The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > Big Mistake, President Trump

Big Mistake, President Trump

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. ...
  10. 15
  11. 16
  12. 17
  13. All
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.
Posted by ttbn, Sunday, 9 April 2017 10:28:05 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
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.
Posted by doog, Sunday, 9 April 2017 10:33:05 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
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?
Posted by AJ Philips, Sunday, 9 April 2017 11:00:14 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
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."
Posted by Foxy, Sunday, 9 April 2017 11:02:41 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
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.
Posted by JF Aus, Sunday, 9 April 2017 11:53:51 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
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.”
Posted by Albie Manton in Darwin, Sunday, 9 April 2017 12:49:41 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. ...
  10. 15
  11. 16
  12. 17
  13. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy