Politics aside do folks on this board support our action in Syria?

[cawacko]

for those so inclined i'm curious why you do or don't support the bombing (leaving the political actors out of it)

[Element-22-Cat]

for those so inclined i'm curious why you do or don't support the bombing (leaving the political actors out of it)

I don't like it because it is reactionary and not part of a cohesive plan. It's a bomb now and then what? We'll see?

If it was going to cause many very bad things before, how are those going to be addressed?

[tinfoil]

America! Fuck Yeah!

[Cypress]

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...65#post1875265

[anatta]

I like it in that it could have been much more reactive (worse).

Trump gets to look tough. McCain and Graham have a militaristic orgasm.
world leaders and Congress get to say "we're doing something in Syria." everybody gets a feel good photo-op

Does any of this matter one way or the other?? is the question...*meh* not really.
I don't think it even weakens Assad-he's still got the Russian AF

[Phantasmal]

I am truly torn, because even though it was a strike on the facility that launched the attack, what now? What is Trump's message to Assad?



What next?

[tsuke]

its the middle east. They wont notice a couple of missiles here and there. If anything it is a highly inefficient method of killing than the methods they use to exterminate each other.

[blackascoal]

He should have done what Hillary Clinton told him to do just hours before his attack .. BOMB THE AIRFIELDS.

That would keep ASSAD from any similar airborne gas attack.

That would have been far more strategic and would have sent a better message.

Beyond that, like Clinton, he would have needed congressional approval.

War can't be based on one person supposedly changing their mind.

[leaningright]

I am truly torn, because even though it was a strike on the facility that launched the attack, what now? What is Trump's message to Assad?



What next?

This is where I'm at. It depends a lot on what follows as to how I feel about the strike. I am not for bringing those folks wholesale over here but I would love to see something done over there to help them.

[Jarod]

I like it in that it could have been much more reactive (worse).

Trump gets to look tough. McCain and Graham have a militaristic orgasm.
world leaders and Congress get to say "we're doing something in Syria." everybody gets a feel good photo-op

Does any of this matter one way or the other?? is the question...*meh* not really.
I don't think it even weakens Assad-he's still got the Russian AF

So people died, remember that.

[Jarod]

If its part of a cohesive strategy, I like it. That remains to be seen.

Its interesting that he is doing what HRC promised to do if elected president.

[anatta]

Hew should have dome what Hillary Clinton told him to do just hours before his attack .. BOMB THE AIRFIELDS.

That would keep ASSAD from any similar airborne gas attack.

That would also have grounded Russian air-without Russian air Assad is weak -he was close to falling last year before Russia came in,

If Assad falls -who replaces him? either AQ related types like al-Nusra, or some Shi'a/Russian backed faction.

As usual Clinton's bloodthirst was a bridge too far..this was a "proportional response" about the least bad option

[anatta]

So people died, remember that.

as opposed to what?
what is it now? 300k+ DEAD and millions and millions displaced?at least that many

[Timshel]

No. I would not support it anyway, but we need to demand that he seek congressional approval.

[Timshel]

I like it in that it could have been much more reactive (worse).

Trump gets to look tough. McCain and Graham have a militaristic orgasm.
world leaders and Congress get to say "we're doing something in Syria." everybody gets a feel good photo-op

Yeah, that's worth five dead. Stupid tool.