President will speak shortly; will strike Syria

Poll: Americans also see chemical weapon ‘red line’ in Syria
By Scott Clement Email the author
December 20, 2012

And support for involving the U.S. military in general rises to 63 percent if Syria’s government uses chemical weapons on its own people. If the Syrian government lost control of their stockpile of chemical weapons -- known to be among the world’s largest -- 70 percent would support U.S. military action.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...n-syria/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.6c8229d23b98
An air strike is not what it takes, Congress knew this. The American people would not have supported boots on the ground. Obama did the right thing in changing by his mind.

These air strikes will not make a difference to Assaud. The last one did not make a difference and now Russia
has decided to prop up Syrian defenses. It a win for Assaud, it’s a win for Putin and America is once again the “paper tiger”
 
dolt. we TREAT the Russian as the boogeyman,but the long term money and power are China's -not Putin's

And if you think Russia hacks us,,the Chinese are masters at it

Then forget about Russia hacking the election and trying to sway it to Donald. If China haacks, then we should not bother doing anything about it.
 
Hey Donaldvo. Thanks for warning Assad ahead of time, you fucking moron.

iu

So sorry...didn't know you wanted human beings killed in this action.
 
So sorry...didn't know you wanted human beings killed in this action.

President Donald Trump's warning on Wednesday morning that US missiles "will be coming" to Syria was notable not only for its military and geopolitical implications, but because he tipped off US plans in exactly the same manner for which he's criticized his predecessor.

In 2013, as the Obama administration was weighing a response to the Syrian government after it violated President Barack Obama's "red line" for its use of chemical weapons, Trump argued that the US should "stay the hell out of Syria" and criticized the administration for "broadcasting" its strategy.

"Why do we keep broadcasting when we are going to attack Syria. Why can't we just be quiet and, if we attack at all, catch them by surprise?" Trump tweeted in response.

He argued that he "would not go into Syria, but if I did it would be by surprise and not blurted all over the media like fools."
"For the first time in the history of military operations a country has broadcast what, when and where they will be doing in a future attack!" Trump also wrote back then.

"In war, the elememt (sic) of surprise is sooooo important.What the hell is Obama doing," Trump wrote, a day after Obama announced he believed the US should take military action against Syria with approval from Congress.

Since becoming President, Trump has broken his own rule of not publicly relaying US military strategy. Last month, Trump said US troops would "be coming out of Syria like very soon."
Last year, after another deadly chemical weapons attack on civilians in Syria, Trump authorized a military strike on a Syrian government airbase.
A day before the military strike was carried out, Trump said he likes to think of himself as a "flexible person" and suggested that his attitude toward Syria and its President, Bashar al-Assad, had changed after seeing images out of Syria from the aftermath of the chemical attack.
But, he cautioned to reporters at the time, "One of the things I think you've noticed about me is, militarily, I don't like to say where I'm going and what I doing."
iu

I rest my case.
 
President Donald Trump's warning on Wednesday morning that US missiles "will be coming" to Syria was notable not only for its military and geopolitical implications, but because he tipped off US plans in exactly the same manner for which he's criticized his predecessor.

In 2013, as the Obama administration was weighing a response to the Syrian government after it violated President Barack Obama's "red line" for its use of chemical weapons, Trump argued that the US should "stay the hell out of Syria" and criticized the administration for "broadcasting" its strategy.

"Why do we keep broadcasting when we are going to attack Syria. Why can't we just be quiet and, if we attack at all, catch them by surprise?" Trump tweeted in response.

He argued that he "would not go into Syria, but if I did it would be by surprise and not blurted all over the media like fools."
"For the first time in the history of military operations a country has broadcast what, when and where they will be doing in a future attack!" Trump also wrote back then.

"In war, the elememt (sic) of surprise is sooooo important.What the hell is Obama doing," Trump wrote, a day after Obama announced he believed the US should take military action against Syria with approval from Congress.

Since becoming President, Trump has broken his own rule of not publicly relaying US military strategy. Last month, Trump said US troops would "be coming out of Syria like very soon."
Last year, after another deadly chemical weapons attack on civilians in Syria, Trump authorized a military strike on a Syrian government airbase.
A day before the military strike was carried out, Trump said he likes to think of himself as a "flexible person" and suggested that his attitude toward Syria and its President, Bashar al-Assad, had changed after seeing images out of Syria from the aftermath of the chemical attack.
But, he cautioned to reporters at the time, "One of the things I think you've noticed about me is, militarily, I don't like to say where I'm going and what I doing."
iu

I rest my case.

Yup. Dang those pesky old ever-changing geopolitical situations. Glad he didn't go over there to kill people and nation-build. ;)
 
Back
Top