MSM, 8/4/17, describe the town on which the Syrian government is accused of delivering chemical weapons (they deny it) as “the opposition-controlled town”. No mention that the “opposition” are Islamic jihadis, intent on converting Syria to an Islamic republic as their contribution to the promised world Caliphate.

Already, the terrorists are calling the U.S. 'their' air force.

The Tomahawk missile attack by the U.S. was extremely stupid, and has the support of our own useful idiot (to Islam), Malcolm Turnbull. What's the betting that he will soon start yapping about more Syrian Muslim “refugees”? After all, it wasn't until we allowed ourselves to be dragged into Iraq and Afghanistan that “refugees” became a problem.

Our one-bomb-a-week effort in Syria doesn't seem to have drawn much attention to us, but Turnbull's' approval of Trump's 'retaliation' will soon change that. The terrorists will see us a softening up again,willing to import more of their troops into Australia.

Tony Abbott at least got Syria right: two groups of bad people who should be left to slug it out on their own. Meanwhile, we and our greatest ally are proving that we will deliver ourselves to Allah 'by own own hand'. Going against a bad guy who is also fighting Islamists is suicidal.

A big mistake quoting anything that comes out of Syria.
Abig mistake quoting Abbott,s populist remarks. Then again we have had a run in with Abbotts populist policies haven't we.

The following link explains why the American President
Donald Trump targeted that Syrian air-base:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-04-07/syria-strikes-why-did-donald-trump-target-that-airbase/8425658

We're told that:

A chemical weapons attack killed more than 70 civilians
in Syria earlier this week. The United States retaliated with
a missile strike on a Syria air base.

President Trump explained that "It is in this vital
national security interest of the US to prevent and deter
the spread and use of deadly chemical weapons."

Prime Minister Turnbull was informed about the strike.
He made his
position clear:

"The use of chemical weapons was illegal and abhorrent.
It is a violation of international law. It is a war crime.
It is a blatant contravention of basic principles of humanity".
The PM also added that "The continued role of President
Assad must be under enormous question."

The link tells us that during the election campaign Mr Trump
was all for a no interventionalist foreign policy. That he
had repeatedly urged America not to get involved in Syria.
However it was this week's horrific chemical attack that
changed the American President's mind.

Middle East analyst Dr Rodger Shanahan from the Lowy Institute
said the strike was "Swift, targeted and, perhaps most
importantly, proportionate".

He continued to explain that, "In a complex and confusing
civil war in which decisions can result in unforseen
consequences the Trump Administration was presented with
a relatively straightforward choice and with a perfect target."

Dr Shanahan added, "Something had to be done," about the
use of chemical weapons.

Former American President Obama elected not to retaliate
when chemical weapons were first used in 2013. In exchange,
he managed to get from Assad the removal of all chemical
weapons. However, in this case Syria did not live up to
its side of the agreement with the US so President Trump
had little choice but to act.

Foxy,

I know the excuses. It was still a stupid thing to do.

Suppose you tell us why it was so stupid. Sounds like you are in bed with Abbott and the rest of his rusky mates who want to protect Assad an his bandits.

Dear ttbn,

Could you please explain why you think this move
by the US President was as you put it "stupid?"

As a developed country with a permanent seat on
the United Nations Security Council the United States
has a responsibility to step in to protect the
millions of civilians who are at risk.

Abbotts opinion is to let them slug it out. Syria is running a one sided war. Now they use unconventional means of fighting that war.
These weapons were supposed to be surrendered, and now they find more.

Why would Assad risk world condemnation and hanging as happened to Saddam Hussein for alleged use of chemical weapons against his people.
Assad is not stupid.

Best look at all possibilities because Assad has not been tried and found guilty.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KU5taO5vRDo&feature=youtu.be

The weapons were launched from an air base that has been identified and destroyed.
It,s hard to say that Assad would not know what was happening on his own territory.

If that air based was used as claimed then surely it would be part of the crime scene, and should not have been attacked as it was.

Evidence is needed.
There is only belief that air base was used, apparently no evidence to establish relevant fact.

It is stupid for a "developed" country to become involved in the internal problems of undeveloped countries, where the culture, mores and values of that country are nothing like ours. It's none of our damn business what dysfunctional states get up to. The West is not what it is by dint of good luck. We have what we have because the West if different from the rest. No-nothing Western leaders think that democracy and rule of law can be drafted on to backward countries still living in the Middle Ages. Iraq and Afghanistan have proved how wrong they were. All we have got from meddling in these hell holes is an influx of aliens who think that they can force their barbarism on us.

At the moment, Syrians are fighting a civil war, and that's the way it should remain. Far better for them to destroy themselves than allow them to drag us down with them.

Some of you people on OLO really need to start doing some serious reading instead of googling and taking notice of the media and self-interested politicians. Start thinking for yourselves.

JF Aus,

Good to see someone who can think turn up. Just because Assad is not a darling of the Left he must be guilty, according to the usual gang of lefty posters. Nobody not directly involved can be sure whether or not the chemical weapons were used by the Syrian government or the Islamist rebels.

Anything you find in a book is either past tense or fiction. We are talking about now.
Let them slug it out. With Russia on Assad,s side. How would the slug out be an even match.

Syria is a religious war and beyond the means of minorities or majorities.

Get Abbott out of your mind and join the rest of the world.

//At the moment, Syrians are fighting a civil war, and that's the way it should remain.//

Until they start using chemical weapons. At which point they deserve a swift boot up the arse from the international community, which I'm pleased to see has been delivered.

There's a reason chemical weapons are banned: they are weapons of terror. They don't destroy strategic targets: if you bomb a munitions factory, you destroy the factory as well as the people inside it. When you employ chemical weapons, you only kill the people. And everybody downwind of the factory within a certain distance. In a horrific and barbaric fashion - children being the most likely to fall victim to a chemical attack.

It's interesting to note that the very same posters who often seek to caricature me as some sort of traitor to Western values because I don't hate all Muslims are exactly the same posters who think it's OK to just turn a blind eye to the use of chemical weapons if it's not happening to them. I don't know what sort of values those are, but they aren't the Christian or Australian values I was raised with.

If you're the sort of person that thinks the use of chemical weapons is ever acceptable, frankly I'm not sure you're the sort of person this country needs. Since you're obviously so opposed to mainstream Australian values, why don't you just piss off back to where you came from? We could do without your type.

"ONE STEP AWAY FROM WAR" says Russia.
Donald Trump pulled the trigger.
That's why Donald Trump is stupid.

Donald Trump has to be stupid talking to a journalist about his prowess with women, while a recorder was at hand and turned on.

During the US Trump election many people spoke of the danger of Trump holding the nuclear button.

With world war III looming lookout for collapse of food supply and consequent hunger and disease and death, especially in Australia where farm tractor and truck transport fuel now has to be imported.

To say nothing about consequences of radiation

ttbn writes: “Some of you people on OLO really need to start doing some serious reading instead of googling and taking notice of the media and self-interested politicians. Start thinking for yourselves.”

Ha! This coming from someone who rejects anything scholarly and peer-reviewed as “scientific blah”.

Thinking for oneself is one thing, but when you extend that to rejecting findings from credible research because it clashes with your worldview, you’ve lost the plot.

There’s nothing wrong with Googling either, so long as you know where to go for reliable information. There is nothing inherently more reliable about hard copies of literature. This is an old mindset, from the days when the internet was new and peer-reviewed literature hadn’t yet been digitised, that is now employed by some to dismiss links provided by others as unreliable - as if reliable data couldn’t POSSIBLY be so easy to access as clinking on a link (Surely?!). Aside from the occasional paywall, all peer-reviewed literature is accessible online, making “Googling” a more reliable means of accessing reliable, and particularly up-to-date, information.

But we’ve been through all this before, haven’t we ttbn?

--

JF Aus,

An important difference between Saddam Hussein and Assad is that Assad has one of the world’s most powerful countries backing him up.

Doog,

You are the one obsessed with Abbott. Just because I agree with some of the things he says, does not mean that I am in love with the man. He is just a politician, after all, and I am not particularly admiring of politicians.

As for “past tense and “fiction”, well you seem to be one of those people who hasn't learned from the past and is doomed to continue making the same mistakes. Fiction? Are you seriously suggesting that the internet, where anyone, qualified or not, can put up anything they feel like is not likely to be fictitious?

I suggest that it is you that needs to get with the real world before it is too late.

Toni Lavis,

I am glad that you are pleased by the U.S action. But, killing is killing, irrespective of the weapons used. Besides, there is no firm evidence that the people Trump has taken it on himself to 'punish' were the perpetrators of the chemical attack. When dealing with Islam and and Third World mentality, you have to have more to work on before making decisions than Trump did.

I find it hard to believe your sincerity when it comes to comparing 'good' weapons of war and 'bad' weapons of war. War is a horrible thing, no matter how it is waged. And, I really doubt your understanding of “mainstream Australian values”.

And, do tell, to where is it should I “ piss off back to where you came from”? I'm a third generation Australian,which I doubt, with your non-Anglo Saxon name, you are. And, what exactly is my “type”. I would enjoy a free analysis.

JF Aus,

Yes. I think that I am going to have to revise my initial enthusiasm for Donald Trump. Maybe he is just somebody who wanted to be president after all?

It's great to a non-idealogue and have the ability to change your mind, is it not? Still, he has 'gotten' (as the Yanks say) America off the moribund track it was on, and he can still do a lot of good – if he keeps his nose out of civil wars.

I just hope he doesn't get to fight a war, though, given his now obvious talent for picking the wrong side.

Just noticed a Speccie article entitled "Trump's Strike: a move even peaceniks should back" - indicating that even some conservatives do not recognise the real enemy: Islam. It is not Assad's Syria that is the enemy of the West, it is Islam, and it is that enemy that Trump has just aided.

Chemical weapons are not an implement of war, both Saddam Hussain and Assad have used them and must pay the price.

I believe the strike should have been directly on the Assad regime.

Cringe at what Russia says is a cop out. I suppose n Korea has you worried also.
Man or mouse,

Abbott worshippers, Abbott would say anything if it gets up the nose of Turnbull. Even if it goes against the USA.

ttbn writes: “Maybe he is just somebody who wanted to be president after all?”

http://youtu.be/C3TUWU_yg4s?t=11

Yeah, that was obvious from the very beginning. And more so with Trump than with any other US president that I can think of, too.

Isn’t it amazing just how clouded by our biases our vision can become?

Perhaps the following website may help.

http://www.vox.com/2017/4/8/15218782/syria-trump-bomb-assad-explainer

The war in Syria explained.

At the end of this article we are told that -

"There are two main questions that need to be asked:

1) Will Trump;s strike successfully deter Assad from using
chemical weapons again - and if they don't how will
Trump respond?

2) Could this limited initial attack quickly escalate into
something larger, with Trump potentially being pressured
into trying to not just constrain Assad but push him out
of power?

We don't know the answers to these questions yet. But
they will play a significant role in determining America's
role in Syria and possibly, the future course of the
Syrian civil war itself."

ttbn,
Yes it's good to have an open mind.
I changed my view of Trump on hearing news of this attack.
I though DT would be ideal for the US because of his apparent business ability but now I think his reckless response to likely propaganda is too dangerous for him to remain as US President.
How could he remain? I feel sure he will not admit his (likely) rash or stupid decision and order to attack Syria.

AJ,
At the end of the day I don't see how Russia could fend off genuine world opinion and hanging of Assad, IF Assad was found by a genuine Court to be guilty of using gas.
Assad saw Saddam Hussein caught and executed.
Assad is educated, not stupid.

Syrian army defectors stole weapons and probably gas when they defected. ISIS is being armed and supplied probably including with gas. I assume there is trade between rebels and ISIS. Both have the same goal, to oust Assad and takeover Syria.
It's likely ISIS or rebels have access to use of an aircraft.
The aircraft at the recent chemical attack was not identified.

It is not Assad that has the modus operandi to kill crowds of innocent people in a marketplace or a passenger jet or 9/11 building attack, is it?

Cars and trucks are being used to kill and terrify people, even now in Sweden, so why not also use a borrowed or stolen aircraft?

Also, surely it would be so easy for radicals to bait a location with gas and then 'leak' a tip off to authorities about a meeting of wanted leaders at that location. National response with a conventional bomb could set off a gas explosion, so could a nearby planted terrorist with mobile phone.

Trump has believed the media about this recent gassing of children. Trump has no evidence the Syrian airforce did it. The unidentified aircraft could have even been baited into that location. It could have been an Australian aircraft tricked into a hitting a target there, not impossible.

The world needs prosperity and peace.

It's all about big business girls and boys…like former Yugoslavia was the premise for the UN (read:quasi police force to Raytheon, McDonnell Douglas, Nokia and Monsieur Gates) to intervene. The high yield reserves of Iridium, Platinum and other precious metal up in them thar hills behind Bosnia that needed “protecting”.

Watch with interest the share prices of oil/gas.

DECEMBER 2, 201510:04AM . NEWS.COM.AU
“Many have questioned why Russia became involved in the Syrian war but often overlook the fight over natural gas. Russia currently supplies Europe with a quarter of the gas it uses for heating, cooking, fuel and other activities.In fact, 80 per cent of the gas that Russian state-controlled company Gazprom produces is sold to Europe, so maintaining this crucial market is very important.
But Europe doesn’t like being so reliant on Russia for fuel and has been trying to reduce its dependence. It’s a move that is supported by the United States as it would weaken Russian influence over Europe.”

April 4, 2017. PALMER REPORT.
Putin had Assad gas his own Syrian people so Donald Trump would have an excuse for war.
“Putin, Assad, and Trump are betting on this chemical attack motivating the American public to decide it’s okay with American military intervention in Syria. The trio is merely gambling that most Americans won’t notice they’re entering the war in favor of the genocidal Assad, instead of against him. And Trump believes he can boost his approval rating by initiating some winnable military action in Syria, whereby he wipes out the rebels that Russia wants gone anyway, and then announces that he’s instead wiped out ISIS. And again, he hopes the average American isn’t aware that ISIS was mostly wiped out in Syria during the Obama administration.”

4/6/17. NEWSWEEK.
WHY DONALD TRUMP WON’T TRY AND OUST SYRIA'S BASHAR AL-ASSAD.
“What Russia holds dear is the reputation it’s gained as a defender of regimes against western aggression,”. There would have to be a grand bargain of sorts for Russia to drop Assad, but the concessions it would want would go beyond Syria.”

JF you have lost your marbles. With a story like that is found in the Australian newspaper.

The us has cameras everywhere. To sum it up with fairy tales makes you a fool .

doog,

Does the US have cameras in the ISIS target site?
Maybe they do via the White Helmets.

Use your own free thinking.
It's common for an enemy to draw fire where and when they want.

It's the MO of ISIS etc to bomb and kill innocent people in groups.

And where is the evidence to convict Assad?
Even Russia is looking for it.
Why is such evidence not published in major media?

This was just posted to me from the USA.
http://www.facebook.com/eurasiadaily.nz/videos/vb.1534348620189458/1753555704935414/?type=2&theater

Dear Foxy,

We should for a moment reflect on Trump's hypocrisy. Not that it should be overstated but it definitely is a measure of the man. When Obama as president was looking to respond to the much larger gas attack these are some of the things Trump tweeted;

“We should stay the hell out of Syria, the "rebels" are just as bad as the current regime.”

“Remember, all these ‘freedom fighters’ in Syria want to fly planes into our buildings.“

“If Obama attacks Syria and innocent civilians are hurt and killed, he and the U.S. will look very bad!“

“What will we get for bombing Syria besides more debt and a possible long term conflict? Obama needs Congressional approval.”

“The President must get Congressional approval before attacking Syria-big mistake if he does not!”

Well Trump never got Congressional approval.

When Obama was looking to strike after the initial gas attack he mulled it over for a long time even though he had decided on a particular date. In the end after much contemplation he stood down and worked with Russia to remove much of Assad's arsenal.

Ultimately I do not trust Trump in the slightest. I do not have any confidence his actions were as selfless as he wants us to believe and I think the power rush he has just experienced will drive this man to seek more. I note with concern the news that he has ordered a carrier group to the Korean Peninsular.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-navy-korea-idUSKBN17A0V5?il=0

But by far the most unsettling feeling is that we may well be taken on a ride. The fact that the damage on the Syria targets was only minimal, that the runway was left completely intact and that the Russians did not use any of their anti-aircraft assets to prevent the bombings means for me at least I just don't buy it.

Dear SteeleRedux,

I understand. The points you've raised are valid.

And with Trump - it's always, expect the unexpected.

We shall have to wait and see what develops next.

Hopefully, Congress will have some say in future matters.

A one off strike does not constitute a war. Congress could take weeks.
It was a Uni matter to strike Syria of proportionate value as Assad inflicted on his own people.

I have no problem with it at all. Nor would I have a problem if a strike went to North Korea for his failure to take notice of Un directives of no testing explosives of mass destruction.

I am no fan of trump, but you must admit Obama tried his way to no conclusion.

So doog, you have no problem with a world nuclear war.

How many children and other people do you think a world nuclear war would kill?

And, doog, what proportionate value are you talking about, if Assad was not the offender as claimed by western media?

Dear Foxy,

Earlier today I watched the heartbreaking account of Amal Kassir describing losing 10 family members in an aerial attack the same day of the gas attack in Syria.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-04-08/poet-amal-kassir-loses-10-relatives-in-syria-bombing/8427688

This was in the Ghouta region where the 2015 gas occurred

It is a very human reaction to want something to be done. Let us hope those around Trump make it a measured response.

Your brand of western media is not my brand of western media.
Who said anything about new learn war. That is all in your head.
Nuclear weopans are a weapon of mass destruction and illegal.
No one can use such weapons unless they are first attacked by them. They are the greatest deterrent the world has ever had.

Unless you are n Korea or Iran that have openly stated using them which becomes a UN problem.

So the provocative activity and statements have to be addressed. That is my opinion.

Whilst I recognise that the general public have been fed so many years of BS on this topic that the mere possibility of logic and reason from them has long disappeared, and as a result one might easily find themselves arguing with idiots; I have to say that I've pointed you all in the direction of the truth on this forum many times before.
If I had to do so again I'd start feeling like a cracked record, meaning its almost easier to just criticise some of you for being so ignorant and misinformed instead.

Why would I criticise?
Because if the general public weren't a bunch a clueless clucking dodo birds the powers that be wouldn't get away with half the stuff they do.
What do you call a bunch of dodo birds anyway; is it a 'flock'?
I guess it doesn't matter since they're all now extinct.
I'm sure there's a message in that but I'll move on.
... A flock of clueless idiots.

The first thing you all should be aware of is Pro-Israel Neocon think-tank PNAC document 'Rebuilding America's Defenses' written prior to 9/11 and the 'War on Terror'.
These people came to power in the Bush Administration.
The second thing you all need to be aware of is General Wesley Clarks admission that 'information had come down from upstairs' - meaning Secretary of State Donald Rumsfeld that the US planned to topple '5 countries in 7 years', Syria included.
Look it up dimwits.

This is just the beginning of a long and involved story and although I can't really get angry at you guys because the media won't tell you the real story; but at the same time if you don't know this stuff you don't know anything, and that's just how it is...

This war essentially began when Clinton, Rice, Soros took advantage of a drought and water crisis that was badly managed by Assad (his efforts may also have been undermined) to ferment civil unrest and stage a 'civil war'.
The US was covertly training and arming these people through Libya...

[Cont.]

Moving on...
If you want to hear more of the truth in regards to recent situations on the ground in Syria you should look up Vanessa Beeley or Tulsi Gabbard.
If you haven't heard what they have to say, then you don't know anything.

Finally, yes the Trump train has derailed.
He's a foreign policy fool and he's just crossed my 'red line'.
I was concerned prior to his election of his foreign policy stance and his ego.
Some say his actions weren't about Syria at all but in regards to his meeting with Xi Jingping.
But the fact he said 'there can be no dispute' in regards to blaming Assad, and knowing his ego and doubting a President will ever admit they've made a mistake I feel he's made a huge mistake himself and taken us in exactly the same direction the Clinton camp would've.
No wonder ISIS, Clinton, McCain and the #NeverTrump crowd are all cheering.

He's just gone and done the exact thing the whole protest movements against him were really about in the first place, and the exact thing many of his conservative supporters supporting him opposed, though many of his 'Make America Great Again' supporters aren't as well versed on Syria.
In Washington part of the reason for this was because Steve Bannon has been muscled out by Kushner, who's essentially globalist with ties to Soros.

There was no reason whatsoever for Assad to use Sarin gas when he was largely winning the war and when just one week ago said that the Syrian people could choose their future and that Assad could stay if the people supported him.
Entertaining that idea is completely ridiculous.

'Assad is killing his own people'
How many times have we been told 'such and such is killing their own people' as a pretext for military intervention you stupid chumps?
'Assad is gassing his own people'
How many times have they tried to use that line you clueless morons?

[Cont.]

[Cont.]
Why is Trumps attack bad? OMG.
Don't any of you know that Assad is secular (i.e 'wearing of scarves is banned in some places) and the reason he's fighting is because he doesn't want the country turned over to jihadis like America did in Libya and elsewhere as part of the stupid so-called 'Arab Spring'?
Do none of you comprehend that?

Right now there a whole town full of Syrian Christians who are going to be overtaken by ISIS as a result of Assad not being able to defend it because of Trumps missile strike and posturing.

In any case Trump has just made a huge mistake betraying his core supporters, because now that a wedge has been driven between him and his core supporters, he can be more easily be removed.
And what's more they don't even have to remove him, if he's going along with their agenda.

[Cont.]
I'd give you the links for all these above topics but the people here that need to look at this info are the exact same people who wouldn't bother doing so, they are already convinced they know better.
Those people are too busy beating the drums of their 'tried and true trollop' and are only ever going to make a contribution that reflects their continued ignorance.
I've posted the links to everything I've just mentioned before as well as much much more numerous times now anyway.
It's not my fault many of you are determined to remain ignorant when someone else is literally 'crow pecking' you on the top of the head trying to help you become informed.
Remain dumb if you will, just don't get mad at me when I choose to point it out.

Dear SteeleRedux,

Thank You for the link.

The situation in Syria is very dire and my heart goes
out to its people. What should the West do next, I really
don't know. But I shall hope and pray that the right
choices will be made.

cont'd ...

The last sentence should read - that I also hope and pray
that a measured response will take place.

I think it's worthwhile looking at all views such as at the following.

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/9089/americas-tomahawk-missile-attack-on-syrias-shayrat-air-base-was-a-sham

Someone's opinion is just that. Why not write your own opinion instead of picking an opinion from someone that suites your argument. If they think more damage should have been done I am sure that can be arranged.

You are not concerned about the use of chemical weapons why would that be. They are illegal and a weopans of mass destruction.

Your worry is the welfare of some airplanes. Why not worry about the victims of illegal warfare.

Trump is a 'tactics' man, not a 'strategy' man: if he (or at least the US military) can carefully 'quarantine' such strikes (in response to such atrocities), and make it clear that they don't want to go beyond a precise punishment for a definite crime, the US might avoid being dragged into an incredibly complex, and almost irresolvable, quagmire. In other words, if the US can make it clear that this is a one-off, IF that chemical attack was also a one-off. Any more use of chemical attacks will bring about another air-base demolished.

But fighting two enemies is always dangerous: I think von Clausewitz or Sun Tzu or some military hot-shot warned about that, particularly if you don't have much skin in the game, or boots on the ground. The Yanks are probably not stupid enough to actually send in large numbers of troops, and attack Syrian troops (and alienate Russia and Iran) AND ISIS (and alienate Turkey and the Saudis) simultaneously.

If they had enough sense, they would sit back now for a while, and watch the Russia-Turkey kiss-arse fall apart. But of course, Trump and 'sense' don' fit easily together.

Joe

True Joe, but it beggars belief that Assad committed the crime.

The immediate resumption of air attacks is a response of innocence, not of a perpetrator.

Trumps attack onto the Syrian state is clearly illegal.

There are two legal reasons to start a war:
- in self defence if the own country is attacked
- if mandated by the UN Security Council

While Bush junior convinced the UN with fake decoments in regards of WMDs, Trump did not even bother to ask for an investigation of the gas attack and to get an approval to act against those who dropped the bombs.

Australia should never approve US activities which are against international laws.

The countries joining the US led coalition that way is becoming the coalition of evil states.

It is time to tell big brother USA to get reasonable.

The USA created Alqaeda to fight the Russians in Afghanistan.
The USA supports the Syrian Rebells and ISIS to destabilise the Assad regime, because the USA wants control over the oil pipeline from Iraq to the Mediterranian.

As an effect all US wars made the world an unsafer place with more terrorist acts than 30 years ago, causing thousands of civilian deaths and thousands of immigrants flooding Europe and Asia / Australia.

If Turnbull would be reasonale he would call the troops back home. We wasted enough money to fix problems caused by stupid US foreign policy. Trump should clean up the mess he and Bush junior created himself alone.

Given the US history of false flags, mistakes and downright lies used to justify their extreme violence against innocent people I need way more than usual proof before condemning assad for this attack.

Dear Foxy,

I am at the point where I think there are very few of us in Australia can have a decently informed perspective on Syria because different groups including MSM are spinning it very hard. This doesn't mean we should not keep trying to inform ourselves but it should make us deeply suspicious of anyone claiming a definitive take on the conflict.

Here is a different view of the start of the conflict. It is gruesome in parts but worth noting.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8prwbWLa7f0&feature=youtu.be

It contends that hardcore Islamist ideology was part of the uprising from the very start. As with all these things there are undoubtedly elements of truth but it is what is left out that is almost as important.

Dear SteeleRedux,

I've just had a telephone call from a close friend
who lives in Los Angeles. I asked her what she
thought about her new President. I hadn't spoken to
her for quite some time and as she has always been
a conservative voter I was careful with what I asked.
I was surprised
at how emotional she became. She related some appalling
events concerning the man's behaviour and much to my
surprise she totally condemned what he was doing in
Washington.

I'm going to keep an open mind as far as the Syrian situation
is concerned until I learn much, much more about the situation.
Thank You for the link you gave me. It does help.

Hi Steele,

In societies with few traditions of democracy, but underpinned by very strong religious traditions, it may be possible (and maybe even unavoidable) for a nationalist leader to seize power and set up a dictatorship, like Nasser, Kassem, Boumedienne, Reza Pahlavi, Saddam, Assad & Assad, Gaddafi, etc., but that underlying Islamist threat will always remain. Probably this how it's worked for more than a thousand years, sultan against mosque.

This is on top of ethnic fractures, especially in the region around Syria: Turk, Kurd, Arab, Yazidi, Sunni vs Shi'ite, Shi'ite Turkmen, Christians, Druse, etc. So any Leftist or democratic forces don't get much of a look-in. They must be the bravest people in the Middle East.

So it seems that there are always powerful dictatorship forces, verging on fascism, powerful Islamist forces waiting to step in if the dictator falters (like in Iran), and very weak democratic forces. Not to mention a host of other groups, each pushing their own barrow, and just as likely to bitterly attack each other.

In this case, Trump seems to have shoved a stick up both the nationalist-fascist forces and the Islamo-fascist forces, while the fragmented and compromised 'democratic' forces seem to be pushed to the sidelines.

And over-arching Syria is of course, the Sunni-Shi'ite fracture. So even if one two-way conflict is resolved, others will immediately take its place. While I would support Trump's specific attack on that air-base in response to the specific use of chemical weapons, I think Obama may have been wise to just keep out of the whole mess.

Joe

Russian planes delivered the chemical weopans.

Steelie: The fact that the damage on the Syria targets was only minimal, that the runway was left completely intact and that the Russians did not use any of their anti-aircraft assets to prevent the bombings means for me at least I just don't buy it.

For once I agree with you Steelie. The Russians were warned 24 hours in advance. Two Civies & 3 Syrian Soldiers killed. During the raid. I’d say that the Base was cleared out & a number of civies went in to see what they could steal & the Soldiers were trying to chase them out, as a result two Civies & three Syrian Soldiers killed. Besides, it cleared out some 60 (old tech) Tomahawks. Time to update the inventory. (My take).

It was mentioned when it first happened that the Bombs hit a Warehouse where the Rebels were holding Chemical Weapons. This has been downplayed to the Rebels advantage. The Rebels have also been known to use Chemical. Weapons. Actually, all three sides have used Chemical Weapons at some time.

What a wonderful War. ISIS, The Rebels & Assad, all fighting each other in a Round Robin. The Rebels are made up of a number of factions, who also hate/fight each other in a Round Robin. There are no innocent moslim Civilians in this War, everybody backs one side or the other. The moslim fighters keep their families close to them because they don’t trust their fellow fighters not to Rape them (Women & Children). That’s why they get killed & used as propaganda.

The only lot we should be tasking is ISIS. Leave Assad & the Rebels fight it out among themselves. I’m inclined to favour Assad a bit, at least he did have some Religious Freedom in Syria. The Rebels & ISIS want to illiminate that aspect of Syria.

Anyway, who cares moslims killing moslims can only be a good thing. Now if only we can ship the ones that escaped back to whence they came, that would also be a good thing. At least for the West.

The moment Trump entered the White House he was taken in hand by the Yank deep state to drive its long term programme. Google PNAC and Monroe Doctrine for the outline and authors of that programme. The events in Syria have been perfectly choreographed: Shock the world with a horrific false flag atrocity, raise a howl to punish the chosen target - Assad and the Syrians who elected him, restore faltering demand for regime change.

The essential part of the regime change is nail it down with external force to disallow the Syrians from choosing who should lead their country. Surest is the way they did it in Libya and Iraq - kill the deposed leader.

It doesn't always work. Look at Vietnam, where they disallowed an election because the US President feared "the commies would win". Countless deaths later the commies won!

If the gas weapons were delivered by aircraft there is a very very
limited number of airfields possible. If the Wedgetail was in the air
or another similar aircraft then they will know for certain where it was from.

It is six of one and half a dozen of the other whether it was a wise move or not.
It has at least one positive result.
Those that thought he was all talk & waffle, will now realise that
what he says he might do.
That at least is a move to reality.

Bazz.

What reality are you referring to?

Reality at the moment is that Trump is moving a strike force into Western Pacific waters near North Korea.
Reality is that Donald Trump could provoke North Korea and China and Russia and start a nuclear war.

Dear Bazz,

You wrote;

“Those that thought he was all talk & waffle, will now realise that what he says he might do.“

Good lord mate, where did that come from? Trump has been very explicit in wanting to keep the US out of the Syrian conflict. He was also very vocal about Obama possibly taking action without congressional approval. His actions are diametrically opposed to the very things he said he would do so how on earth are you putting this in the plus column for him?

Dear Loudmouth,

You wrote;

“And over-arching Syria is of course, the Sunni-Shi'ite fracture.”

You naturally, given your ideology, are keen to reduce this to Islamic feuding. That is not what the facts support. Here is a documentary from Al Jezeera of “The Boy who started the Syrian War”. What was telling was the example of true democracy on display, one that took courage and resolve, one that had people from that city protesting on the streets for the release of these teenagers despite the risk of injury and death.
http://video.aljazeera.com/channels/eng/videos/the-boy-who-started-the-syrian-war---featured-documentary/5318377073001;jsessionid=07DB0F611C37E0422F42C08AFFA64D0C

Have other actors imposed themselves into the conflict? Of course, as with any war, but first and foremost this has been a resistance movement against a tyrannical security apparatus.

Dear Foxy,

Thank you but I'm not sure my link really helped since it poses far more questions than it answers, at least in my mind. Not that this is a bad thing. If you get the chance please look at the link above and tell me what you think. This is the thing about the Syrian conflict, whenever you seem to be getting closer to solidifying your appraisal of it something else comes along to point you in another direction. What is indisputable though is the death and misery it has wrought on a beautiful people. Terrible.

A lot of people though Trump was all a big bag of wind.

Now the US Pacific Fleet was at Singapore but having been diverted to
near Korea the shortest path is through the Sth China Sea.
Now that is something to watch VERY closely.

If China does nothing then it totally undermines their claim to
sovereignty of that ocean. If the fleet goes the long way round it
will undermine the US's objection.
I wonder if that was the conversation with xi in Florida ?

Dear Steele,

Thank You for the link.

I agree with you. It is a complex situation and one
that I'm not sure that this American President is
capable of resolving. I wish that the political
debate on this conflict would focus more not on how to
stay in it, but on how to get out of it, without
deserting the brave Syrian people.

What to do next, I really don't know.

Hi Steele,

I agree that, at first, " ..... first and foremost this has been a resistance movement against a tyrannical security apparatus."

But ISIS has surged since 2011. The various 'democratic' forces have been severely weakened. So, in a multiple-sided - mainly three-sided - conflict, the two major evils are the nationalist/fascist dictatorship of Assad, and the Islamist/fascist dictatorship of ISIS. Which is worse ? Even Trump is not stupid enough (I hope) to fight two enemies at once, with little presence on the ground and with only a Libya-like outcome possible at this stage.

So which 'worst enemy' should be fought first ? I've suggested for years that we hold our noses and try to destroy ISIS. First. What comes after is impossible to guess, but it's more than likely that ISIS will rise up again in some other guise, perhaps somehow worse than ISIS itself: fanatics rarely give up their ideology, but tend to become even more reactionary, fascist and insidious.

Of course, I would support strictly quarantined assaults on Assad's forces if they launch any more gas attacks on ordinary people, with such a response clearly linked to yet one more of Assad's atrocities. How that could be done without inciting the Russians or Iranians or Hezbollah is the difficult part.

Middle Eastern countries have usually been strong-centre/weak periphery states, so dictatorships, either by nationalists or Islamists, have always been far more likely than any push towards democracy. So democratic forces, defined loosely, but which I would certainly rather support, are almost bound to be the weakest of the three forces. That's the reality.

So which of the two evils do 'we' leave alone for the time being ? It's a horrible choice for any military power wanting to get involved to support the people in some way. But they all have to make it.

Cheers,

Joe

Foxy & Joe,
There does not seem to be a solution in sight.
One side is backed by Iran and the other by Saudi Arabia.
This war has been on since Mohommad died.
The conflict has dragged on because the people who could and indeed
have the responsibility to settle it have deserted the country.

I refer of course to the million of young men who fled to Europe.
I cannot say I blame them as I would not risk my life for a ME country.
However, it is their homeland and their families are there.

All the west should do is rescue the groups under risk such as
Christians, Yazidies etc and send back those men who left.
The west has tried everything, all to no avail and it is now time to
tell the people of the middle east, sink or swim !

Dear Bazz,

If only the US and the UN could get the Russians
on side. If they all worked together perhaps
this conflict could be resolved. However, whatever
the UN and the US suggest the Russians block so
currently there's an impasse.

Loudmouth: So, in a multiple-sided - mainly three-sided - conflict, the two major evils are the nationalist/fascist dictatorship of Assad, and the Islamist/fascist dictatorship of ISIS. Which is worse ?

You forgot to mention the Islamist/Dictatorship of the numerous Rebel Factions who are fighting each other. They are a just a big a danger to the rest of the World as ISIS.

Actually, thinking about it, Assad had to be Fascist to keep the peace in Syria's various Religious factions & theirs lots of them, Sunni, Shia, Druse, Alawati, The Twirlie ones, Yarzies, Syrian Christians & a few others. Keeping them from killing one another would take a very strong man. That's most likely why his Security Forces were not liked by the Islamists for that very reason.

Loudmouth: So which of the two evils do 'we' leave alone for the time being ?

Well I for one, would concentrate on ISIS in the North & illuminate that threat to the World. Leave the Russians & Assad to the Rebels. When the S#!t is over then there needs to be a big, Big reshuffle of the Middle East by the Middle Eastern peoples alone. Let the West & Russia stay out of the whole Meeting. It would mean completely new Boundaries for all the Countries involved. This should have happened after WW1. It didn't because, as Laurence explains in the "Seven Pillars of Wisdom," "Arab pride." Everybody wanted to be in charge, each tribe thought they were better than other Tribe & the Conference broke down & let the Westerners carve the Land up to suit themselves. Look how that's played out. That 1918 Conference should be given another go. It'll never happen.

Foxy: I refer of course to the million of young men who fled to Europe.

These young men have the sole intention of imposing Islam & Shari'a Law on the West. That is the entire goal of this invasion. They have stated that many times.

You're deluding yourself with Gulf States propaganda SteeleRedux.
The story seeks to gain your support for their point of view by making you want to 'react with emotion' rather than to use your brain and think logically or rationally.

'React with emotion' is manipulation and justification to 'Act against Assad'

Why do you think they plaster dead or dying kids across the TV from Syria, but they won't show you the dead kids the immigrant in Sweden deliberately ran over?

(Which is another story I could char grill all the delutional left on but we'll leave that for now...
Actually 'No'; how many of the looney liberal left care to admit they were wrong on Sweden and Islam? No, of course not... crawl away and hide like cockroaches.)

Those dead kids are the 'Sale of an Agenda'.
They are selling you something, manipulating you, it's like advertising.

Sweden and the Globalists don't want you to know they have an immigrant / Islam problem.
But they do want your complicity to allow them to act in regards to Assad.

You should try to break the conditioning:
'Won't Somebody Please Think of the Children'.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RybNI0KB1bg
Play it over several times, and remind yourself you're just being manipulated.

They won't tell you that the rebels kill far more innocents than Assad does or speak logic and remind you Assad wouldn't still be in power if his own people didn't support him.
They won't tell you the about the kids being exploited to the Gulf States for sex trafficking and organ harvesting.
They won't openly tell you the US deliberately was conducting regime change using Islamic extremists they themselves armed.
They (the West) won't tell you they themselves trained the rebels in the use of chemical weapons.
And they won't tell you they had a deliberate plan to oust Assad by false flag 'blaming him for the use of said chemical weapons'.

Here's an article you shouldn't miss.
http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2016/04/28/seymour-hersh-hillary-approved-sending-libya-sarin-syrian-rebels.html

Hi Jayb,

Yes, I forgot those other 1,500 other groups. I'll look for their names now for you :)

I suppose that once ISIS is defeated, and before another Islamist-/fascist group can get organised, attention can turn to Assad and his nationalism/fascism. Probably other groups out of that 1,500 will surge up, and so on.

But over-arching all of that, once each of that multitude(1,500 x 1,500) of rivalries can be sorted out, there will still be the North-South Axis of Sunni Turkey and Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States, AND the East-West Axis of Iran, Syria and Hezbollah/Hamas - each with outside allies. Eventually a billion and a half people at each others' throats, some with nuclear weapons and a craving for Paradise, an all those virgins. Iran, by the way, is very friendly with both India and China. It's a funny old world.

So maybe, the longer this one plays out, the further off the Big One recedes. Book a ring-side multi-season seat, Jayb :)

Joe

If any of you take the time to really hunt for the backstory you'll find there are alternative points of view the media doesn't go out of its way to share with you.

'Far Right Wing Conspiracy'
'Fake News'

'Don't listen to THEIR facts, ONLY listen to ours'.

Tell me how many of you guys honestly don't know that regime change was planned in Syria?
Watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-MqVY1-ncBI
Why are you not asking the questions 'Why wasn't I given that information?'
Why are you not asking yourselves whether it's pure journalistic incompetence or is there more to the story?
Whether you were deliberately not told?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird

But does this stuff still go on today?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_Matters_for_America
http://www.thenation.com/article/amazon-washington-post-and-600-million-cia-contract/
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-24/obama-signs-countering-disinformation-and-propaganda-act-law

And how many of you actually went and looked up Vanessa Beeley or Tulsi Gabbard?
Here's Vanessa Beeley.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8mA0h7dCKI

Remember if you don't know this stuff, if you aren't aware of it you don't know anything; you're deliberately not been given the right info and played for an idiot.

Anyone here want to admit they're an idiot?
Because that's what anyone else's opinion of you will mostly be after they watch it and become more informed and you still haven't.

According to the Chicago Tribune - if the Trump
Administration and the Kremlin are not able to
come to a meeting of the minds on Syria, it could
set the two nuclear powers on a dangerous collison
course.

The Chicago Tribune tells us that finding a way to
advance American interests in Syria while avoiding
a war with Russia is the urgent task at hand.
"After all, sinking into a Syrian quagmire would be
bad enough. World War III would be far worse."

Dearest Foxy,

Yes, after all, what ARE US interests in Syria ? None, apart from its supposed concern for human rights and punishment for war crimes. Fair enough, but those don't give the US much of a foothold, while the Russians have been bed-mates with the Assads for fifty years, and desperately need to keep their air-base and port facilities in Syria, to give them a Mediterranean presence.

So it shouldn't be hard for the Yanks and the Russians to come to a tacit agreement: that the US stays out of it unless that 'red line' is crossed again, BUT they will make sure, even then, they don't harm any Russians or touch Russian hardware. They ought to come to a definite agreement about air space in relation to fighting ISIS in the East, maybe a twenty-kilometre no-fly corridor between the two sets of operations (which varies unbeknownst to ISIS). [I've always wanted to use 'unbeknownst' somewhere; like 'albeit' or 'notwithstanding', big, important-sounding words].

Yes, it is a 1500-group quagmire, with very powerful forces immediately outside the arena: e.g. Turkey and Iran, and other powerful forces outside of that: all of Sunni Islam vs all of Shi'ite Islam - a sort of inverse of Dante's circles of Hell.

Much love always,

Joe

Yes, Armchair.
But the pundits here including on OLO continue to blindly follow major media spiel and spin.
They continue commenting as though Assad is guilty of using chemical weapons just several days ago.
So much for democracy in Australia.
Guilty without evidence or trial is un-Australian.
Why isn't evidence of Assad using gas published?

It's unsubstantiated accusation of weapons of mass destruction consequences all over again, now, plus deadly radiation.

Trump apparently has shares in Tomahawk missile manufacturing and a new supply will cost hundreds of millions of dollars to replace those just fired on Syria.
.N.B. Raytheon.
http://www.businessinsider.com.au/donald-trumps-stock-portfolio-2015-7?r=US&IR=T
and
http://fortune.com/2017/04/07/syria-airstrikes-tomahawk-missile-boeing-raytheon-stock/

And have a good look into the first link Armchair posted above.

Ah, the consequences of consequences of actions: China has moved 150,000 troops and 'medical supplies' towards the North Korean border:

http://www.msn.com/en-au/news/world/china-moves-150000-troops-and-medical-supplies-to-north-korean-border-in-case-us-attacks-kim-jong-un-regime/ar-BBzFSGj?li=AAavLaF&ocid=spartandhp

Silly question: would Trump be stupid enough to launch an attack on North Korea ? After all, what would Rambo do, or Clint Eastwood ? Ride in, shoot up the baddies, and ride out to the grateful thanks of village people.

Maybe it's not just his mobile phone that they need to keep away from him, but all those action comics as well.

Joe

Dear Loudmouth,

You are forgetting the US has an incredibly strong relationship with the Israelis who are busy bombing targets within Syria and providing support to not only the Free Syria Army but some other pretty unsavory groups much of it in the name of 'my enemy's enemy is my friend'.

“analysts suggest the Jewish state has in fact struck a deadly 'deal with the devil' – offering support to the Sunni militants who fight the Syrian ruler Assad in the hope of containing its arch enemies Hezbollah and Iran”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3315347/Watch-heart-pounding-moment-Israeli-commandos-save-Islamic-militants-Syrian-warzone-risking-lives-sworn-enemies.html

Trump had promised to “bomb the sh@t out of ISIS” but resultant carnage in the civilian population is clear to see.

“According to Airwars, a British monitoring group, alleged civilian casualties linked to U.S. strikes in Syria and Iraq have soared to 1,472 so far this month. In March of last year, 196 civilians were reported killed. The previous all-time high was 613 in January.”
https://news.vice.com/story/us-airstrikes-have-killed-more-and-more-civilians-in-iraq-and-syria-since-trump-took-office

I'm not sure the dead civilians now know the difference between the Syrian government gas attack and the US bombing raids, they remain dead. Both aggressors will be using the excuse, that the armaments were directed primarily at fighting forces on the other side, but civilians are still losing their lives in horrific numbers.

Armchair, that story about a plan of regime change is a really old story.
The idea is now obsolete as everyone now realises that changing the
head man or head party or head religion is to no avail.

Until they stop marrying their cousins their behaviour problem will
not subside. It is also at the root of their tribal problem.
However if they stopped cousin marriage today it would take several
generations perhaps 500 years to repair their genome.

Nothing will change until the politicians come to the realisation
that there is a problem with Islam and that nothing can be done to
help them. They have to help themselves. The rest of us have spent
enough lives and wealth trying to help them all to no avail.
All we can do is perhaps enforce the laws about cousin marriage in
our own countries so that those of Arab descent will breed it out
and deport as many as possible.
That is it, they are a problem and it must be accepted as such.

steelie: “analysts suggest the Jewish state has in fact struck a deadly 'deal with the devil' – offering support to the Sunni militants who fight the Syrian ruler Assad in the hope of containing its arch enemies Hezbollah and Iran”

Hmmm, you didn't mention that Israeli Planes attacked Hezbollah targets after they shell & used missiles against Israel first. They were very selective. (Selective again)

steelie: I'm not sure the dead civilians now know the difference between the Syrian government gas attack and the US bombing raids,

You didn't mention any ISIS or Rebel killed Civilians, of which there were many. Why is that? Supporting ISIS & the Rebels for the Islamists? I think so.

steelie: but civilians are still losing their lives in horrific numbers.

They wouldn't be killed if the Rebels or ISIS weren't using their own families as human shields. As I've stated previously, the reason they have their families with them is because their male friends would Rape them if they were not with them. Great mates Ay?

Thank goodness we've now got a Repubican in the White House, eh?

The last 8 yrs have been a nightmare for the WIAFS (whatever, its America's fault) who really couldn't give full vent to their prejudices given the occupant's skin colour and political leanings. But now its back to full on blame the US first and ask questions later.

Any old piece of rubbish passes as considered thought when it puts the US in a bad light. Did Assad drop WMD's - no, not if the US says he did...it musta been someone else. Quite how this someone else got these weapons is left unansweredd because its unanswerable and/or the answers don't suit the WIAF narrative.

Trump's actions have been a master-stroke, which I'm guessing was planned for some time and by the board that now runs the US policy, not just the CEO - Tillerson, MAttis, Haley etc.

In one stroke, without any great cost to the US, all its enemies have been put on alert that the game has changed and the adults are back in charge. The Obamessiah's leading from behind policies are no more and the aggressors who have been operating on the assumption that the US was too timid to oppose them, have been disabused of that fallacy.

Assume that Russia, Iran, China and Kim will all be a lot more 'flexible' in their thinking and attitude to the US from this point onward

Hi MHaze,

Do you mean that, say, China will be flexible like this:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/china-moves-150000-troops-medical-10199100

Encouraging a tight alliance between Russia, China, Iran and all their client states may be something of a problem for the US.

So what's next ? Does Trump et al. have follow-through plans ? Any Plan B ? Will the US respond in the same way if there is another gas attack ? Or have they got an even more cunning plan ?

When I was a kid, I used to enjoy shoving a stick into an ants'-nest until my mum clipped me round the ear [children: that's called corporal punishment; ask your grandparents]. I hope Trump does have a range of 'flexible' Plan Bs.

Cheers,

Joe

Master stroke. LOL

Dear mhaze,

Well “masterstroke' got a laugh from me as well. I think the only master stroking going on is when he looks in the mirror after he puts in a good round of golf.

Nixon engaged the “Madman Theory” for some of his foreign policy with admittedly questionable results. In his own words;

“I call it the Madman Theory, Bob. I want the North Vietnamese to believe I've reached the point where I might do anything to stop the war. We'll just slip the word to them that, "for God's sake, you know Nixon is obsessed about communism. We can't restrain him when he's angry—and he has his hand on the nuclear button" and Ho Chi Minh himself will be in Paris in two days begging for peace.”

He at least had the rat cunning to use it as a calculated manner. Trump has none of those qualities. He is a real class A egotistical nutter and it should concern any thinking human being on this planet. What we are all banking on are the few sensible heads around him although I don't put it past them using Trump's erratic behaviour to advance their own objectives. I am very skeptical about them being able to keep a lid on him for 4 whole years though.

I know it will give the old codgers here a little stirring in the loins as they see each cruise missile being sent on its way. I'm just not sure that is a decent enough reason to put the rest of us at risk.

Hey Bazz,
"Armchair, that story about a plan of regime change is a really old story.
The idea is now obsolete as everyone now realises that changing the
head man or head party or head religion is to no avail."

What do you mean by 'avail' ?
I hope you're not implying that anyone 'actually' cares about the interests of the actual people living in Syria.
That'd be buying into propaganda; all the foreign entities party to the Syrian conflict are concerned with their own interests.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-04-10/trumps-bombing-syria-continuation-policy-which-started-only-3-years-after-syria-beca
http://williamblum.org/essays/read/overthrowing-other-peoples-governments-the-master-list

Hey Jayb,
I only want to add one comment to this statement:
Quote "Hmmm, you didn't mention that Israeli Planes attacked Hezbollah targets after they shell & used missiles against Israel first. They were very selective."

Remember this story?
http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13950631000607
I grant that some may consider the source questionable, but the story certainly indicates that Israel were up to more than just retaliation.

As another point of interest the Democrats are going after Tulsi Gabbard for not being a team player.
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/04/09/politics/democratic-leaders-gabbard-syria/

And hows this; I don't exactly know how to respond to it...
Maybe 'Don't worry Ivanka, Daddy will punish the bad man that made you cry'...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/10/ivanka-trump-influenced-father-launch-air-strikes-against-assad/

It's a shame she isn't aware of the missiles that did not hit their targets, overshot, hit towns and killed more innocents...
And did anyone hear why it was only 59 missiles?
Apparently it was 60 but one of them was a dud and fired straight over the side and into the drink...

AC said;
What do you mean by 'avail' ?

I mean no matter who you install they just start fighting amongst
themselves again, again and again.
We all have to get used to the idea that that is what they do !

They have never been any different from before Islam and it has just
been made worse by their religion as it gives them an excuse
to attack anybody.

Bazz: I mean no matter who you install they just start fighting amongst themselves again, again and again.We all have to get used to the idea that that is what they do ! They have never been any different from before Islam and it has just been made worse by their religion as it gives them an excuse to attack anybody.

Yep. I've said that many times. That's what the ME does. Now they want to do that in the rest of the World & complain when we try to stop them. They are forever stuck in 639 AD with their crazy dangerous Religion.

If everybody in the Middle East had a job and equivalent to US$100 a day take home pay there would be prosperity and peace in the region.

Chronic hardship involving lack of income and relative high cost of food leads to hunger, irritability, civil unrest, fighting and revenge and desperation.

Hardship and desperation leads some people to gang up within religious or tribal or other groups that then engage in enacting revenge.

I think long term sustainable solutions in the Middle East and elsewhere worldwide appear to be review of international fiscal policy and economic development involving generation of business and adequately remunerated employment and profit.
Not impossible.

I thought election of business developer Trump might lead the way but at present I think the opposite.

JFA: If everybody in the Middle East had a job and equivalent to US$100 a day take home pay there would be prosperity and peace in the region.

Nah! that would allow them to buy more guns & ammo & kill more of their own people. Hmmmm... come to think of it, might be a good idea after all.

JB,

Think.
The suicide bombers don't have to buy their bombs and the ME rebels don't buy their mortars or machine guns.

It's much more of an attraction to have money to take home to pay for food and a swimming pool, new house or new car and stereo etc.

JFAus, it would not matter what amount of riches they had they would
still fight over whatever was there.
Look at Iraq for example, 3rd largest oil producer but have been at
each others throats forever.
Those ME countries that have oil production keep the peasants in line
by means of food and fuel subsidies. As production and/or price falls
they blame the government, the US or Rome and overthrow their governments.
That is what happened to Mubarik and eventually Sisi will be overthrown.
Note how they are now blaming the Copts for their problems.
It is always someone else’s fault.
Typical behaviour of someone with mental problems.

Bazz,

The hardship and unrest I am referring to is occurring at the bottom of the economy, oil revenue is at the top.
There is virtually no firewood remaining in the ME. Buying gas or electricity for warmth and cooking uses up vital cash.
It's thousands of years of consumption of natural food and essentials that have occurred in the ME and not here in Australia, that makes the difference.
Chronic hardship, long term hardship, and hunger changes mental attitude, leading to desperation including suicide.

Likely the Copts are being targeted because they are linked to Russia that is standing up for Assad (who in absence of evidence has not been convicted).

This is about land and food shortages, and greed.

If you are predisposed to see Trump as an incompetent fool then its pretty easy to see everything he does as foolish. Of coarse that paradigm leaves such people scratching their collective heads and/or nether regions trying to square it with the fact that he defeated, in turn, the Bushes, the GOP, the MSM, the Democrats and the Clintons.

So Trump the fool, foolishly lobbed a few bombs into an essentially vacant airfield and, apparently, took a giant step toward WW3. Wow!

If however you think that Trump, and his team, have a very good grasp of whats-what, the bombing is clearly a masterstroke. At little cost to the US, the world has suddenly changed very much to their advantage. All of the US' enemies are on the back foot and will remain so, so long as Trump is disposed to keep them there. In a stroke, the future of Assad is back on the table. Suddenly the Chinese are talking trade concessions and (despite Loudmouth hilariously falling for the 150000 soldiers story) are lifting not a finger to help out Kim. And now Putin, who played the Obamessiah for a fool, finds himself in a bind and having to choose between mutually unpalatable options.

I'm old enough to remember when Reagan lobbed a few bombs into Libya in the mid 80's. Then as now, those who fancied themselves sophisticated analysers of international affairs, declared him reckless and fretted about WW3. Then as now they revealed how little they understand. Afterward, Libya went from being the main supporter of international terrorism and an enemy of the west to being a docile pussy-cat and, if not exactly respectable, then at least a useful member of the global community....until that is those unutterable fools in the previous administration decided it'd be fun (and profitable??) to overthrow his government.

So, Loudmouth, Armchair et al, continue to work on your unsupportable assumption that Trump is an incompetent fool, as your like in the 80's thought of Reagan. But be prepared to constantly sit in wonder as to how that paradigm never seemsto work out.

Hi MHaze,

What never ? Well, hardly ever. Take the batteries out of your clock and it will still be right twice a day.

Yes, sorry about that gaffe: as the Sun reports, it isn't 150,000 Chinese troops (and medical and food supplies) moving towards the North Korean border, as both News Limited and Fairfax press report, but 140,000. Or maybe, as that authoritative journal Pravda reports, there are no troop movements at all:

http://www.pravdareport.com/news/world/asia/11-04-2017/137452-karmanov-0/

Wait and see :)

So Trump had a Plan A on Syria: can he use it again ? And again ? Or will he have to develop a Plan B, something a bit more sophisticated. Russians, after all, play chess, not so much golf. I'm not complaining, I support his response to Assad's chemical attacks (and yes, I do believe that), but did he think, being 'an incompetent fool': "Duh ! now what ?"

Perhaps you're right about Reagan, perhaps his Iran-Contra deal was devilishly cunning and perhaps the Soviet Union would still exist if it weren't for his genius. Apart from those master-strokes, I don't recall Reagan being anything but a duller forerunner of your idol.

Wait and see :)

Joe

MHaze,n fromo
Today's Sydney Morning Herald reports 150,000.
Where are you getting wrong information from?

Is China moving 150000 troops to the Korean border? Well the Chinese Foreign Ministry denies it (http://world.huanqiu.com/hot/2017-04/10453306.html -use Google translate). And the US Dept of Defense says there is "No evidence" of any troop movements in the area.

But what do these people know, eh?

This whole thing is based on one report from Japan about "rumors" of movements which the usual suspects then repeat as fact and before you know it you have multiple sources all telling those who
just want it to be true that it is true. Really, you fellas need to get a grip.

But even if the stories were true, its about China trying to protect itself from a refugee wave. China has been reducing its support for the Kim regime. The last thing they want is a war with the US over PRNK. They have been looking to make changes in the PRNK to reduce tensions. That's why Kim killed his brother...China was reportedly trying to use him to replace Kim and create a less aggressive regime.

The problem with the WIAFS (whatever, its America's fault) is that they see everything done by the US as the harbinger of escalation. What Trump is doing is increasing the pressure on Kim to get him to back down, and it looks like the Chinese aren't going to interfere. The US has tried to play nice with Kim for a decade and got nowhere. The adults in the room have finally decided that Kim's tantrums have to be addressed.

_________________________________________________

Reagan was such a successful president that even Obama tried to compare himself to Reagan. That you can't see it, don't understand it, indicates a rather poor understanding of recent history. Its rather difficult to learn from the past if you utterly misunderstand the past.

JF; I repeat what I said;
Those ME countries that have oil production keep the peasants in line
by means of food and fuel subsidies.

That is why the bottom end is having a hard time.
Egypt's oil production peaked in 2000 and the subsidies have been cut.
Egypt for example is only being kept quiet by charity from the Gulf States.

When they stop supporting Egypt, the subsidies will disappear and
shortly after the government will also go.
Then 45 million people will need to move somewhere else.
It will make the starvation in the Sudan look like a weight watchers nightmare.

MHaze,

Look at what you yourself say about incorrect reports turning into fact.
Do you think it possible that is happening with news Bashar al-Assad used toxic gas on children?

AJF: It's much more of an attraction to have money to take home to pay for food and a swimming pool, new house or new car and stereo etc.

You are superimposing your Western Values onto Islamic Values. Not the same thing. Like Oil & Water.

AJF: Likely the Copts are being targeted because they are linked to Russia that is standing up for Assad.

WTF

mHaze: took a giant step toward WW3. Wow!

This was all discussed with Putin & XI well before the Missile strike. All the Blowhard talk after is all just part of the dance.

JayB

Re your WTF.
http://lacopts.org

Jayb,

Sorry.So much for smartphone copy and paste. Try this.

http://lacopts.org/story/copts-and-russians-discovering-each-other/

Dear mhaze,

Oh boy, here we go again.

You wrote;

“I'm old enough to remember when Reagan lobbed a few bombs into Libya in the mid 80's....Afterward, Libya went from being the main supporter of international terrorism and an enemy of the west to being a docile pussy-cat and, if not exactly respectable, then at least a useful member of the global community”

Rubbish.

1986 Lybia bombing by Regan

1988 Pan Am Flight 103 goes down over Lockerbie

Or perhaps this is one you appear too old to remember.

Hi Steele,

Libya. Reagan. As I recall, probably imperfectly, the US missile attack on one of Ghaddafi's palaces was in response to (?) a series of terrorist attacks in Europe, the murder of an English policewoman earlier and a bombing and shoot-up of the Rome (or Turin?) air terminal. The bombing killed Ghaddafi's step-daughter.

Ghaddafi, Gadafi, Ghadaffi.

The current US genius-statesman is great at knee-jerk, but slightly deficient at thinking through anything. Well, they don't do that in action comics, do they, so why should he ? Perhaps it is necessary because, after all, this is the real world.

Drumpf sends a battle fleet towards the South Korea/North Korea/China coasts. It can get pretty tight up there, not much room for error. So China is in the box-seat: what will it do to deter all-out war ? It would have ships, swarms of aircraft, nests of missile sites along its coast. So it would be no problem, to warn the US not to proceed past a certain point, somewhere south of the 38th Parallel [Wow, 'the 38th Parallel' sets up all sorts of nostalgic memories for us oldies] - and east of China's EEZ, or at least a distance from its territorial waters. A red line, if you like: cross this and there will be consequences.

I wonder if Munchausen/Trump understands the concept of 'consequences': after all, in his mind, it seems, to think something is to complete it, to bring it about, like Baron Munchausen, and to do so without any negative consequences, like Batman. Or Superboy.

Well, we will all share the consequences of this one. KYAG.

Cheers,

Joe

He

DT has also made big mistakes picking his crew, like the one who yesterday stated hitler did not kill children and others with gas.
The mistakes show little if any thought into circumstances and consequences of orders being issued.

Reagan-Libya...

In the real world we recognise that there are rarely perfect outcomes, only better outcomes. Reagan's bombing of Libya was one such. Prior to it, Libya had been a major threat to stability in NorthAfrica with its attempts to absorb Chad and talk of a pan-African Muslim league. It was also actively seeking to become a nuclear power. Apart from sponsoring PLO activities, it was also a major funder of various European terrorist groups such as Red Brigade and the IRA.

Within a relatively short time after the slap-down, the Chad adventurism was over, the nuclear ambitions shelved, the funding to IRA etc stopped (which in no small part led to the demise of those groups) and the cosying up to the Soviets ended. It took longer for Libya's support for the PLO to wind back but that also happened.

So all-in-all, not a perfect outcome but an extremely good outcome and pretty much the best that the US could hope for. In the grown up world, that's a success. In the world that always sees the US as the great satan, the search is always about diminishing the success by pointing out it wasn't perfect.

I prefer the grown-up world.

NK...

So no one's gunna acknowledge they were happily led down the garden path on the 150000 troops. About what you'd expect.

Now we have fantasies about China staring down the US armada. You people have no understanding of realpolitiks.

Just a couple of points to consider:
1. The Syrian strikes occurred right in the middle of Trump's dinner with Xi. Anyone who considers that a coincidence is too naive for words.
2. China is also very unhappy with Kim.
3. There are always troops on the China-NK border.

/cont

/cont

4. China also wants the NK to give up its nuclear ambitions.
5. If Kim has to be forced to give up his insane adventurism, China would prefer to do it rather than have US and SouthKorea do it.
6. There was, apparently, reports in one of the Beijing papers considered to be close to the Politburo that China was considering taking the Kim regime out.

There's every chance that this is all a co-ordinated dance between Xi and Trump to ratchet up the pressure on Kim until he comes to heal.

Re Korea and the US Navy. The fleet was, I read, in Singapore when the
orders were changed.
So a week or more later and not a peep out of China, or the US, about
the US Fleet being in the Sth China Sea.
By far the shortest way to Korea. Likely, this was an arrangement
agreed in Miami with Xi. Just shut up about it.

Is The Washington Times a credible publication?

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/6/syrian-rebels-used-sarin-nerve-gas-not-assads-regi/

As the US fleet steams towards the 38th parallel:

North Korea missile launch fails

The Australian - ‎19 minutes ago‎

UPDATED: White House military advisers have briefed London the US is considering a pre-emptive strike on North Korea's nuclear facilities and assured the UK America has the intelligence and firepower to “utterly destroy” the rogue state's nuclear program."

And all their artillery, aircraft, ships and troops as well ?

Could they be that stupid ? What might the South Korean government think, with thousands of big guns aimed at Seoul from barely twenty miles away across the border ?

Will Trump graduate from incompetent buffoon to pathological maniac in one step ?

Oh well, there goes the Korean vote.

Joe