Russia warns the US of serious consequences

[A rather obscure Bassoon]

7 minutes ago, seeder said:

 

I added a better link. see my post above again

How far to Moscow would they get before Putin launched, probably about a mile.

Edited April 8, 2017 by A rather obscure Bassoon

[seeder]

If a European country was invaded by ISIS, with a leader who allowed and supported Christians, and were being bombed by Israel and the US

the world would not accept it

But....Syria is suffering that fate....and half the world couldnt give a damn

[Lilly]

1 hour ago, Manfred von Dreidecker said:

How do you know that Syria's Tyrant was behind it, Lilly?

I don't know. That said, we struck the airbase where the chemical attackers originated from. Also, keep in mind, we don't have all the intel that the President is privy to. Rand Paul doesn't think Assad was behind the attack and he might be correct...but he probably doesn't even have all the intel.

[MWoo7]

1 hour ago, A rather obscure Bassoon said:

Just like the way America has supported Saudi Arabia for years?

Okay see below for quote toy's mistake again

 

corrected, whew!

1 hour ago, Manfred von Dreidecker said:

Just like the way America has supported Saudi Arabia for years?

again and I can't be the only one .... what a pain in the arrrrrrrzzzzzzzzzz, but done YEY!

 

Oh thought we weren't suppose to talk about that, just kidding.  Have to go laterzzzrzzz its been fun! great thread btw. bye-bye-now toodles and all that rot.

Edited April 8, 2017 by MWoo7

[seeder]

5 minutes ago, Lilly said:

 Rand Paul doesn't think Assad was behind the attack and he might be correct...but he probably doesn't even have all the intel.

 

Nor do many others incl Brit politicians

But hey forget all that, the US just launched 59 cruise missiles on a country that it isnt sure even did anything

way to go USA!

 

 

Edited April 8, 2017 by seeder

[+and-then]

9 minutes ago, oldrover said:

Why? What difference will that really make to the balance of power? The only people they could threaten without risking instant and absolute annihilation as a state would be countries at their level of development or behind them. Even then using a nuclear weapon on a non nuclear armed country would probably result in a retaliatory strike which come to the same thing, at the very, very least regime change would be the minimum they could expect. 

The race has moved on too much for anyone else to enter it now and ever hope to compete. 

I believe that neither of those regimes are rational.  The Iranians I KNOW are not.  The pudgy despot might be sane, maybe, but he's apparently disconnected from the reality of what will happen if he actually launches a nuke strike.  Put another way, Un may not care what happens to anyone else if he decides he's going to be killed. Irrational people with the nuclear fire should be avoided.  

[A rather obscure Bassoon]

5 minutes ago, MWoo7 said:

Oh thought we weren't suppose to talk about that, just kidding.  Have to go laterzzzrzzz its been fun! great thread btw. bye-bye-now toodles and all that rot.

Not my Quote look again.

[oldrover]

1 minute ago, and then said:

Irrational people with the nuclear fire should be avoided.

Well that's definitely not up for debate. 

[+and-then]

4 minutes ago, Lilly said:

I don't know. That said, we struck the airbase where the chemical attackers originated from. Also, keep in mind, we don't have all the intel that the President is privy to. Rand Paul doesn't think Assad was behind the attack and he might be correct...but he probably doesn't even have all the intel.

I agree with this but I think the doubters among us have decided, without real proof, that this president is some arch neocon in sheep's clothing after a single, very limited strike.  I get the feeling they aren't interested in waiting for the situation to unfold more clearly.  I have to say, I'm surprised by how many of DJT's early, true believers have turned on him over a single strike against a chemical weapons state.  

[Lilly]

1 minute ago, seeder said:

 

 

But hey forget all that, the US just launched 59 cruise missiles on a country it isnt sure even did anything

Like I said, we struck the airbase from which the chemical attackers originated. Tends to throw a real wrench into the ability of whoever did it to do it again.

[Space Commander Travis]

5 minutes ago, Lilly said:

I don't know. That said, we struck the airbase where the chemical attackers originated from. Also, keep in mind, we don't have all the intel that the President is privy to. Rand Paul doesn't think Assad was behind the attack and he might be correct...but he probably doesn't even have all the intel.

You say "I don't know.", but then you say "we struck the airbase where the chemical attackers originated from", so you must believe it. Did you know, the only ones we have word from that this even happened, let alone that Syria's Dictator did it, are the "Resistance"? That the place where this (supposedly) happened is "rebel" controlled, and no Western journalists are allowed anywhere near? Now don't you think the "rebels" would have a vested interest in stirring up trouble for their enemy (Assad), and if they could get America on their side (which they've done), what a fabulous coup it'd be for them,while it would make no sense at all for Assad to do it, that is if we were still applying basic rules of common sense rather than just resorting to that useful old line "he's Evil!, which means he could do anything, however irrational"?

[Space Commander Travis]

4 minutes ago, and then said:

I agree with this but I think the doubters among us have decided, without real proof, that this president is some arch neocon in sheep's clothing after a single, very limited strike.  I get the feeling they aren't interested in waiting for the situation to unfold more clearly.  I have to say, I'm surprised by how many of DJT's early, true believers have turned on him over a single strike against a chemical weapons state.  

Possibly because of this? Trump in 2013 : 'DO NOT ATTACK SYRIA' - CNBC.com

he's either absolutely barefaced, shameless hypocrite, or he's an opportunist who's seen this as a glorious opportunity to shut down criticism of him. Hey, even Sen. John McCain (R-Absolutely Insane) has said he now approves of the Great Man! 

[Space Commander Travis]

I get the feeling they aren't interested in waiting for the situation to unfold more clearly.

And Pres. Trump was? 

Edited April 8, 2017 by Manfred von Dreidecker

[seeder]

36 minutes ago, and then said:

"massed troops"?  Do you mean the 500 soldiers sent to the region?  Or has there been a deployment I've not heard of?  

 

man...you are out of touch with reality and facts

500 soldiers? I suggest you read more, that will save me pointing out your lack of knowledge about the real world

[.ZZ.]

9 minutes ago, and then said:

 I have to say, I'm surprised by how many of DJT's early, true believers have turned on him over a single strike against a chemical weapons state.  

I was thinking the same thing.

[seeder]

9 minutes ago, Lilly said:

Like I said, we struck the airbase from which the chemical attackers originated

 

Oh? perhaps you have some info the rest of us dont?  Pls  enlighten us on exactly who initiated the chem attack?  As I believe no-one actually knows for sure

[Space Commander Travis]

 

6 minutes ago, Manfred von Dreidecker said:

You say "I don't know.", but then you say "we struck the airbase where the chemical attackers originated from", so you must believe it. Did you know, the only ones we have word from that this even happened, let alone that Syria's Dictator did it, are the "Resistance"? That the place where this (supposedly) happened is "rebel" controlled, and no Western journalists are allowed anywhere near? Now don't you think the "rebels" would have a vested interest in stirring up trouble for their enemy (Assad), and if they could get America on their side (which they've done), what a fabulous coup it'd be for them,while it would make no sense at all for Assad to do it, that is if we were still applying basic rules of common sense rather than just resorting to that useful old line "he's Evil!, which means he could do anything, however irrational"?

did you also know that one of the doctors who reported this came from London, where he'd stood trial as a suspected terrorist? 

Doctor in Syria stood trial on terror offences

[MWoo7]

24 minutes ago, A rather obscure Bassoon said:

27 minutes ago, MWoo7 said:

Oh thought we weren't suppose to talk about that, just kidding.  Have to go laterzzzrzzz its been fun! great thread btw. bye-bye-now toodles and all that rot.

Not my Quote look again.

see CORRECTION BELOW::::: what a pain in me aaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrzzzzzz but done now WHEW !

1 hour ago, Manfred von Dreidecker said:

Just like the way America has supported Saudi Arabia for years?

 

Yeah it does that, don't tell me about it, singing to the Choir, I'm mentioned GET THE QUOTE GLITCH FIXED , oh wellzzzzz sorry about that.  I'd never upset my Canadian friennds!! 

I must have said this half a dozen times and seen it by other's too.  A problem, minor sure, but still there. at least they corrected the +++++++++++++++++ in some edits that magically appeared.

Edited April 8, 2017 by MWoo7

[odas]

40 minutes ago, A rather obscure Bassoon said:

No doubt this this latest attack is scripted but who wrote it ?

The Trump Putin conspiracy thing is just a red herring.

Who? There are a few writers. Putin, Trump, Ass(ad) but I think Bannon had a thing or two to say just because he has some experience in scriptwriting and directing.

But, I could see Trump being stabbed in the back too. The far right has a thing for Putin and Trump turned out not to be to far right for some. Who knows.

[seeder]

Lets see who here is really smart

WHY is the US determined Assad MUST GO?

[RoofGardener]

3 hours ago, and then said:

If Putin had wanted a showdown, he had the time to use his S400's to shoot down some Tomahawks and humiliate Trump.  He didn't.  What does that tell you, if anything?  Putin knows that his military would be destroyed by a full confrontation with the U.S. and his only recourse would be nukes.  He's playing a long game, I think.  He's probably just really p***ed that his free ride is over.  

I'm not sure whether an S400 CAN 'shoot down' a Tomahawk missile. After all, the s400 is an anti-aircraft/anti-ballistic-missile unit, presumably geared up for fairly high-altitude and high-speed engagements. I thought that the Tomahawk was a very low-level "terrain following" missile, and quite slow to boot ? 

Notwithstanding, I think Putin's "serious consequences" comment is sheer bluster. Just consider how embarrassed he must be that a Syrian airbase with HIS military advisers and technicians on it was (apparently) involved in an attack on civilians using a weapon of mass destruction. That casts the immediate suspicion that either (a) Russia helped Assad's forces with the attack, or (b) they where irrelevant and sidelined by his 'ally'. 

Widening the focus; Putin has allied with somebody who's military carried out the above WMD attack. Even if there where no Russian forces on the airbase, this would STILL be a huge embarrassment. 

Put the two together, and we move from embarrassment to humiliation. In my opinion Putin's comments are pure bluster to try and deflect from being made to look like an idiot by Assad. His foreign policy in regards to supporting Assad is in tatters. 

[Claire.]

10 minutes ago, seeder said:

Lets see who here is really smart

WHY is the US determined Assad MUST GO?

Why don't you start by telling us why he should stay.

[seeder]

4 minutes ago, Claire. said:

Why don't you start by telling us why he should stay.

 

erm.... because he was elected and has the support of his people?

Your turn.... tell us why he should go?  Lets see what you got?

[A rather obscure Bassoon]

17 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

I'm not sure whether an S400 CAN 'shoot down' a Tomahawk missile. After all, the s400 is an anti-aircraft/anti-ballistic-missile unit, presumably geared up for fairly high-altitude and high-speed engagements. I thought that the Tomahawk was a very low-level "terrain following" missile, and quite slow to boot ? 

Notwithstanding, I think Putin's "serious consequences" comment is sheer bluster. Just consider how embarrassed he must be that a Syrian airbase with HIS military advisers and technicians on it was (apparently) involved in an attack on civilians using a weapon of mass destruction. That casts the immediate suspicion that either (a) Russia helped Assad's forces with the attack, or (b) they where irrelevant and sidelined by his 'ally'. 

Widening the focus; Putin has allied with somebody who's military carried out the above WMD attack. Even if there where no Russian forces on the airbase, this would STILL be a huge embarrassment. 

Put the two together, and we move from embarrassment to humiliation. In my opinion Putin's comments are pure bluster to try and deflect from being made to look like an idiot by Assad. His foreign policy in regards to supporting Assad is in tatters. 

Tomahawks fly low and subsonic, so only a look down radar system like awacs would possibly detect them.

[Claire.]

29 minutes ago, Manfred von Dreidecker said:

did you also know that one of the doctors who reported this came from London, where he'd stood trial as a suspected terrorist?

Doctor in Syria stood trial on terror offences

Yes, we're aware, but that in no way tarnishes the reports of other doctors, most of whom stated the symptoms were indicative of exposure to a nerve agent. The doctors' diagnoses were later confirmed post mortem.