SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for chromas
President Trump announced Friday night that the U.S. and its allies had launched attacks on Syria in response to an alleged chemical weapons attack last week by President Bashar Assad's regime.
In televised remarks from the White House, Trump said the attacks were underway, and that Great Britain and France were also taking part.
The president did not provide details, but U.S. warships in the Mediterranean Sea, armed with cruise missiles, were in position to strike. British and French forces were also in place.
[...] The president said the U.S. prepared to sustain effort until the Syrian regime stops using chemical weapons.
[...] In the days leading up to the U.S. attack, Russia had warned that it would defend its troops in Syria. This has raised fears of a possible direct clash of U.S. and Russian forces.
Source: https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/04/13/601794830/u-s-launches-attacks-on-syria
Also at Bloomberg and The Guardian
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Bobs on Saturday April 14 2018, @02:34AM (18 children)
For background on the situation, I recommend the book American Hero [wikipedia.org] or the movie Wag the Dog [wikipedia.org].
Acting to stop Assad from using Chemical weapons on civilians can be good, but the important part is the follow-up: dropping bombs is easy (and profitable for the contractors), the hard part is improving the situation and avoiding blowback.
Last time Trump dropped some bombs to "stop chemical weapons" we spent $100 million+ to shut down an airport for a few hours.
(Score: 0, Offtopic) by Ethanol-fueled on Saturday April 14 2018, @02:58AM (3 children)
HAHHAHAHAHA
Oh man.
(Score: 1) by Ethanol-fueled on Saturday April 14 2018, @02:59AM (2 children)
Uh shit....NEVERMORE.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 14 2018, @10:19AM (1 child)
Better if people just knew about the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) and the Eretz Israel project. And for some immediate-term analysis people could do worse than tune into the X22 Report.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Saturday April 14 2018, @02:35PM
I'll point out that the web face of PNAC has changed pretty drastically since 2002/2003. The goals are more subdued now. The site isn't so 'in your face' as it was. A person might believe that they have matured or something. Well, some people might believe that. What I think is, enough people objected, enough people were repelled, that PNAC realized they needed to cover up their better/baser side.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Saturday April 14 2018, @04:13AM (2 children)
>$100 million+ to shut down an airport for a few hours.
is cheap, compared to the blowback from any military deployment.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by Bobs on Sunday April 15 2018, @04:13PM (1 child)
True.
But what was accomplished by the attack?
By a number reports, the attack was so impotent that Assad was emboldened in his use of chemical weapons.
So the 2017 attack/response by Trump was a net negative.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Sunday April 15 2018, @06:16PM
As released to public knowledge, or full spectrum?
Which could actually be a strategic move to draw Assad out into making a bigger mistake on the international stage...
As so many military interventions are - from some perspectives. From other perspectives the same intervention can be win-win for several parties.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 4, Insightful) by TheRaven on Saturday April 14 2018, @10:16AM (3 children)
The New Statesman raised an interesting point yesterday: the civil war in Syria is estimated to have killed at least tens of thousands of civilians, probably over a hundred thousand. Why are we willing to intervene when they're killed with chemical weapons but not when they're killed with conventional ones? I suspect most people would consider being shot and bleeding to death on the street not to be much worse than being killed with chlorine, yet apparently we're fine with the former but not the latter.
sudo mod me up
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 14 2018, @11:21AM
Because chemical weapons are banned by treaty that Syria accepted ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_Weapons_Convention [wikipedia.org] )
And they're an easier false flag that can trigger "International action".
The real truth is the USA has been wanting to overthrow Syria for years. They're not there to stabilize stuff. The USA helped START the war in the first place.
They funded the opposition in Syria: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-syria-wikileaks-idUSTRE73H0E720110418 [reuters.com]
And when the civil war finally started they supplied weapons to the rebels:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/21/world/middleeast/cia-said-to-aid-in-steering-arms-to-syrian-rebels.html?pagewanted=all [nytimes.com]
The USA also went in there and they aren't there to fight the ISIS at all, they want ISIS contained, not destroyed.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-sh/raqqas_dirty_secret [bbc.co.uk]
They want the "fire" of ISIS to burn Syria. They don't want that fire put out. That's why they never seemed to have as much success as the Russians when the Russians fought the ISIS.
The USA sponsors Muslim extremists to overthrow Syria. Assad is bad but which of the USA sponsored extremist groups will be better at ruling Syria? Just look at what happened to Libya after the USA's "success" at removing Gaddafi. Then bleeding hearts cry over open slave trade in Libya but that wouldn't have been allowed under Gaddafi's regime. https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2017/11/27/clinton-ponders-2020-run-lets-not-forget-her-real-libya-scandal-glenn-reynolds-column/895853001/ [usatoday.com]
The USA is the corrupt World Cop that goes about killing and pretending to be the hero.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 14 2018, @11:56AM
Plus, we arm Saudi Arabia who are bombing Yemeni civilians suffering from famine and the worst cholera outbreak in human history.
(Score: 3, Informative) by corey on Saturday April 14 2018, @10:23PM
Yeah that was the main point made in this opinion piece:
The Syria bombing is a disgraceful act disguised as a noble gesture
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/14/syria-airstrikes-bombing-assad-war [theguardian.com]
(Score: 1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 14 2018, @11:02AM (5 children)
Saddam has been winning the war. Why would he use chem weapons when he's been doing so well at killing people without those weapons.
Another chem weapon false flag also happened last year when Trump was already being friendlier with Assad and Assad was having lots of success (with Russia's help) fighting ISIS and the US supported rebels.
(Score: 4, Informative) by Runaway1956 on Saturday April 14 2018, @02:54PM (1 child)
modded up because I'm not convinced. Hell, people, my own government would be willing to stage a false flag chemical attack, if it advanced their agenda. Who remembers how we convinced the American public that we needed to go into Vietnam? https://www.usni.org/magazines/navalhistory/2008-02/truth-about-tonkin [usni.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 14 2018, @07:11PM
I am sure there are even older examples in American History as well, not including the conflicts with Native Americans, Mexicans, and other groups with a preexisting stake in regions we found it lucrative to control.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 14 2018, @06:56PM
But anyway on the subject of Saddam yes he had WMD before, but that's because the USA and the allies "had the receipts" - they helped him get them. But he got rid of them.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 17 2018, @02:02AM
it's well known to anyone that bothered to follow the details that the chemical weapons found in iraq were sold to iraq by the US. the chemical weapons the US soldiers breathed were US ordinance sold to iraq and blown up likely by the US, likely to cover their asses for selling the shit in the first place. a few thousand soldiers die? big deal, right? we'll just blame it on saddam who was bullied into the damn war when kuwait started stealing their oil underground, btw.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 17 2018, @02:05AM
some poor dumb slave modded you troll! lmao! thanks modder that was hilarious.
(Score: 2) by SpockLogic on Saturday April 14 2018, @03:10PM
I too thought of "Wag the Dog". Its the perfect opportunity for the the spotlight to be taken off the Mueller investigation into the criminal activities of the Trump crime family.
I'm not suggesting that the Trump crime family instigated the events in Syria. That would require planning and intelligence on their part, thus assuming facts not in evidence.
Overreacting is one thing, sticking your head up your ass hoping the problem goes away is another - edIII