure Russia/Putin will be openly upset over Trump unilaterally attacking and then business will go on.

Just like every other time Putin or Obama raped international laws out of convenience.

Originally posted by |King Joker|
Remember when all the Trump supporters used the argument that Hillary was a hawk and her putting up a no-fly zone would escalate things with Syria/Russia?

Oops.

yeah, but obama

Originally posted by Impediment
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/04/06/politics/donald-trump-syria-military/index.html

So, is this gonna end up WWIII?

Russia mustn't be too happy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pKMV6e5kEo

Why has this assclown not been impeached yet?

Because Trump's opponents also hate Pence.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
Because Trump's opponents also hate Pence.

You're absolutely right, I forgot about that. That was very strategic of him to have such a running mate. Pence might actually be worse. But at least for the principal of the matter it should be done..

Is there a way to get rid of both of them at the same time?

I thought these people were supposed to be colluding with Russia? I thought Russia had stuff in which they could blackmail Trump?

Weird, no?

Originally posted by |King Joker|
Remember when all the Trump supporters used the argument that Hillary was a hawk and her putting up a no-fly zone would escalate things with Syria/Russia?

Oops.

Lol wait, that was a fear of escalating stuff for stupid reasons. Like Russian hacking.

This is..an airstrike on a friggin chemical plant. Which came about when..a chemical attack murdered a bunch of people, including children.

I'm talking about the argument everyone used regarding Hillary's no-fly zone policy, which Trump supporters criticized and said would escalate tensions / cause WW3. It's separate from the Russian hacking thing.

It was a Syrian government air base, not a chemical plant.

Originally posted by |King Joker|
I'm talking about the argument everyone used regarding Hillary's no-fly zone policy, which Trump supporters criticized and said would escalate tensions / cause WW3. It's separate from the Russian hacking thing.

It was a Syrian government air base, not a chemical plant.

Okay but the context here is that we just had a deadly chemical attack that killed shitloads of people including children.

Which is something I hope people keep in mind before they immediately jump to "but Hilary!". Also btw, PLENTY of Trump supporters are indeed upset over this. Richard Spencer put out a whiny 20 minute video. So not only has Trump alienated Russia with this(but..collusion!) but also some of the alt right.

What do you think we should have done?

Originally posted by Emperordmb
Because Trump's opponents also hate Pence.

Because Articles of Impeachment originate in the House of Representatives, which is controlled by Republicans.

They are not going to move to impeach a member of their own party who will rubber stamp any damaging bill they ram through, and replace him with a more deliberative person.

But way to shift the blame to the opposition party who does not have the power to do anything.

Trump isn't going to be impeached, period. People need to accept that and move on. It's irrelevant why it won't ever happen, it just won't happen.

Originally posted by Surtur
I thought these people were supposed to be colluding with Russia? I thought Russia had stuff in which they could blackmail Trump?

Weird, no?

No. al-Assad is beholden to Putin. Trump is beholden to Putin. The ties of Trump to Putin are coming under the microscope, so Putin uses one puppet to make the other look like he is not one too. It is a conveniently-timed distraction designed to make Trump look tough on Russia, so people like you will think that he could not possibly have Russian ties.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE

But way to shift the blame to the opposition party who does not have the power to do anything.

http://i.imgur.com/RApkN6l.png

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
No. al-Assad is beholden to Putin. Trump is beholden to Putin. The ties of Trump to Putin are coming under the microscope, so Putin uses one puppet to make the other look like he is not one too. It is a conveniently-timed distraction designed to make Trump look tough on Russia, so people like you will think that he could not possibly have Russian ties.

Again: if Trump is beholden to Putin why is he launching missiles at Syria? Especially makes zero sense if Putin has stuff to black mail Trump.

But I do love the conspiracy theories. Now you're implying Trump did this just so people wouldn't think he is in cahoots with Russia? Right.

I love the lunacy of the left. No matter what they will find a way to whine about Trump. If they can't find anything on the surface they will start putting forth conspiracy theories.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
http://i.imgur.com/RApkN6l.png

Originally posted by Surtur
I thought these people were supposed to be colluding with Russia? I thought Russia had stuff in which they could blackmail Trump?

Weird, no?

Not weird at all.

Why would Assad use a chemical attack now that only serves to make his allies look bad and turn the world against him when he could have killed those very same people with a conventional bombing as he has been and not drawn attention? Do the maths.

Originally posted by Robtard
Not weird at all.

Why would Assad use a chemical attack now that only serves to make his allies look bad and turn the world against him when he could have killed those very same people with a conventional bombing as he has been and not drawn attention? Do the maths.

Right right, so who is behind this conspiracy theory then? Who masterminded it?

Trump, I'm guessing? Or the Russians? Or both?

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
http://i.imgur.com/RApkN6l.png

The problem is this isn't unique to one side lol. Each side blames the other for everything.

Then people make it worse and exacerbate the situation when they go "maybe, but it totally wasn't my sides fault! The other side forced our hand!".

Like for instance, I predict you will respond and..more or less say that lol.

You don't find it convenient at all that with the Trump/Russia scandal gaining head, Assad who was winning his war/genocide and had a new US president who basically said "let Syria deal with themselves", decided now to use an attack that draws world-wide negative attention when he could have just continued dropping bombs freely and now Trump gets to fire some missiles at an airstrip which makes him look tough and tough on Russia? An atrocity story will always dominate the news.

edit: Of course you don't. Why bother.

Originally posted by Surtur
The problem is this isn't unique to one side lol. Each side blames the other for everything.

Then people make it worse and exacerbate the situation when they go "maybe, but it totally wasn't my sides fault! The other side forced our hand!".

Like for instance, I predict you will respond and..more or less say that lol.

...in case anyone thought the meme was goundless, and conservatives can't be that petty and stupid. how thoughtful of you.

#ClassicButtsurt

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
...in case anyone thought the meme was goundless, and conservatives can't be that petty and stupid. how thoughtful of you.

#ClassicButtsurt

It sucks you don't like hearing reality and shout butthurt whenever someone drops a reality bomb on you.

Also do you not even read the meme's you post? You said people blame liberals, I said both sides blame the other. That is not an example of someone blaming everything on liberals.

Originally posted by Robtard
You don't find it convenient at all that with the Trump/Russia scandal gaining head, Assad who was winning his war/genocide and had a new US president who basically said "let Syria deal with themselves", decided now to use an attack that draws world-wide negative attention when he could have just continued dropping bombs freely and now Trump gets to fire some missiles at an airstrip which makes him look tough and tough on Russia? An atrocity story will always dominate the news.

edit: Of course you don't. Why bother.

I don't think Trump would set up an attack just to get people not to talk about Russia. Especially when people in this country will get distracted by stupid tweets and shit, he doesn't need to stage some attack.

Just send Sean Spicer out to a press conference with his pin upside down again. Boom, distraction. Or just have one of his aides criticize a female or a minority. Boom, shouts of racism and sexism distract.

Not Trump per say, as he can't make Assad do something tactically useless and utterly stupid, which only draws negative attention with no gain whatsoever. Putin on the other hand, he can.

Originally posted by Robtard
Not Trump per say, as he can't make Assad do something tactically useless and utterly stupid, which only draws negative attention with no gain whatsoever. Putin on the other hand, he can.

I get it now, so it's Putin who staged an attack against an ally just to get people in another country to stop bringing up Russia to Trump?

But..this will grant only a temporary reprieve from Russia being discussed. He's going to murder his allies in exchange for a few weeks of Russia not being focused on?

Let's just go with "Assad is a bad hombre" and he does stuff that severely endangers his control even though he now had the clear upper-hand in his war/genocide and a new US president who didn't give a shit about conventional bombs. Also expect the new angle that Putin really doesn't like Assad much and Assad's a loose cannon.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Because Articles of Impeachment originate in the House of Representatives, which is controlled by Republicans.

They are not going to move to impeach a member of their own party who will rubber stamp any damaging bill they ram through, and replace him with a more deliberative person.

But way to shift the blame to the opposition party who does not have the power to do anything.
I'm on the left lol, I'm not trying to shift the blame to shit.

Originally posted by Surtur
Okay but the context here is that we just had a deadly chemical attack that killed shitloads of people including children.

Which is something I hope people keep in mind before they immediately jump to "but Hilary!". Also btw, PLENTY of Trump supporters are indeed upset over this. Richard Spencer put out a whiny 20 minute video. So not only has Trump alienated Russia with this(but..collusion!) but also some of the alt right.

What do you think we should have done? Surt, are you aware that the suggested no-fly zone was in response to the bombing of civilians also, and the steady destruction of most of Aleppo? The reasoning hasn't changed lol. And according to Trump, we should have done nothing.

Originally posted by Robtard
Let's just go with "Assad is a bad hombre" and he does stuff that severely endangers his control even though he now had the clear upper-hand in his war/genocide and a new US president who didn't give a shit about conventional bombs. Also expect the new angle that Putin really doesn't like Assad much and Assad's a loose cannon.

Okay so now this has nothing to do with trying to distract from Russia, now it is because Putin just didn't like Assad?

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Surt, are you aware that the suggested no-fly zone was in response to the bombing of civilians also, and the steady destruction of most of Aleppo? The reasoning hasn't changed lol. According to Trump, we should have done nothing.

Trump has now switched gears and wants to do something though.

For instance, your country supports him with what he did to Syria, did you know that?

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Surt, are you aware that the suggested no-fly zone was in response to the bombing of civilians also, and the steady destruction of most of Aleppo? The reasoning hasn't changed lol. And according to Trump, we should have done nothing.

Military action in Syria is okay now that Trump's in office. I'm sure if he suggest a NFZ, it will be the greatest and best idea.

Originally posted by Surtur
Again: if Trump is beholden to Putin why is he launching missiles at Syria? Especially makes zero sense if Putin has stuff to black mail Trump.

But I do love the conspiracy theories. Now you're implying Trump did this just so people wouldn't think he is in cahoots with Russia? Right.

I love the lunacy of the left. No matter what they will find a way to whine about Trump. If they can't find anything on the surface they will start putting forth conspiracy theories. This is coming from the same person who dismissed Russian involvement in the first place on the basis of a conspiracy theory. Amusing as ever Surt.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
This is coming from the same person who dismissed Russian involvement in the first place on the basis of a conspiracy theory. Amusing as ever Surt.

That's exactly why I'm bringing it up though, so thank you for making this point.

You can't whine and say there is no conspiracy about Trump and people are silly for thinking it, but then totally say this other conspiracy is legit.

In other words: conspiracy theories that don't make Trump look bad aren't okay, ones that do are okay.

Yeah bro, that is definitely amusing.

Originally posted by Surtur
Okay so now this has nothing to do with trying to distract from Russia, now it is because Putin just didn't like Assad?

I'm just waiting for Trump to openly criticize Putin, cos apparently as Assad's ally, he was supposed to keep Assad from using a WMDs and only kill his people with standard bombs and bullets.

Originally posted by Surtur
Trump has now switched gears and wants to do something though.

For instance, your country supports him with what he did to Syria, did you know that? Switching gears is what your doing yes. The statement you made was that Trump and Hillary's involvement in the Syrian situation had different contexts and reasoning behind them, they did not, despite Trump vocally opposing Hillary for her stance. In which respect this wholly ironic as Joker remarked, yeah.

What my country thinks is not relevant here, however I'm certainly interested in what you think Surt.

Originally posted by Robtard
I'm just waiting for Trump to openly criticize Putin, cos apparently as Assad's ally, he was supposed to keep Assad from using a WMDs and only kill his people with standard bombs and bullets.

Why are you waiting for this? I can tell you how it will go down and what people will say: if Trump doesn't openly criticize Putin..it means he is in cahoots with Russia. But if he does criticize him, I'm sure a bunch of little Einstein's will try to say it's a lie and that he is just criticizing Putin in the open in order to fool people into thinking he has no ties to Russia.

Originally posted by Robtard
Military action in Syria is okay now that Trump's in office. I'm sure if he suggest a NFZ, it will be the greatest and best idea.

That's really all there is too it.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Switching gears is what your doing yes. The statement you made was that Trump and Hillary's involvement in the Syrian situation had different contexts and reasoning behind them, they did not, despite Trump vocally opposing Hillary for her stance. In which respect this wholly ironic as Joker remarked, yeah.

What my country thinks is not relevant here, however I'm certainly interested in what you think Surt.

I said the context was they were just attacked. People were talking about Clinton being a war hawk, and in the past she had talked about going after Russia and stuff.

Did you have any further questions or comments?

Originally posted by Beniboybling


That's really all there is too it.

Indeed, if only both sides would cease this incredibly pathetic "it's okay when we do it" line of thought.

LoL, Surtur, you do realize there's a word-quilt worth of Tweets from Trump being openly against attacking Syria, right? But now it's kosher, you and your double-standards.

Originally posted by Robtard
LoL, Surtur, you do realize there's a word-quilt worth of Tweets from Trump being openly against attacking Syria, right? But now it's kosher, you and your double-standards.

Yes, from years ago.

People change their minds on things.

Originally posted by Surtur
Indeed, if only both sides would cease this incredibly pathetic "it's okay when we do it" line of thought.

as expected, surt is too dumb to see the point, once again proving himself victorious.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
as expected, surt is too dumb to see the point, once again proving himself victorious.

Lol dude, you insulting the intelligence of others never stops being funny.

You just aren't very bright, it's why mostly all you do is post memes.

Originally posted by Surtur
I said the context was they were just attacked. People were talking about Clinton being a war hawk, and in the past she had talked about going after Russia and stuff.

Did you have any further questions or comments? You've become wholly incoherent, so I'm just going to assume this is a concession and move on.

Originally posted by Surtur
Yes, from years ago.

People change their minds on things. You mean from last year.

During the election campaign. mmm

Originally posted by Surtur
Yes, from years ago.

People change their minds on things.

LoL, look at you defend your golden calf. But they're not all from "years ago", like this from a few months ago.

"Hillary wants to start a shooting war in Syria... that could very well lead to World War III." -Donald J. Trump 11/2016 via rally in Florida

Originally posted by Beniboybling
You mean from last year.

During the election campaign. mmm

Okay, and obviously the chemical attacks caused him to change his stance on Syria.

Anything else?

Originally posted by Robtard
LoL, look at you defend your golden calf. But they're not all from "years ago", like this from a few months ago.

"Hillary wants to start a shooting war in Syria... that could very well lead to World War III." -Donald J. Trump 11/2016 via rally in Florida Missiles don't count as bullets tho. Not really shooting.

Originally posted by Robtard
LoL, look at you defend your golden calf. But they're not all from "years ago", like this from a few months ago.

"Hillary wants to start a shooting war in Syria... that could very well lead to World War III." -Donald J. Trump 11/2016 via rally in Florida

My mistake, I thought people were referring to his comments to Obama after his line in the sand got crossed.

But like I said, the attack obviously made him change his stance.

Originally posted by Surtur
Okay, and obviously the chemical attacks caused him to change his stance on Syria.

Anything else? I dunno man, do you have any more stupid and false remarks to make?

Originally posted by Surtur
Okay, and obviously the chemical attacks caused him to change his stance on Syria.

Anything else?

Lol, when Trump was saying Obama shouldn't attack it was after Assad first used Chem weapons in 2013. Any more flips?

Assad used Syrin gas on 3/19/13

"Again to our very foolish leader, do not attack Syria - if you do many very bad things will happen & from that fight the US gets nothing!" -Donald J. Trump 9/05/13 via Twitter

Originally posted by Beniboybling
I dunno man, do you have any more stupid and false remarks to make?

Concession accepted.

Originally posted by Robtard
Lol, when Trump was saying Obama shouldn't attack it was after Assad first used Chem weapons in 2013. Any more flips?

I just acknowledged that is what I thought was being referred to, anything else?

You also didn't respond to my comment about Trump criticizing Putin. If he does it, you won't say it's only being done to give people the impression they aren't in cahoots, right?

Originally posted by Surtur
Concession accepted.

i hope everyone learned their lessons and will not waste their time in the next election season trying to reason with trumpsters.

Originally posted by Beniboybling

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
i hope everyone learned their lessons and will not waste their time in the next election season trying to reason with trumpsters.

Same with Clinton voters, no reasoning with them.

LoL, look at your flips, you just said that Trump's excused from his previous anti-engagement remarks into Syria because of the use of chem weapons, when this isn't the first time.

Originally posted by Robtard
LoL, look at your flips, you just said that Trump's excused from his previous anti-engagement remarks into Syria because of the use of chem weapons, when this isn't the first time.

It's the first time it's happened under his presidency that I recall.

I ask again: Trump comes out and criticizes Putin, your response is what?

So Trump was correct in calling Obama foolish if he attacked Syria for using chem-weapons, but now that a chem-attack has happened under Trump, it's cool to attack cos chem-weapons are bad.

Your mental gymnastics in defending Trump is amusing, sport.

Originally posted by Surtur
Okay, and obviously the chemical attacks caused him to change his stance on Syria.

Anything else?

*Assad used Syrin gas on 3/19/13*

"Again to our very foolish leader, do not attack Syria - if you do many very bad things will happen & from that fight the US gets nothing!" -Donald J. Trump 9/05/13 via Twitter

I've already acknowledged that, I've already said I think he changed his mind because now it has happened under his presidency. Continuing whining over it if you need to though.

I ask again: Trump criticizes Putin over this, what is your response?

IOW: It's okay when Trump does it.

Dunno, will have to wait until it happens as I can't see into the future. Personally, I'm not holding by breath for it to happen. You can though, go on.

Originally posted by Robtard
IOW: It's okay when Trump does it.

Sucks when parties have this attitude, I agree.



Based on your history I am going to make a prediction: if Trump comes out and criticizes Putin, you will say it is just an attempt to convince people he is not beholden to Putin.

At the same time, if he never comes out and criticizes him you will find a way to fit that into your "he is beholden to Putin" narrative as well.

And there's that Surutr deflection. All is complete.

Genius, I said yesterday that this Syria tragedy/travesty is a political distraction, Putin will condemn the attacks and then business will go on as usual.

Originally posted by Robtard
And there's that Surutr deflection. All is complete.

Just reminding you of reality, my bad.



Genius, this is about what you would do if Trump criticized Putin.

If Trump doesn't say anything, you'll say he is beholden to Putin. If he does? You'd..still say that lol.

Just send in the Dragonborn and the Middle East will be pacified.
Cello player Tina Guo - https://youtu.be/hJc9Fko0mf4

All joking aside, the strike was the right thing to do for several reasons. Other than Syria committing a war crime, the U.S. needed to send a message to the world (especially N.Korea) that we're back and we won't tolerate these kind of actions. Too long have we sat idly by and watched mass murder committed by ISIS, Assad and can't remember the name of that organization in Africa. How can we claim to be a light and hope of the world when we watch people be massacred?

Originally posted by Darth Truculent
and can't remember the name of that organization in Africa.


Boko Haram?


If this attack does not lead to a political discussion about deposing Assad, then I'll continue to be dissapointed in how the conflict is being handled by everyone involved (specifically EU and Russia).

Bently, thanks for reminding me the name.

Assad does need to be removed and tried before the Hague otherwise they'll be another failed state. The new leader of Syria of whoever it may be can legitimately claim that the country is willing to follow the rule of law.

It's not just that Obama was weak, but the EU too refused to do anything about it. The Middle East is nothing more than an ocean of blood. Sure the UN has condemnation resolutions and we have a few thousand troops in Iraq to advise, but the blood flows like a river.

Has the world become used to seeing mass death on a large scale?

I will agree with people that yeah, Trump is flat out hypocritical over this given his tweets.

At the same time I've seen the pictures of the dead little kids from this chemical attack, and the stories of how they died. So I agree with Bentley..Assad needs to go.

Originally posted by Darth Truculent
Assad does need to be removed and tried before the Hague otherwise they'll be another failed state. The new leader of Syria of whoever it may be can legitimately claim that the country is willing to follow the rule of law.

He needs to be executed imo.



Terrorist attacks do seem to be happening more frequently. Though it is possible that is merely because they are getting a lot more focus, as opposed to an actual increase in the numbers.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
I'm on the left lol, I'm not trying to shift the blame to shit.

And yet, you somehow managed to anyway. Good job.

I like Assad. He's an educated man, a doctor actually, some say he's one of the most highly educated presidents in the world. The man is pro-secular and overall against the islamism which many of the Syrian rebels follow.

Originally posted by Darth Truculent
It's not just that Obama was weak, but the EU too refused to do anything about it.

EU did show some heavy limitations when reacting to this. In France the government really wanted to engage in a coalition to depose Assad, but it never came to fruition. Sure, we could've jumped alone to the battlefield, but we are engaged in several african campaigns, carrying ground operations over Syria without international cooperation would be technically very challenging and also political suicide.

Arguably the UK had good reasons to avoid entering the conflict (their participation in the Irak war left a bitter taste in their mind, Brexit was showing the internal fissures of the country). The rest of the European armies would only work in the basis of heavy cooperation with each other and that's where the Union's decision making utterly failed.

So what is this I hear about a second chemical attack?

Huh?

It seems the town that was hit by chem weapons previously was hit again by Assad, but with conventional missiles/bombs.

Well See! Assad is a Nice Guy! Only a real jerk would bomb
with chem weapons more then once. It would just be RUDE!

Originally posted by Robtard
Huh?

It seems the town that was hit by chem weapons previously was hit again by Assad, but with conventional missiles/bombs.

Indeed, so was Putin behind the 2nd attack as well Rob?

HAHAHAHA!

I read that Iran and Russia just had a joint meeting, both asking Trump to leave Syria alone. I personally hope Trump doesn't back off, it will make him look weak, if he does.

I'm hoping this escalates into a full on war. I'm glad the neocons are taking over. Our end goal needs to be obliterate China while we still have global military dominance. In less than 10 years from now, they are predicted to be about equivalent to us, and then beyond that they will surpass us. We can't let that happen, but it probably will. Russia is useless.

Originally posted by vansonbee
I read that Iran and Russia just had a joint meeting, both asking Trump to leave Syria alone. I personally hope Trump doesn't back off, it will make him look weak, if he does.

I'm hoping this escalates into a full on war. I'm glad the neocons are taking over. Our end goal needs to be obliterate China while we still have global military dominance. In less than 10 years from now, they are predicted to be about equivalent to us, and then beyond that they will surpass us. We can't let that happen, but it probably will. Russia is useless.
You're just bristling with great ideas, aren't you? How do you suppose "we" should obliterate China without starting a nuclear war that would destroy half the world? And if you want it to come to that, I assume you're volunteering to be on the front lines?

Trump is right to avenge those dead Syrian children, and hopefully he can begin the process of avenging all of the dead women in Children from the Iraq/Afghanistan wars. We must show the world we are the beacon of hope

Originally posted by carthage
Trump is right to avenge those dead Syrian children, and hopefully he can begin the process of avenging all of the dead women in Children from the Iraq/Afghanistan wars. We must show the world we are the beacon of hope

Did you not hear? It's a plot by Putin to distract from the Trump/Russia story.

To be fair at this point..Trump could call in a nuclear strike on Moscow and people would still find a way to try to say it was a ruse to make people think he has no dubious connections to Putin.

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
You're just bristling with great ideas, aren't you? How do you suppose "we" should obliterate China without starting a nuclear war that would destroy half the world? And if you want it to come to that, I assume you're volunteering to be on the front lines?

IF I was the Chinese I would be more worried that one of the Nork Nukes would go haywire and land right in the middle of Beijing

Lol! So I'm hearing reports now that, if true, demolish any conspiracy theories about Trump planning the chemical attack or Putin conspiring to attack his ally in order to help Trump.

Rather, it seems Russia and Syria worked together. With Russia apparently trying to help Syria cover up the chemical attack.

Official: Russia knew in advance of Syrian chemical attack

I am not saying these are true, we have no real evidence any of this is.