Trump warns of missile against Syria; lays into Assad ally Russia

Why is Trump telegraphing what the US will do? I thought it was better to be unpredictable. Where did I get that idea? Trump.

Dude couldn't be consistent if his life depended on it.

Who conducts foreign policy this way. It's bizarre -- and, no doubt, dangerous. God help us....

I’m so, so confused, the man doesn’t do anything, the left have a mental breakdown, he does something their hair catches fire. Trump wants to get out of Syria, Howard Dean calls him a coward, he does a military strike, he’s a warmonger. Such a confused bunch Lol

"Russia vows to shoot down any and all missiles fired at Syria. Get ready Russia, because they will be coming, nice and new and 'smart!'" Trump wrote on Twitter.

Well, we know the missiles certainly are smarter than Trump...

Well, we know the missiles certainly are smarter than Trump...

Their laser guided, they should be. Hit that target!

Syria is a mess. It would still have been a mess even if the US under Obama had committed itself - and good thing he didn't. Turkey wants to crush the Kurdish independence movement, Russia wants to safeguard its only Mediterranean port, and Iran wants to take over de facto control of the country. They're all long way from fulfilling their goals, and many, many more on all sides will continue to die horrific deaths, but they will keep at it as the result is, if not existential (at least excluding the Kurds), at least very important. Trump should do no more than Obama had done, keeping as distant an arm as possible. Threatening the Russians in such a direct manner is simply foolhardy.

GWB handed Syria to Iran by his invasion of Iraq. Iran will likely be unable to resist the temptation of trying to pacify the country, much as Russia and, in turn, the US has done with Afghanistan, and this will bleed Iran dry. Foolish moves are being made on all sides. Trump

...would be wise simply to stay the hell away.

Funny comments, Trump is now doing exactly what the left want, which is conflict with Russia. And they are still not happy. Perhaps War War 3 will leave them satisfied?

For once I have to side with Trump. I really hope he sticks it to Putin. For all his faults, I'll still take Trump over that psychopath Putin. SOMETHING needs to be done about Vlad and his "Renfield" Assad.

Well, at least Trump isn't sending Putin a box of chocolates with a congratulatory note. At the same time, it would be better if Trump wasn't so over the top about everything he tweets about doing.

There's a right way to be strong and there's a wrong way to be strong, Trump being the the latter. Hopefully, Trump is listening to Sec. of Def. Mattis, one of the few steady hands and heads still on deck.

It's funny that conservatives oversimplify things. It isn't that Trump is or isn't doing things, it's his hypocrisy and the hypocrisy of his supporters.

He rails on Obama - with cheers from his supporters - for telegraphing what the US will do and then Trump hires sky writers to let everyone know what the US will do.

He accused Hillary of being a warmonger - to cheers from his supporters- and then goes on Twitter tirades pushing the world towards war with the DPRK.

He claims the US shouldn't be involved in Syria's civil war - to cheers from his supporters - and then wants to take military action against Syria.

@bas4 Hit that target!

Are you hoping for war? I thought that's what GoTrumpers said Clinton wanted and one of the reasons you opposed her. After all, the GoTrumpers bought the RT line about the no-fly zone bringing WW3. 

@comment Trump is now doing exactly what the left want, which is conflict with Russia

I recall many posters, whose expressed views represented a range of political beliefs, worrying about ‘conflicts’ with Russia. The ‘conflicts’ mentioned were primarily in regard to Russian meddling in elections and ongoing cyberwarfare with them.

I hope you’re not stretching things to mean people concerned about the meddling wanted military actions.

Funny comments, Trump is now doing exactly what the left want, which is conflict with Russia.

What? I'd imagine the left, whoever they are, don't want war. The people who want war are the American Military Industrial complex, the same as always.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/why-america-needs-war/5328631

A clear and concise article, as true today as it was in 2003 when it was written.

All this for an unverified gas attack? That's quite a defense for human rights. If the OPCW find there was no chemical attack, is Trump, the UK and France going to turn their sights on Israel for their sniping and murdering of innocent civilians?

So much stability...

Whatever the west does it's 7 years too late !

The left decidedly does not want conflict with Russia. There is a huge difference between conflict with Russia and not bending over for Russia.

But Maddog Mattis admits the US Govt has no evidence of gas attacks in Syria.

http://www.newsweek.com/now-mattis-admits-there-was-no-evidence-assad-using-poison-gas-his-people-801542

I hate wars, all of them!

No one likes or wants war.

He rails on Obama - with cheers from his supporters - for telegraphing what the US will do and then Trump hires sky writers to let everyone know what the US will do.

Ok, I’ll give you that one.

He accused Hillary of being a warmonger - to cheers from his supporters- and then goes on Twitter tirades pushing the world towards war with the DPRK.

He doesn’t want to go to war with NK, he wants a peaceful outcome, but since the last 3 Presidents were taken hook, line and sinker by this regime, Trump doesn’t want to (and justifiably so) make the same mistake, this time he’s being pushed by Democrats to do something, but the moment he does, then as usual, the left will scream he’s a warmonger, he declared war without going to the U.N., the typical whine tantrum, the right doesn’t want him to get tied down. And by the way, how do we know the bombings took place recently? Who are were bombing again? As much as I hate Assad he does protect the Christian minority and has hit ISIS with massive attacks. So what is the objective? Do something you’re damned, allowing innocent women and children to die and stand by and do nothing, you’re damned.

He claims the US shouldn't be involved in Syria's civil war - to cheers from his supporters - and then wants to take military action against Syria.

I really don’t see anyone cheering. As a parent, i don’t like to see the suffering of kids, but if he does, no boots on the ground, bomb the heck out of Assad’s air fleet, give a time and an objective and I can deal with that.

I hope you’re not stretching things to mean people concerned about the meddling wanted military actions.

All part of the same scheme. I know a lot of people here claim they don't want war, and that's commendable. Yet, they allow themselves to be manipulated in such a way that war becomes inevitable. The meddling is far less than the USA does on a routine basis to Russia and other countries. And the concern about meddling doesn't extend to the Clinton Foundation, only to evidence that points toward Trump.

The left has a pretty ugly track record when it comes to starting wars, ironic given the pacifist banner they claim to wear. Eisenhower long ago warned about both parties doing the bidding of the military/industrial complex. He warned Kennedy about the CIA's increasing powerful and secret activities to aid that complex. Kennedy spoke about dismantling the CIA, Kennedys term ended violently.

I would hope that reasonable people would treat everything they are told by their government with a great deal of suspicion. But it seems that skepticism gets turned off when it's their favorite political party speaking.

Unfortunately, it seems the only things that will bring sanity back to the US is for the US to suffer an enormous war with massive destruction and death at home. That's a horrible thing, but people just never seem to learn. The whole world will suffer from this insanity.

Someone that doesn't want to be stung by bees doesn't go poking a beehive. Someone that doesn't want war with a country doesn't insult that country's leader and brag about the fire and fury/big buttons.

As for those claiming Dems want trump to do something but then complain when he does, see my 8:00 post.

Donny's supporters cheered when he said we shouldn't be involved in Syria, now they are cheering him for getting involved. Consistency at its finest.

This is a false flag ploy from Syrian rebels trying to sway public opinion in the West.

Dont fall for it. Assad may be an animal, but what would replace him much, much worse.

Donny's supporters cheered when he said we shouldn't be involved in Syria, now they are cheering him for getting involved. 

Examples? I haven't seen this at all.

Wether you like or hate Trump, wether you're a "consecutive" or "liberal", 99% of you support military action in Syria. You only disagree on how it's done and who's calling the shots.

I remember the day that most people realized that the Middle East could never be fixed by America getting militarily involved, aka, war. I guess those days are long gone.

https://www.google.co.jp/amp/s/www.haaretz.com/amp/middle-east-news/syria/trump-s-syria-threats-directly-contradict-his-campaign-vows-1.5490349

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/daily-202/2017/04/11/daily-202-reflexive-partisanship-drives-polling-lurch-on-syria-strikes/58ec27d4e9b69b3a72331e6e/?utm_term=.45e92a22fa13

Someone that doesn't want to be stung by bees doesn't go poking a beehive. Someone that doesn't want war with a country doesn't insult that country's leader and brag about the fire and fury/big buttons.

What about crossing Red Lines and not following through on it looking like a kitty cat.

As for those claiming Dems want trump to do something but then complain when he does, see my 8:00 post.

Then there shouldn’t be a debate since the Dems thinks he should do something.

Donny's supporters cheered when he said we shouldn't be involved in Syria, now they are cheering him for getting involved. Consistency at its finest.

I don’t know a single person that applauds that, maybe some of these establishment big wigs like Graham probably.

Obama's no longer president. He hasn't been for over a year and had nothing to do with Trump's actions towards the DPRK.

The Dems think Trump shouldn't be hypocritical.

What about crossing Red Lines and not following through on it looking like a kitty cat.

Obama drew up plans an took them to Congress. Republicans said NO. It’s been explained to you before with sources given for confirmation.

Obama drew up plans an took them to Congress. Republicans said NO. It’s been explained to you before with sources given for confirmation.

Obama never listened to Congress when he really wanted to do something.

Obama's no longer president. He hasn't been for over a year and had nothing to do with Trump's actions towards the DPRK.

Cause and effect and now here we are.

The Dems think Trump shouldn't be hypocritical.

Conservatives think the left shouldn’t have been so weak, now they want to make it up with Syria? Huh?!

Obama drew up plans an took them to Congress. Republicans said NO. It’s been explained to you before with sources given for confirmation.

Given his past history of not following through on threats and being severe on rules of engagement and to make sure overly cautiously careful about where the bombs drop and collateral damage and seeing how many of our planes were coming back with their payload, then what is the purpose of fighting a war if you are not allowed to engage the enemy or given a certain end date for a military conflict. Either you do this right, or you don’t do it at all. So yes, the GOP didn’t want to waste time and money if he wasn’t going to properly use the military properly, either you kill the enemy or just don’t get involved.

Good on Trump for countering Russia's comically moronic provocative comments about shooting American missiles down. This is what happens when you give Russia even a little bit of wiggle room. If they step out of line again, Russian bases should be "accidentally" targeted. No one on Earth would shed a tear and Russia itself will deny they were even Russian.

Tommy - thanks for providing 2 polls which at best show indifference to President Trump getting involved in Syria.

Donny's supporters cheered when he said we shouldn't be involved in Syria, now they are cheering him for getting involved. Consistency at its finest.

Your first link didn't support this assertion at all. The second link was from the Washington Post, Jeff Bezos's personal anti-Trump media outlet, with a very poor record of polling accuracy. You may wish to believe it, if it makes you feel better, but it doesn't at all reflect what I have seen. It's the kind of misinformation that keeps the left rallying I guess.

I think it would be in the US' best interest to announce support for the Syrian government. This could solve a lot of the problems all parties are facing. Then, possibly all parties could work together to see a better future for that country including banning chemical weapons and giving the Kurds and other smaller groups some say in their own future. Constant fighting and war is not making it.

dcog9065

Good on Trump for countering Russia's comically moronic provocative comments about shooting American missiles down. This is what happens when you give Russia even a little bit of wiggle room. If they step out of line again, Russian bases should be "accidentally" targeted. No one on Earth would shed a tear and Russia itself will deny they were even Russian.

The only time we ever seem to agree is when it comes to Russia

Give me evidence.

Here's your evidence.

That's not the kind of evidence I accept.

A lot of excuses as to why Trump's hypocrisy is acceptable.

I love this exchange because it demonstrates absolute lack of ability to retort substantively:

What about the red line?

Obama took plans to Congress and it said no.

But Obama had a history of not following through on threats, etc.

. . .

Another fun part of a certain post is bitching about the Rules of Engagement being strictly enforced, wanting the bombs to hit appropriate targets, and wanting as little collateral damage as possible.

Give me evidence

heres the flimsiest excuse of a Hail Mary I could google

thats not evidence

OUTRAGE!

bass4funk: "I’m so, so confused, the man doesn’t do anything, the left have a mental breakdown, he does something their hair catches fire."

Of COURSE your confused -- you support a man you called "lunatic". The same man you voted in because you were screaming that Hillary would start war with Syria. The same man who, when he did a 180 and said he'd support Assad staying in power after the first time he threatened to bomb him through the crocodile tears after seeing gassed children a year ago, you supported on the tomahawk missile strike and his desire to oust Assad and then his next day support for him.

You're confused because no matter how many times Trump flip-flops you can't see you've drilled a whole in the ground with all the circles and tail-chasing. It does things to your head to continue supporting such a man.

No remember, you screamed about Hillary starting war -- and now you support war.

missiles "will be coming"

That's right dummy! Tell your Russian masters beforehand so they can clear the airfield again and you waste TNT on an empty lot. Spanky Don, you ain't got the sense that God gave an ant. You're just miffed because the world knows you love your spanky spanky. You are pathetic!

What about the 3 million Vietnamese that the US sprayed with Agent Orange. Is France, the UK and Australia going to bomb the US for the use of Agent Orange? What about Myanmar, is Trump going to bomb Myanmar for their genocide of the Rohingya? What about Israel, is Trump going to bomb Israel for its genocide of the Palestinians? Has the US not caused enough havoc and misery in the past 70 years? Any nation found on investigation to have used chemical weapons should face the Hague be it Syria, or the US. The US is trying to bully and dictate to Syria and Russia. Putin should stand his ground and retaliate if Trump bombs Syria or any Russian base. How many more wars are we going the US to start so they can dominate the globe? How many more people must die at the hands of the US?

If not war, then what?

Hit the Russians hard with sanctions on everything and regard Russia as a pariah until Putin is no longer in power. Until that time, any further discussion concerning Russia's resumption to conduct normal relations with the global community should be put on hold.

It will be like sport. Can Russia shoot down American missiles? If so, Russian can sell trillions of S400 systems.

The only ones to gain, in an all out Nuclear War, would be the Arabs....

The mastermind behind this chemical plot is none other than the one who uses it as justification to attack. It's a desperation to stay in the game and undo all progresses achieved by their opponents so far.

stormcrowApr. 12 01:39 pm JSTIf not war, then what?

Hit the Russians hard with sanctions on everything and regard Russia as a pariah until Putin is no longer in power. Until that time, any further discussion concerning Russia's resumption to conduct normal relations with the global community should be put on hold.

The UN sanctions worked on South Africa to make them dismantle apartheid and it worked on Libya to make Qaddafy pay up to the survivors of his terror escapades.

> bass4funk: So yes, the GOP didn’t want to waste time and money if he wasn’t going to properly use the military properly, either you kill the enemy or just don’t get involved.

The comments I read from Republicans was that Syria wasn't a strategic interest for the US and it's best to not get involved. Did you read something different, or are you inserting your own personal feelings to explain other people's actions? Either way, Congress said NO.

zichiApr. 12  07:51 am JST

I hate wars, all of them!

Yet you and many others will support war because of your hatred of Russia or Putin?

Will anyone answer this, what country has been in the most wars or "military actions" since WW2?

It's pretty ironic that after going on about Clinton potentially starting war with Russia during the election, that Republicans are now supporting Trump in potentially starting a war on Russia.

They flip flop about as much as Trump.

Zichi

I did use a question mark at the end of my comment, I've already read many comments justifying a war or wars to rid a country of a dictator or WMDs and was curious of you're own view. I'm no fan of Putin nor any other president, PM or dictator but war should only be justified for those who are being attacked in their own country.

Not that it matters but Putin wasn't the only president who was the head a organization that's above the law, Bush senior was to.

Noticed you nor anyone else cared to answer the question of what country has the worst track record for war, since WW2.

Many people hate war but many people mistakenly justify the need for them as well.

Well, I read all of your comments back to the 7th and while I agree with many of them, I saw nothing mentioning which country has been involved in the most military confrontations since WW2. Though I'm sure you know, it's America. Theyre are also number one with having foreign military bases around the world. No other country even comes close, so while you may hate very specific leaders, there's one country responsible for more destruction and innocent lives being lost than the worst Syrian, Russian, NK and Chinese leaders could ever hope for.

Zichi

Lol, you said that I must not be caught up on my reading because you mentioned it so often, that's the only reason I read your comments.