Syria

[refineryworker05]

You brought up what anti-war Democrats were saying 15 years ago, not me. I don't recall them saying the things you said, but I'd be happy to be enlightened. And who's ignoring Trump? A lot of prominent conservatives are ripping him for attacking Syria. On the other hand if he didn't do anything I'm betting Democrats would be ripping him for it just as we did Obama for talking about a red line but not enforcing it. There is no winning no matter what he does.

What is your point? Yeah republicans ripped Trump for his anti-Iraq War stance that he campaigned on and voiced frequently, that they helped elect him president and they love him as President. LOL

Again, Trump in 2016 said he was against the Iraq War, thought it never should have happened, wasted resources and lives, created more of a mess in the middle east and lead to the creation of ISIL. If the republican party's standard bearer and its most popular politician with republican voters takes that position on the disastrous War, why does it matter what Democrats said 15 years ago? What is there to debate?

The anti- War Democrats were correct, and Trump agrees with them that the War should have never been fought.

 

[vantexan]

What is your point? Yeah republicans ripped Trump for his anti-Iraq War stance that he campaigned on and voiced frequently, that they helped elect him president and they love him as President. LOL

Again, Trump in 2016 said he was against the Iraq War, thought it never should have happened, wasted resources and lives, created more of a mess in the middle east and lead to the creation of ISIL. If the republican party's standard bearer and its most popular politician with republican voters takes that position on the disastrous War, why does it matter what Democrats said 15 years ago? What is there to debate?

The anti- War Democrats were correct, and Trump agrees with them that the War should have never been fought.

And what is your point? You just keep regurgitating the same spiel. What matters is you said that Democrats exactly predicted what is happening now but can't back that up. You want to give them credit for everything while beating Republicans up for everything. You're a partisan hack, nothing more. So really anything you say is just B.S.. Good luck with that in the midterms because the more people like you spew the more most people realize how extreme the Left has become. Supporting extremists like BLM makes you feel superior but it doesn't win elections.

 

[floridays]

The US fired more than 118 missiles at Syria in coordinated response to suspected chemical weapons attack

It's unclear yet what weapons were used. But if the Raytheon-produced Tomahawk missiles, which have an estimated cost of $1.4 million each, were used in Friday's strike, that puts the minimum weapons cost at $165.2 million.



165 million down the drain.
America first my ass.

Money well spent, the Tomahawks don't have to be dusted now, think of the money saved on housekeeping.

 

[floridays]

I hear you’re always a bit ‘short’.

My girth is breathtaking however.

 

[vantexan]

My girth is breathtaking however.

I exceed acceptable FedEx shipping dimensions. OK, that's all of me.

 

[Serf]

Leaders who seek to keep fellow countrymen free from international finance, gay marriage, & back up reserves with gold; both were accused of gassing their own citizens and were invaded. Same thing is currently happening to Assad that happened to Saddam & Gaddafi. Another war, potentially where we don't win anything.

 

[Sportello]

My girth is breathtaking however.

I'm sure it is. Being fat is not healthy, try to slim down a bit.

 

[rickyb]

Jesse Ventura
3 hrs ·

I heard Roger Waters condemned the air strikes on Syria and I want to join the list in doing so. My condemnation comes from our President violating the constitution. If our country is in direct danger, then yes, he has the authority to send air strikes. But we are not in direct danger. Congress is supposed to vote on this, and they aren’t. The most absurd thing about this is that he took an oath to defend and uphold the constitution. So I guess we’re a country that stands for nothing now. The President is now shooting missiles into another sovereign nation just because he doesn’t like what the government is doing. And when it comes to chemical weapons, IF the government is actually using them on their own people, well, our government does that all the time to us. That doesn’t make it right, but it’s true. What do you think agent orange is? What do you think napalm is? It’s pretty common for protestors in America to be met with tear gas and attack dogs. So what right do we hypocrites have to bomb another country? Because a violent action always stops another violent action, right? We won’t expect to see any escalation from these air strikes, right? And for those who say “we had to do it” — oh really? Remember, our government lied to us about Iraq’s ties to Al Qaeda and weapons of mass destruction. Our government told us it wasn’t surveilling us. Our government told us it wasn’t torturing prisoners of war. So you want me to believe our government actually did the right thing and went through the proper channels to verify this information on the chemical attacks? When our government lies, and lies, and lies, why should I believe they are now suddenly telling the truth? Because remember, no one was fired for lying to the American people. Those in the intelligence agencies who lied about Iraq, lied about illegally surveilling us, lied about torture, are still there. So why should I believe their investigations are even occurring? When the government lies, the truth becomes a traitor. The point is we are a country that stands for nothing now because the President can fire rockets on another country without declaring war, without the approval of Congress, without abiding by the constitution, and that’s why I have to condemn it.

 

[vantexan]

Jesse Ventura
3 hrs ·

I heard Roger Waters condemned the air strikes on Syria and I want to join the list in doing so. My condemnation comes from our President violating the constitution. If our country is in direct danger, then yes, he has the authority to send air strikes. But we are not in direct danger. Congress is supposed to vote on this, and they aren’t. The most absurd thing about this is that he took an oath to defend and uphold the constitution. So I guess we’re a country that stands for nothing now. The President is now shooting missiles into another sovereign nation just because he doesn’t like what the government is doing. And when it comes to chemical weapons, IF the government is actually using them on their own people, well, our government does that all the time to us. That doesn’t make it right, but it’s true. What do you think agent orange is? What do you think napalm is? It’s pretty common for protestors in America to be met with tear gas and attack dogs. So what right do we hypocrites have to bomb another country? Because a violent action always stops another violent action, right? We won’t expect to see any escalation from these air strikes, right? And for those who say “we had to do it” — oh really? Remember, our government lied to us about Iraq’s ties to Al Qaeda and weapons of mass destruction. Our government told us it wasn’t surveilling us. Our government told us it wasn’t torturing prisoners of war. So you want me to believe our government actually did the right thing and went through the proper channels to verify this information on the chemical attacks? When our government lies, and lies, and lies, why should I believe they are now suddenly telling the truth? Because remember, no one was fired for lying to the American people. Those in the intelligence agencies who lied about Iraq, lied about illegally surveilling us, lied about torture, are still there. So why should I believe their investigations are even occurring? When the government lies, the truth becomes a traitor. The point is we are a country that stands for nothing now because the President can fire rockets on another country without declaring war, without the approval of Congress, without abiding by the constitution, and that’s why I have to condemn it.

Congress votes on going to war. Did we go to war with Syria? Nope.

 

[rickyb]

Congress votes on going to war. Did we go to war with Syria? Nope.

yea you did.

if the terrorists drop bombs on america, yall would be tripping about them being at war

america doesnt follow the constitution

now in this situation the majority of the articles said congress is supposed to vote. 2 or 3 of the articles said trump has a secret authority to go to war.

 

[Jkloc420]

yea you did.

if the terrorists drop bombs on america, yall would be tripping about them being at war

america doesnt follow the constitution

yes and no, the patriot act allows us to drop bombs, blame idiot bush for that

 

[rickyb]

yes and no, the patriot act allows us to drop bombs, blame idiot bush for that

first time ive heard that.

 

[Jkloc420]

first time ive heard that.

we are at war against terrorism, so that falls under the patriot act somehow

 

[oldngray]

yes and no, the patriot act allows us to drop bombs, blame idiot bush for that

It goes back to way before Bush.

 

[Jkloc420]

It goes back to way before Bush.

ok

 

[rickyb]

we are at war against terrorism, so that falls under the patriot act somehow

well everyones tripping about it mostly being unconstitutional, and the other theory is that its top secret authority or something like that.

 

[Jkloc420]

well everyones tripping about it mostly being unconstitutional, and the other theory is that its top secret authority or something like that.

they always do, and it is both parties.

 

[floridays]

I'm sure it is. Being fat is not healthy, try to slim down a bit.

Once again you are incorrect, at least you are consistent.

 

[vantexan]

well everyones tripping about it mostly being unconstitutional, and the other theory is that its top secret authority or something like that.

Everyone is the liberal media. Same media that would be excoriating Trump if he did nothing.

 

[Jones]

Israeli intelligence reportedly says Trump's Syria strike failed, didn't take out much of anything

• Israeli officials cited in a Ynetnews report characterized the missile strike on Friday by the US, the UK, and France on suspected chemical weapons facilities in Syria as a failure.
• Multiple Israeli government and military sources suggested the strike was not effective in hurting Syria's ability to conduct chemical attacks.
• These officials also criticized President Donald Trump's talking about the strike beforehand.
• The latest strike most likely didn't change anything on the battlefield in Syria, and it's hard to know how much of the chemical weapons stockpile it hit.