Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Politics
posted by on Monday April 10 2017, @11:43AM   Printer-friendly
from the two-peas-in-a-pod dept.

MOSCOW — If Russia once maintained at least a semblance of distance from President Bashar al-Assad of Syria, it rushed to his defense after the American missile strike ordered by President Trump on Thursday. The attack cemented Moscow more closely than ever to the notorious Syrian autocrat.

Even as the United States condemned Mr. Assad for gassing his own citizens and held Russia partly responsible, given its 2013 promise to rid Syria of chemical weapons, the Kremlin kept denying that Syria had any such capability.

By championing Mr. Assad and condemning American "aggression," President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia seemed to be burying the idea that he could somehow cooperate with the Trump administration to end the conflict on his terms.

"I suppose it is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail." Attributed to Abraham Maslow.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/08/world/europe/us-attack-on-syria-cements-kremlins-embrace-of-assad.html?


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 0, Flamebait) by What planet is this on Monday April 10 2017, @01:18PM (41 children)

    by What planet is this (5031) on Monday April 10 2017, @01:18PM (#491609)

    Putin must want that base on the Mediterranean pretty bad. I'm surprised Assad hasn't had an "accident" yet so he can be replaced by a smarter puppet. Hopefully Trump will continue to bitch-slap these two brats whenever they step out of line. Negotiation and trying to show them how "nice" we are is never going to stop these two from killing everyone who gets in the way of getting what they want.

    • (Score: 4, Interesting) by Demena on Monday April 10 2017, @01:46PM

      by Demena (5637) on Monday April 10 2017, @01:46PM (#491618)

      Bitch slap?

      They lost a few, probably inoperable 'planes, Assad managed to get rid of one of his more risky generals, and they are flying again within 24 hours with half the world pissed at America for aggression and the other half pissed at America for taking stupid risks and starting something it does not have the will to finish.

      Love those run on sentences.

    • (Score: 3, Informative) by c0lo on Monday April 10 2017, @01:47PM (8 children)

      by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 10 2017, @01:47PM (#491620) Journal

      Putin must want that base on the Mediterranean pretty bad.

      You betcha. Without them, Russia's navy would need to cross through the Bosporus straight, controlled by NATO.

      Hopefully Trump will continue to bitch-slap these two brats whenever they step out of line.

      Maybe it will... at least as long as this will amuse China. You reckon it's a coincidence this happened while president Xi was visiting Trump?
      I mean, quite a reversal of the orange one's in the love relation vis-a-vis Russia and China - the later is no longer evil, eh? Have you heard anything new about China's artificial islands lately? No? Mmmm... it may be a coincidence... or not, time will tell.

      --
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
      • (Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @02:17PM (2 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @02:17PM (#491636)

        Putin must want that base on the Mediterranean pretty bad.

        You betcha. Without them, Russia's navy would need to cross through the Bosporus straight, controlled by NATO.

        Yeah... controlled by NATO...by member country Turkey... with its glorious leader Erdogan... who is in the same league as Putin and Assad.

        • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday April 10 2017, @09:11PM (1 child)

          by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 10 2017, @09:11PM (#491942) Journal

          Yeah... controlled by NATO...by member country Turkey... with its glorious leader Erdogan... who is in the same league as Putin and Assad.

          Who also doesn't play as Putin's interest dictate... it downs russian planes now and then [bbc.com]

          --
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @10:11PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @10:11PM (#491967)

            That was then, when Erdogan still thought the US would be useful to him.
            Times have changed and he's gone full-putin since.

      • (Score: 2) by RamiK on Monday April 10 2017, @05:29PM (2 children)

        by RamiK (1813) on Monday April 10 2017, @05:29PM (#491759)

        You betcha. Without them, Russia's navy would need to cross through the Bosporus straight, controlled by NATO.

        Or, it's the usual suspect: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-04-09/russia-iran-warn-trump-they-will-respond-force-if-syria-red-lines-crossed-again [zerohedge.com]

        Btw, Trump's new found interest in Israel-Palestine peace? You could skip Syria and cut through Jordan and Israel directly to the sea if you didn't have to worry about Palestinians blowing up the proposed lines.

        --
        compiling...
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @06:12PM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @06:12PM (#491791)

          Couldn't you at least come up with a source better than zerohedge? That site is just infowars for hipsters.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 11 2017, @05:19AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 11 2017, @05:19AM (#492145)

            Those ideas are older than Zerohedge.

      • (Score: 2) by butthurt on Monday April 10 2017, @07:17PM (1 child)

        by butthurt (6141) on Monday April 10 2017, @07:17PM (#491856) Journal

        Yes, it could just be a coincidence.

        China's trademark review board announced in September it had invalidated a rival claim for the Trump trademark, clearing the way for Trump to move in. In November, soon after the election, it awarded the trademark to the Trump Organization.

        -- http://money.cnn.com/2017/02/17/news/companies/trump-china-trademark/index.html [cnn.com]

        Matthew Dresden, a lawyer with Harris Bricken in Seattle who specializes in Chinese intellectual property law, said it was atypical that all the trademarks were “approved at once.”

        -- https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/08/business/china-trademark-donald-trump.html?_r=0 [nytimes.com]

        • (Score: 3, Funny) by arulatas on Tuesday April 11 2017, @03:01PM

          by arulatas (3600) on Tuesday April 11 2017, @03:01PM (#492284)

          Make America Great In China (MAGIC)

          --
          ----- 10 turns around
    • (Score: 4, Touché) by Thexalon on Monday April 10 2017, @01:54PM (7 children)

      by Thexalon (636) on Monday April 10 2017, @01:54PM (#491621)

      Putin must want that base on the Mediterranean pretty bad.

      He's already got a port that gets him access to the Mediterranean, in Crimea. No, I'm pretty sure he's fighting for the defense of an allied nation against internal rebellion and foreign aggressors. Just like the US is in Yemen.

      I'm surprised Assad hasn't had an "accident" yet so he can be replaced by a smarter puppet.

      The fact that Assad is still in power after a half-dozen rebel groups and ISIS and the US have spent years trying to force him out means he's either not an idiot, or very very lucky.

      Hopefully Trump will continue to bitch-slap these two brats whenever they step out of line.

      By spending $100 million on missile strikes that had no appreciable effect [thedrive.com]?

      --
      The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
      • (Score: 3, Touché) by captain normal on Monday April 10 2017, @04:39PM (3 children)

        by captain normal (2205) on Monday April 10 2017, @04:39PM (#491717)

        Eh...Crimea is on the Black Sea. The only outlet from there to the Mediterranean is through the Bosporus.

        --
        When life isn't going right, go left.
        • (Score: 2) by Thexalon on Monday April 10 2017, @10:06PM (2 children)

          by Thexalon (636) on Monday April 10 2017, @10:06PM (#491966)

          Of course Crimea isn't on the Mediterranean. That hasn't put any kind of dent in the ability of the Russian navy to get to the Mediterranean.

          --
          The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
          • (Score: 3, Touché) by bob_super on Monday April 10 2017, @10:19PM

            by bob_super (1357) on Monday April 10 2017, @10:19PM (#491970)

            Has the US been conducting "freedom of navigation" patrols in the Bosphorus to protect the Russian Navy from the outrageous unchecked construction conducted by the Turkish along the strait?
            Asking for a Chinese friend.

          • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday April 10 2017, @10:23PM

            by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 10 2017, @10:23PM (#491973) Journal

            Of course Crimea isn't on the Mediterranean. That hasn't put any kind of dent in the ability of the Russian navy to get to the Mediterranean.

            Why do you say that? Bosporus Strait in the hands of a foe would be an impassible bottleneck should things come to a shooting war.

      • (Score: 3, Interesting) by AudioGuy on Monday April 10 2017, @11:07PM (2 children)

        by AudioGuy (24) on Monday April 10 2017, @11:07PM (#492000) Journal

        Lets have a look at the sequence of events.

        Trump position - he campaigned on 'no regime change wars'. This position is also visible in various public talk show appearances going back 15-20 years, so is probably sincere.

        Putin position - Initially criticised Assad publicly, blaming Assads problems on his lack of properly taking care of his people, even suggested some constitutional changes. But made it clear he does not believe in regime change wars either. When the US initially started supporting so called 'moderates' like Al Nusra/Al Queda, he criticised this, saying this would lead to a mess as ALL these groups were terrorists. He said 'FIRST stop the terorism, THEN deal with Assad.'

        Assad has publicly said he will hold elections as soon as the terrorists are gone.

        Obama seemed content to let Russia, Iran, etc mostly handle this, and so did Trump apparently. The US position was still suportive of regime change, but this was not pressed. Russia and Iran want Assad to stay. The US, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Israel all want Assad gone, each for different reasons.

        Great progress was made in removing ISIS by all parties. Russia had some peace talks beginning.

        Recently, support for the so-called 'moderate' terrorists was stopped by US.

        A bit later, there were speeches by State (Tillerson) and our UN rep stating that 'regime change was not a priority'.

        At this point, from Assads point of view, he was in the best position he had ever been in. ISIS was on the run. The US had publicly apparently changed its poition to not require 'regime change'. And he had multiple forces helping him rid his country of terrorists.

        -At this exact point-, within 48 hours of the apparent US change in position, he decides to use gas, a move guaranted to piss off the US and probably Russia as well. If this is true he has to be the dumbest dictator to ever live.

        There has been determinations that both Assad and various terrorists have used gas in the past by an independent UN monitor. So it is not necessarily certain immediately who used gas.

        Despite this, instead of allowing the the UN to investigate as in the past, the US press goes into full bore warmongering mode within hours, blaming Assad and calling for action. And full propaganda mode, with pictures of dead babies etc.

        The US state department and UN rep suddenly reverse position, and begin calling for regime change.

        Trump makes a speech in full war propaganda mode, cute dead babies, etc. Also reversing his position.

        Now at this point I would have expected the US to contact Russia, which they already had both human contact and intelligence contact with on the battlefield, and show them the evidence of Assads chemical attack, and inform them of our response. Since Syria is Russias ally, this would be a sensible thing to do to try to avoid problems.

        Instead, a missile strike is ordered, with Russia given just one hour to get their people out. This seems absolutely guaranteed to piss them off as much as possible without actually causing an incident that would force a retaliation (because of dead Russians).

        The missiles come not from bombers but from two recently positioned US warships, suggesting the possiblility of pre-planning.

        The people on the ground able to report on the inital gas attack are our 'moderates' (who recentlly lost funding), and the so-called 'White Hats' who are funded by the US, and whose neutrality has been seriously questioned.

        To me, this just REEKS of a possible false flag operation.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 11 2017, @02:15PM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 11 2017, @02:15PM (#492263)

          Assad has publicly said he will hold elections as soon as the terrorists are gone.

          Anyone who believes that isn't just willfully ignorant, they are living in an alternate reality.
          There is not one single middle-eastern dictator who has ever run an even remotely fair election.
          That's what the Arab Spring was all about FFS.

          I have no idea about the factual nature of half of the other things you've posited, but you sure wrecked your credibility with that one.

          • (Score: 2) by AudioGuy on Tuesday April 11 2017, @07:27PM

            by AudioGuy (24) on Tuesday April 11 2017, @07:27PM (#492412) Journal

            My intended point was that it provides leverage for later action to insure that promise is kept. Which I did not make clear.

            My personal opinion is that Putin had the right idea, deal with the terrorists first, then deal with Assad. There is no doubt he needs to go, but -how- he goes may be the difference in creating chaos there or a stable government.

    • (Score: 2, Informative) by khallow on Monday April 10 2017, @01:56PM (15 children)

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 10 2017, @01:56PM (#491623) Journal

      I'm surprised Assad hasn't had an "accident" yet so he can be replaced by a smarter puppet.

      Assad isn't completely stupid. Such a puppet will be hard for Russia to come by. A common strategy is the house of cards. It is a sort of dead man's switch for self-destruction of the country with the dictator's presence being the key stabilizing influence. Remove the dictator and the whole thing collapses into chaos, such as happened in Yugoslavia, Iraq, and Somalia over the past few decades.

      • (Score: 1) by higuita on Monday April 10 2017, @02:10PM

        by higuita (2465) on Monday April 10 2017, @02:10PM (#491632)

        Add Libya to the list... and Tunisia and Egypt barely escaped civil war, with Egypt still unstable

      • (Score: 5, Funny) by DannyB on Monday April 10 2017, @02:27PM (9 children)

        by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 10 2017, @02:27PM (#491639) Journal

        It is a sort of dead man's switch for self-destruction of the country with the dictator's presence being the key stabilizing influence. Remove the dictator and the whole thing collapses into chaos

        It's a good thing that a clown puppet could never happen in the United States.

        Nor could our government fall into deeply partisan bickering. Nor the White House have bitter infighting under an ineffective president always on vacation. Nor a dictator wannabee who thinks executive orders can accomplish anything. Nor a senior advisor publicly endorsed by the nazi party. Oops, godwin.

        It's a good thing the US is safe from foreign interference, massive disinformation, hacking and destabilization.

        Q. Why doesn't Trump wear a wedding ring?
        A. Because they don't make rings small enough for such tiny hands.

        --
        People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
        • (Score: 2) by https on Monday April 10 2017, @03:52PM (8 children)

          by https (5248) on Monday April 10 2017, @03:52PM (#491685) Journal

          The biggest horrorshow in the tragedy the Americans are living with right now is that even if someone successfully assasinates Trump, they then have Pence in charge. There's not enough whiskey to fend off those nightmares.

          --
          Offended and laughing about it.
          • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @04:02PM (7 children)

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @04:02PM (#491695)

            It may turn into an ironic fight whereby GOP tries to get rid of T to get Pence, but Democrats prevent it because they'd rather live with a bumbling clown than a "normal" Republican like Pence who could actually get right-leaning legislation passed (rich-tax-cuts & dereg).

            The Orange Monkey Wrench sure makes politics interesting. Maybe both parties deserve to be tripped up a bit. Let's just hope he doesn't break something important on the journey.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @04:49PM (1 child)

              by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @04:49PM (#491724)

              I hope he does break something important.

              It's the only way to shock Americans out of their conspiracy-clouded complacency.

              • (Score: 4, Insightful) by DannyB on Monday April 10 2017, @07:13PM

                by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 10 2017, @07:13PM (#491850) Journal

                I hope he breaks something important affecting rich people. Bigly.

                --
                People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
            • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Monday April 10 2017, @05:43PM (1 child)

              by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 10 2017, @05:43PM (#491769) Journal

              This is the best situation I can imagine. The Republicans try, desperately, to impeach Trump. Blocked at every step by the Democrats. Pence doesn't end up in power -- because he might be somewhat more effective than Trump at breaking things, and because he believes gays can be cured with electric shocks.

              Trump remains in power. Is even more ineffective because both parties in congress work against him. By 2018, the Republicans are tainted with the stench that will not wash off. Hey, they could have invoked emergency measures even after this clown was nominated. The party of Trump rather than Lincoln.

              Maybe both parties might wake up and realize that the offices they hold have a duty to the public attached to them. Something called Public Service. And I'm not pointing my fingers at any single party.

              --
              People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
              • (Score: 2) by bob_super on Monday April 10 2017, @10:33PM

                by bob_super (1357) on Monday April 10 2017, @10:33PM (#491979)

                > The party of Trump rather than Lincoln.

                Nixon, Ford, Reagan, H.W., W, Trump
                vs
                Kennedy, Johnson, Carter, Clinton, Obama

                In the last 56 years, that's quite an imbalance. If Johnson didn't have Vietnam...

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @06:32PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @06:32PM (#491811)

              If grump is impeached that shit will smear all over pence too.
              Pence might still be in office, but GOP political capital will be nil.
              They won't be able to get anything done either.

              The republicans were only a unified front when they were opposed to obama. But now that the black man is out of the white house, the asshole-faction of the party is in open war with the party members who still have some shred of decency. For example, last week Kansas missed a veto-override in support of medicaid expansion (aka obamacare) by just 3 votes. [reuters.com] That's Kansas,FFS, as in the state that is so insanely ideologically republican that they keep screwing themselves with punitive spending cuts that have killed their economy. [motherjones.com]

              Impeaching grump will kill gop congress members chances of re-election just due to the fallout of admitting what all the sane people can already see. Its going to take something monumentally bad, like a video of grump fucking a high-school boy, before the republicans will seriously try to impeach him. Their position is so fragile anyway, they don't dare rock the boat.

            • (Score: 2) by Thexalon on Monday April 10 2017, @10:28PM (1 child)

              by Thexalon (636) on Monday April 10 2017, @10:28PM (#491976)

              The proper solution, of course, is one that was used towards the end of the Nixon administration:
              1. Impeach and remove the VP first for the nefarious stuff he's likely involved in.
              2. Replace him with somebody who's not a complete nutter near the end of his career, who will simply try to finish out the term and not run for re-election.
              3. Then impeach and remove the POTUS. The guy you picked in step 2 now becomes president.

              And I agree both major parties deserve to be tripped up. More than a bit: Neither one has the approval of a majority of Americans (count me among the at least 10% that hate both of them). The trouble is, I don't think that the Orange Monkey Wrench is the person who will actually do that: His only real interest throughout his entire life has been to make money and publicity for himself. The problem that both major parties have is that they sold out the public interest decades ago and show no signs of reforming themselves, and the POTUS doesn't see any of that as a problem.

              About the only political figure that has majority support right now is Bernie Sanders, and I think that's in part because a lot of people think the complaint from Democrats that he's "not a real Democrat" is a good start.

              --
              The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 11 2017, @02:06PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 11 2017, @02:06PM (#492260)

                About the only political figure that has majority support right now is Bernie Sanders, and I think that's in part because a lot of people think the complaint from Democrats that he's "not a real Democrat" is a good start.

                Its also in part that nobody has seriously campaigned against him. Yeah there are the hysterical bernie bros who think the DNC conspired against him, but when it comes down to evidence its a bunch of trivial shit that only the delusionally hyper-sensitive would think made much of a difference. Pissy emails and downplayed debates, OMG! Sanders has not been subject to balls-out opposition. For example, nobody has heard about how his wife basically bankrupted Burlington College because of some really bad real-estate deals she initiated while running the school. Whether you think that's fair criticism of Bernie doesn't matter, campaigns aren't about what's fair, they are about what sticks with the public and that story is one that could easily stick if a PAC with a couple of million dollars made the effort.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 11 2017, @02:27PM (3 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 11 2017, @02:27PM (#492269)

        A common strategy is the house of cards. It is a sort of dead man's switch for self-destruction of the country with the dictator's presence being the key stabilizing influence. Remove the dictator and the whole thing collapses into chaos,

        It is not a strategy to prevent their removal. Its a strategy to deal with the fact that civic institutions are a roadblock to autocracy. Dictators dismantle institutions because they aren't set up to obey their every whim. The fact that it makes society more fragile is a side-effect, not the intention.

        You'll notice that Grump is trying really hard to weaken american institutions that don't roll over for him too. Its easily visible in his tweets like saying "so-called judge" and all this hysteria about the derp state. But his decision to clean house at various agencies like State and DoJ while simultaneously failing to even nominate appointees for hundreds of sub-cabinet positions has the effect of making them weak too, so weak will have a tough time lobbying for their own budgets in congress and of course his budget plan calls for drastic funding cuts to those very agencies.

        • (Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday April 11 2017, @04:29PM (2 children)

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday April 11 2017, @04:29PM (#492337) Journal

          It is not a strategy to prevent their removal. Its a strategy to deal with the fact that civic institutions are a roadblock to autocracy. Dictators dismantle institutions because they aren't set up to obey their every whim. The fact that it makes society more fragile is a side-effect, not the intention.

          This behavior meets the definition of strategy when it is thought/planned out, so no, I disagree on your first comment. As to civic institutions, they are usually replaced rather than dismantled (there remains courts, schools, associations, etc, but these are ordered towards the furtherance of the state - and they usually have some sort of balance of power so that no group or agency gets too powerful). Further, there are structures that can't be dismantled, like ethnicity. In Iraq and Yugoslavia, the system had been set up so that ethnic groups were in relatively peaceful conflict with each other.

          The dictator can reduce the potential for united rebellion along the lines of ethnicity by careful cultivation of ethnic conflict of interest and stoking distrust of other ethnicities.

          You'll notice that Grump is trying really hard to weaken american institutions that don't roll over for him too. Its easily visible in his tweets like saying "so-called judge" and all this hysteria about the derp state. But his decision to clean house at various agencies like State and DoJ while simultaneously failing to even nominate appointees for hundreds of sub-cabinet positions has the effect of making them weak too, so weak will have a tough time lobbying for their own budgets in congress and of course his budget plan calls for drastic funding cuts to those very agencies.

          You're trying hard to carry the water here. I don't believe most of that crap would qualify as a civic institution. It's just places public funding goes to be spent. As such, it really doesn't matter if there are dozens or thousands, or the alleged purpose of the spending. Second, everyone cleans house at agencies like State and DoJ. You won't find a president who hasn't put in their own ambassadors or prosecutors, for example.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 11 2017, @05:31PM (1 child)

            by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 11 2017, @05:31PM (#492374)

            It is not a strategy to prevent their removal. Its a strategy to deal with the fact that civic institutions are a roadblock to autocracy.

            This behavior meets the definition of strategy when it is thought/planned out, so no, I disagree on your first comment.

            Are you really that fucking dumb?
            I said it is a strategy to accomplish something else. And your rebuttal is "its still a strategy so you are wrong!"

            You're trying hard to carry the water here. I don't believe most of that crap would qualify as a civic institution.

            All that means is that you don't know jackshit about civics. Which is no surprise. Its always the most ignorant who are the most confident.

            • (Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday April 12 2017, @12:49PM

              by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday April 12 2017, @12:49PM (#492715) Journal

              I said it is a strategy to accomplish something else. And your rebuttal is "its still a strategy so you are wrong!"

              And I disagree. It's not even that hard to describe how the strategy would work. Hussein for example played the three largest ethnic groups (Sunni, Shi'ite, and Kurd) of Iraq against each other. Thus, for a time he eliminated cross-ethnic collaboration as a source of potential rebellion.

              All that means is that you don't know jackshit about civics. Which is no surprise. Its always the most ignorant who are the most confident.

              A civic institution is something that encourages citizens to contribute to society - for example, courts through the jury system, voting through the election systems of the various states, and a huge quantity and variety of non profits.

              You didn't actually mention a civic institution in your post and instead slid in the far broader and nebulous category of "American institution". Departments of State and Justice aren't civic institutions and the turnover that Trump implemented in those organizations is not unusual. And your discussion of subcabinet posts indicates you completely miss the boat. In fact, a fair portion of civic institutions in the US aren't publicly funded at all.

              And merely being an American institution doesn't magically make something a good thing. After all, the Mafia and the War on Drugs remain American institutions, but not institutions with collectively value. So sure, you could be right just like a stopped clock is right twice a day. But maybe we should try to reason here?

              Moving on, you also don't get that the very "institutions" you complain about not being supported, can be unsupported for other reasons than merely autocracy. Federal agencies consume public funding to exist, and thus, have built-in costs in addition to their alleged benefits. And it's not at all a stretch that someone who has campaigned on reducing government spending would try to reduce government spending by targeting these very agencies.

    • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @02:50PM (6 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @02:50PM (#491650)

      If it doesnt lead to WW3. But it could very well, it was a dangerous risk to take by the US. Its pretty obvious that the US is in bed with many other governments that do worse, such as Saudi Arabia, and China, and now even sort of with Cuba. So why now the focus on Syria? Its pretty obvious that the US military industrial complex wants to provoke something. The tears over the children were crocodile tears, I gaurantee the US elites give a damn. its agiprop, Worse happens every day all over the world by governments the US supports. The gassing is horrible, dont get me wrong, assuming the information that is given is actually accurate, I dare say that information that comes out of the war mongering liberal-neocon complex in the USA is suspect.Trump originally promised to keep the US out of more wars. This is not living up to the promise, this is clearly on a track towards a conflict with Rusia and would make it more difficult to eliminate ISIS, actually sets it back because Assad and Russia were doing much of the work in that regard. the liberals included Clinton celebrated the strike, what does that tell you? That they are war hawks themselves and that Liberals are violent war faring fanatics no diffferent from neocons. The trump that was much hated, was the Trump that opposed the US getting into more wars, to create a cooperative relationship with Assad and Russia in eliminating ISIS, bringing stability to the region and reinstalling Assad and Russia who would stop ISIS and do what they did before, which was protect minorities in Syria. After Trump has begun to morph into Clinton-Bush with warfaring aggression pleasing the military industrial complex, suddenly the liberal started fawning over him. Trumps alt-right supporters are defensive domestically, non-aggressive globally, meaning to avoid contributing to conflict. This drove the left and the neocon nuts. The left in reality wants the US to be bankrupted by endless wars globally but overrun domestically with immigraton invasions. The left hated the alt right because they opposed the destruction of america with immigration invasions. The left are violent savages who are using immigration invasions as a weapon against American christians that they hate so much while using foreign policy to prop u extreme islam globally to destroy whats left of Chritian communities in the middle east. Why did Obama allow so few Syrian christians in, and used it instead to import ISIS? Because Obama created ISIS to destroy christian communities. Ironically what the US is doing by creting a void ISIS will fill it is cauing the massacre of christians en masse in Syria. Obama did this in country after country and is responsible for the killing of thousands. One thread runs through it all, the US elites hate christians and like radical Islam, nearly all of their policies have been geared towards enabling radical Islam to take over the middle east by removing moderate stabilsing governments. For instance Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt which would have unleashed a persecution of Christians after years of Christians being protected under Mubarak. The Muslim Brotherhood had infiltrated the State Department under Obama making it all very clear that the Obama admin and really the US elite have contempt for moderate islam and christians and is strengthening radical islam. The feminist left in the US are basically war mongering islamophile fanatics who want to destroy the christian family to weaken the christian world so it an be taken over by Islam and the christians and can be exterminated.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @03:04PM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @03:04PM (#491654)

        Addendum: The reason US elite want war on Assad is to create a power void so ISIS can finally take over. US supports ISIS through Syrian Free Army which is an ISIS front. The US Elite want war with Russia because this would destroy whats left of the West, allowing it to be overtaken by Radical Islam Globalism. A co-rulership by global superpowers of Radical Islam and Communist China is their plan for globalisation, along with extermination of White Christians and their replacement with Muslim and other third world immigrant invasions. The elite envision a white free world where the white christian has been eliminated. The US Elite hate Rusia because he is an orthodox christian and does not worship transsexuals so therefore he is a strong christian threat to globalist radical Islam. US Liberals hate the christian family, but they are actually tools of the radical islamic globalism and the US elite who are in fact on the side of Islamic globalism, want to exterminate the white christian in America and in Europe, and want to turn the west into a third world islamic theocracy.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @07:18PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @07:18PM (#491859)

          aaaaaaand off the deep end

      • (Score: 2) by curunir_wolf on Monday April 10 2017, @03:59PM

        by curunir_wolf (4772) on Monday April 10 2017, @03:59PM (#491692)

        The US MIC came up with a plan years ago. It's behind schedule, but they are still working on that plan [youtube.com]

        .

        --
        I am a crackpot
      • (Score: 2) by LoRdTAW on Monday April 10 2017, @04:08PM (1 child)

        by LoRdTAW (3755) on Monday April 10 2017, @04:08PM (#491701) Journal

        Line breaks. Paragraphs. Use them.

        • (Score: 3, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @04:11PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @04:11PM (#491702)

          Line breaks. Paragraphs. Use them.

          Medications too.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @06:11PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @06:11PM (#491789)

        Someone call the White House, tell them we have the wall here and they can just drop it on the border. No one's getting through this one!

  • (Score: 1) by higuita on Monday April 10 2017, @02:17PM (18 children)

    by higuita (2465) on Monday April 10 2017, @02:17PM (#491634)

    Both sides in Syria have used chemical weapons, so one reporting the air chemical bombing vs the other reporting that they bombed a ammo stash and that id must had chemical weapons stored are both credible.

    US bombing without trying to find more is more than a blind trust one side (the side they support), it is direct support for their supported side now that they are losing ground.

    do not kid yourself, this is cold war again, with US trying to remove Russia support on the zone and clear a powerful Israel foe in the zone. On the Russia side, keeping their strategic bases open, getting easy Syrian money on weapons and of course, stop ISIL and other radicals, as Russia also have problems with then and better stop then now than later

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Monday April 10 2017, @03:06PM (17 children)

      by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 10 2017, @03:06PM (#491655) Journal

      Interesting, that you seem to be the only poster who questions whether Assad gassed that town.

      I lean more toward the idea that Saudi Arabia supplied the sarin to the rebels, and that Assad's strike only destroyed the containers. Couple years ago, the rebels had some gas, and they simply mishandled the containers, breaking them open.

      The US bombs for any reason, and for no reason. All we need is some pretext to toss explosives around.

      • (Score: 4, Informative) by bob_super on Monday April 10 2017, @04:01PM (2 children)

        by bob_super (1357) on Monday April 10 2017, @04:01PM (#491694)

        The problem is the minor fact that the two sarin precursors are usually kept separate, and mixed at the last moment, which makes dispersal by accidental bombing pretty difficult.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 11 2017, @08:16AM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 11 2017, @08:16AM (#492175)

          Imagine that they are improperly stored, containers with one component stacked in the same room as containers with the other components. A bomb hits at breaks open the containers.

          What would happen when the components mix?

          Apart from that, allow me to quote your own post: "Usually". Meaning when stored by a well-trained army. Which they were not in this case, so the second explanation is that the incompetents simply didn't know or care to store them correctly.

          Either way, I don't believe a word of what the US government says about who has which weapons for as long as I remember the Iraq WMD lie.

          • (Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday April 12 2017, @12:59PM

            by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday April 12 2017, @12:59PM (#492718) Journal

            Imagine that they are improperly stored, containers with one component stacked in the same room as containers with the other components. A bomb hits at breaks open the containers.

            What would happen when the components mix?

            You still have the problem of getting them into the air. But that's a reasonable explanation which would explain why there have been these intermittent chemical weapons attacks/releases for the past five or so years.

      • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @04:05PM (2 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @04:05PM (#491697)

        I lean more toward the idea that Saudi Arabia supplied the sarin to the rebels

        I lean more towards the fact that it was chlorine (possibly mixed with phosgene). Sarin is not water soluble and the western funded, oscar winning, terrorist PR agency pictured helping the victims were not wearing appropriate clothing to be dealing with a sarin attack.

        Anybody who cares can and should research it for themselves -- which is more than the majority of so-called journalists have done.

      • (Score: 2) by tibman on Monday April 10 2017, @04:43PM (5 children)

        by tibman (134) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 10 2017, @04:43PM (#491719)

        Sarin doesn't have a long shelf-life. Typically weeks or months. It can go up to 5 years if it's very pure and uses stabilizers (read this from wikipedia). It also needs to be mixed to work correctly. Blowing up the containers might mix the contents but it probably wouldn't be very effective. Totally agree with the US bombing for stupid reasons. People at the top just flexing.

        --
        SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
        • (Score: 2, Insightful) by fustakrakich on Monday April 10 2017, @04:54PM

          by fustakrakich (6150) on Monday April 10 2017, @04:54PM (#491729) Journal

          Totally agree with the US bombing for stupid reasons.

          Stupid? Hardly [cnn.com]

          --
          La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
        • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday April 10 2017, @05:02PM (3 children)

          by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 10 2017, @05:02PM (#491741) Journal

          And, you have hit on one of the reasons why we should have known that Saddam Hussein didn't have a lot of leftover stocks of NBC agents. Hussein never had high quality dehydration facilities. We knew that, because we sold him most of his stuff. Hussein couldn't get two years shelf life out of his chem and bio agents. And, we found the proof of that when we went into Iraq - all that was left were a few unreliable containers, mostly in landfills, that posed more threat to anyone handling them than to any "victims".

          I wonder - how many people wish that Hussein were still around to keep the lid on his simmering kettle? Sure, he was an evil sumbitch, but he was better than what we have now . . .

          • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Monday April 10 2017, @05:13PM (2 children)

            by DeathMonkey (1380) on Monday April 10 2017, @05:13PM (#491751) Journal

            "America must not ignore the threat gathering against us. Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof, the smoking gun that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud." - GW Bush

            Pretending he was talking about chemical weapons in the first place is a bit revisionist.

            • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday April 10 2017, @05:21PM (1 child)

              by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 10 2017, @05:21PM (#491755) Journal

              At various times, he used everything. He referred to the mustard gas used against the Kurds, as well as the Iranians. Lots of vague references to nuclear arms, along with that forged yellow cake document. Bush made multiple speeches to stir public opinion, and his various talking heads made more speeches. Every possible boogeyman was trotted out in the runup to the invasion. Bush was dead set on invading, and he ignored any intelligence that may have dissuaded him, and blew every scrap of scary intelligence all out of proportion. If not Bush personally, then one talking head or another did it for him.

              Then, there was the anthrax scare. And, the beltway sniper. So much crazy shit came together in a short period of time - but of course, there is no common thread between them . . .

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @05:33PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @05:33PM (#491764)

                Let's just use the simple truth please:

                Another war crime in a long history of war crimes.

      • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @06:40PM (2 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @06:40PM (#491819)

        Interesting, that you seem to be the only poster who questions whether Assad gassed that town.

        Are you joking?
        In the two other stories about this on soylent the people pushing that conspiracy theory got +5 mods.

        Here's the thing - Assad has been using chemical weapons on a regular basis for years now. [archive.org] One more time is not out of the ordinary.

        • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @07:00PM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @07:00PM (#491837)

          assad has been *accused* of using chemical weapons multiple times, by a bunch of lying whores.

      • (Score: 2) by Thexalon on Monday April 10 2017, @10:38PM (1 child)

        by Thexalon (636) on Monday April 10 2017, @10:38PM (#491985)

        Interesting, that you seem to be the only poster who questions whether Assad gassed that town.

        I agree that we don't know who gassed that town. The first casualty of war is the truth, and when it comes to atrocities what's common is for all sides to commit them to some degree and all sides to claim that only the other guys commit them.

        Of course, for all intents and purposes, it doesn't matter who actually did it, because Assad attacking innocent civilians became the version of the truth being used to make policy. Just like the explosion of the Maine, or the Gulf of Tonkin incident, or the numerous other pretexts for blowing up other people's countries. About the only time it might matter is that many years from now, if a side other than the people who did this attack wins, somebody might be called to account at the International Criminal Court.

        --
        The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 11 2017, @02:20AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 11 2017, @02:20AM (#492077)

          You know what?

          Even if this was some sort of bullshit false-flag conspiracy, there is literally no question that Assad has been bombing the shit out of civilians for years now.

          That this one time Grump saw pictures of babies dying from nerve gas doesn't really matter. Assad has blown the arms and legs off 100x more babies than that. I don't think Grump's response will change anything for the better, but getting lost in this conspiracy theory about who gassed who plays right into Assad's hands since the 9999 other bombs were definitely his.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @08:05PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @08:05PM (#491901)

    The gas attack was probably by america which is how we do things in merka land. Fuel all sides to a civil war when Exxon wants something they have, such as natural gas in this instance.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @09:54PM (5 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @09:54PM (#491957)

    The media has been telling me that the Trump Administration has numerous dubious ties to Russia and Putin will be pushing Trump around. I don't see how Trump pissing off Putin in this fashion advances that narrative... someone help me out here.

    Wait, I've got it. Trump ordered the missile strike because Putin ordered him to as a classic bit of misdirection! Genius!

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @10:15PM (4 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 10 2017, @10:15PM (#491968)

      Nah.
      More like Putin had Assad do the attack to give Turmp a chance to play-act independence.
      After all, the only thing that happened was minor damage to a runaway that was operational again in about 12 hours. [vanityfair.com]

      Win-win!

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 11 2017, @05:24AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 11 2017, @05:24AM (#492146)

        More like US testing out Russian air defenses, which were not completely impenetrable. Russia is upgrading as a response. The missile volley was pre-planned before the gas event. The gas event was probably organized by third or fourth party intel operatives. The question is whether this is a one off, which means it was a way to play the neo-conservatives in the US and placate them temporarily, or a prelude to ground invasion, of which rumors abound currently.

      • (Score: 2) by urza9814 on Tuesday April 11 2017, @01:46PM (2 children)

        by urza9814 (3954) on Tuesday April 11 2017, @01:46PM (#492248) Journal

        Nah, Trump doesn't have the capability for that level of planning. Putin would probably have to talk to the the generals directly to put together a plan like that, which seems unlikely.

        The truth is just that Trump doesn't have a plan. Trump mostly just repeats whatever the last person he spoke to said. So if he talks to Putin, he'll spend all day talking about how great Russia is. If he talks to Xi, suddenly he loves China. If we could manage to get him on the phone with Assad he'd probably end up talking about the need to make peace with our friends in Syria! Someone else mentioned above that he DID just meet with China and surely they're happy about anything we can do to block Russia...so that alone could explain this sudden need to attack Russia (or at least Russia's interests.)

        http://www.vox.com/2016/8/29/12691276/trump-believe-flop-flop [vox.com]

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 11 2017, @01:55PM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 11 2017, @01:55PM (#492253)

          I do believe the flip-flop.
          I was making fun of the OP's conspiracy fantasy by inventing an equally well-supported conspiracy fantasy.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 12 2017, @12:29AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 12 2017, @12:29AM (#492546)

            OP's conspiracy fantasy

            Whoosh!

(1)