BREAKING: US Launches Tomahawks Into Syria

So Washington fires 59 cruise missiles at a cost of up to $100 million at the Sharat airfield,
and only 23 of those missiles actually strike the airfield. None of the actual functioning aircraft are destroyed (only six non-functioning salvage aircraft). (And oh yes murdering a handful of civilians with missiles that went off target.)
Only minor damage is sustained to the runway, and it is in fact used a day later to carry out airstrikes against Washington's Al Qaeda insurgents.

If Washington thought this was to send a message of its ability to at will implement decisive bullying power and threat by force of might using any false pretext, they completely failed and sent the opposite message. (Shattering the wet dream glories of McCain, Graham and the neocon psychopaths). While it does reveal reckless, impulsive foolishness, it doesn't project the competent bullying menace able to crush any victim at will.
The message Washington's action sent instead is one stupidity, incompetence, inept, amateurish, wasteful, an impotent (not to mention deceitful, backstabbing, untrustworthy, hypocritical, and law breaking). 59 cruise missiles with nothing to show from any military or strategic standpoint beyond completely inconsequential and trivial damage.
 
Last edited:
AZJoe said:
So Washington fires 59 cruise missiles at a cost of up to $100 million at the Sharat airfield,
and only 23 of those missiles actually strike the airfield. None of the actual functioning aircraft are destroyed (only six non-functioning salvage aircraft). (And oh yes murdering a handful of civilians with missiles that went off target.)
Only minor damage is sustained to the runway, and it is in fact used a day later to carry out airstrikes against Washington's Al Qaeda insurgents.

If Washington thought this was to send a message of its ability to at will implement decisive bullying power and threat by force of might using any false pretext, they completely failed and sent the opposite message. (Shattering the wet dream glories of McCain, Graham and the neocon psychopaths). While it does reveal reckless, impulsive foolishness, it doesn't project the competent bullying menace able to crush any victim at will.
The message Washington's action sent instead is one stupidity, incompetence, inept, amateurish, wasteful, an impotent (not to mention deceitful, backstabbing, untrustworthy, hypocritical, and law breaking). 59 cruise missiles with nothing to show from any military or strategic standpoint beyond completely inconsequential and trivial damage.
Click to expand...
This.
 

Tomahawk missile casings being collected in Sharat airbase hangar


World reaction to airstrike on Syria differs from that in US

Many United Nations members, China included, have called for an independent investigation into who the perpetrator was.
But before such an investigation could be carried out, the White House quickly decided by itself that it was the Syrian government army that carried out the attack.

Sacha Llorenti, the Bolivian ambassador to the UN, was among the most outspoken on Friday at the UN emergency meeting.
He held an enlarged photo of Colin Powell, then-US secretary of state, making a case for a war on Iraq in a 2003 presentation at the UN.
Powell's argument was later proven to be based on false evidence.

"I believe it's vital for us to remember what history teaches us, and on this occasion (in 2003), the United States did affirm, they affirmed that
they had all the proof necessary to show that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction but they were never found … never were they found,"
Llorenti told the UN meeting on Friday.

Olof Skoog, Sweden's ambassador to the UN, also said the US missile strike "raises questions of compatibility with international law".
http://usa.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2017-04/10/content_28852227.htm
 
Last edited:
From an isolationist (the term is fine, stop being afraid of it) point of view, this is obviously a bad thing. I don't think too many people on this forum need to be convinced of that.

From a realpolitik perspective, however, it remains to be seen. If there is an invasion of Syria and Assad is ousted, that is bad and it would be clear that Trump has been turned, or was never who he said he was in the first place. If, however, it doesn't escalate too much beyond this and Assad is brought to the table, it may have been Trump's way of throwing the neocons a bone (they certainly seem to be on his side about this), without indulging in their more insane interventionist schemes, the kind that Hillary Clinton would surely be doing had she won the election. Let's hope it's the latter.
 
AZJoe said:
So Washington fires 59 cruise missiles at a cost of up to $100 million at the Sharat airfield,
and only 23 of those missiles actually strike the airfield. None of the actual functioning aircraft are destroyed (only six non-functioning salvage aircraft). (And oh yes murdering a handful of civilians with missiles that went off target.)
Only minor damage is sustained to the runway, and it is in fact used a day later to carry out airstrikes against Washington's Al Qaeda insurgents
Click to expand...

Pbbbbbtttt! Maybe you should start thinking like a BIG LEAGUE ALPHA!

 
ThePaleoLibertarian said:
From an isolationist (the term is fine, stop being afraid of it) point of view, this is obviously a bad thing. I don't think too many people on this forum need to be convinced of that.

From a realpolitik perspective, however, it remains to be seen. If there is an invasion of Syria and Assad is ousted, that is bad and it would be clear that Trump has been turned, or was never who he said he was in the first place. If, however, it doesn't escalate too much beyond this and Assad is brought to the table, it may have been Trump's way of throwing the neocons a bone (they certainly seem to be on his side about this), without indulging in their more insane interventionist schemes, the kind that Hillary Clinton would surely be doing had she won the election. Let's hope it's the latter.
Click to expand...

Lol. Still with "hopey" even after the "changey."
 
AZJoe said:
So Washington fires 59 cruise missiles at a cost of up to $100 million at the Sharat airfield,
and only 23 of those missiles actually strike the airfield. None of the actual functioning aircraft are destroyed (only six non-functioning salvage aircraft). (And oh yes murdering a handful of civilians with missiles that went off target.)
Only minor damage is sustained to the runway, and it is in fact used a day later to carry out airstrikes against Washington's Al Qaeda insurgents.

If Washington thought this was to send a message of its ability to at will implement decisive bullying power and threat by force of might using any false pretext, they completely failed and sent the opposite message. (Shattering the wet dream glories of McCain, Graham and the neocon psychopaths). While it does reveal reckless, impulsive foolishness, it doesn't project the competent bullying menace able to crush any victim at will.
The message Washington's action sent instead is one stupidity, incompetence, inept, amateurish, wasteful, an impotent (not to mention deceitful, backstabbing, untrustworthy, hypocritical, and law breaking). 59 cruise missiles with nothing to show from any military or strategic standpoint beyond completely inconsequential and trivial damage.
Click to expand...

Trump Inc. does own Raytheon stock. That cool $100m will be worth a few bucks per share in the short term.
 
palelibertarian asserts: "From an isolationist (the term is fine, stop being afraid of it) point of view, this is obviously a bad thing."

:cool:

...no, it is a crappy word/concept...it implies 'discouragement,' etc...to 'isolate' is to prevent contact, etc..the/?your stinking republicrats should neither encourage or discourage relationships among people...they should not intervene...'non intervention' is a much better/more thoughtful concept...
 
Last edited:
I lost two followers for this retweet.

 
AZJoe said:
17861761_643918359111697_5080170213433366966_n.jpg
Click to expand...

Why was that post #601 http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...s-Into-Syria&p=6450240&viewfull=1#post6450240 empty here in my browser?
 
ChristianAnarchist said:
Death and destruction... Have we had enough of goonerment yet??
Click to expand...

Maybe you might benefit from studying what effects culture has on quality of government.

[EDiT] To expand a bit: A typical libertarian thinks the only factor in determining state oppression is what degree of economic and social control falls under the purvue of the State. However history shows that the culture and race of the population out of which state actors are drawn, has an effect on the degree of corruption, arbitrary abuse of inhabitants, etc.
 
Last edited:
Let’s see if I understand.

BOMBS TO CREATE FAMINE
When bombs are thrown on civilians by the US army this is not a war crime but an unfortunate accident. When bombs are thrown on food and water supply, this is not a war crime, but this also results in many dead civilians.
In 2016 there were stories about the starvation of Aleppo. I guess that according to the official story - not ISIS is to blame, but Assad’s regime.
In 2016 alone the US army dropped a whopping 26,171 bombs; that’s more than 500 bombs a week (3 bombs every hour): https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/09/america-dropped-26171-bombs-2016-obama-legacy
The Russian army has helped to cover Syria with bombs since September 2015.
Of course the state media can always explain that I’m wrong to think that bombing food and water by the US and Russian army and the sanctions against Syria are the main reason for the human catastrophe in Syria: http://www.voanews.com/a/syria-food-shortages-rise-as-production-hits-record-low/3596722.html


WHITE HELMETS/SOHR
There are a total of 2 sources that have accused the Syrian government of the Sarin gas attack: the white helmets and SOHR.
That’s the White Helmets that are financed from the US/UK. Here’s a story on the great “humanitarian” work of the White helmets: http://21stcenturywire.com/2016/09/...ias-white-helmets-raises-even-more-questions/
Then there’s the undisputed Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) of Rami Abdulrahman. Abdulrahman is actually based in London, who hasn’t been in Syria for more than 15 years, and is probably a one man organisation: http://anonhq.com/truth-behind-oft-quoted-syrian-observatory-human-rights/


FALSE FLAG ATTACK
Clearly we have to believe that the White helmets are completely insane; in the following picture we can see White helmets treating some child victims of the Sarin gas. One of them actually touches a child without hand gloves, while in the background we can see somebody without a gas mask. Sarin is highly toxic and leads to immediate health problems for idiots that act like this.
The only conclusion can be that these children weren’t gassed with Sarin: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-...ative-about-syrian-chemical-incident-question
040517nomask.jpg


Former British Ambassador to Syria, Peter Ford, has said that it’s improbable that Assad’s regime or the Russians are behind the chemical attack: https://youtu.be/pS6Oa_aDS6E
Former US representative Ron Paul has also explained that it’s unlikely that this gas attack is the work of the Syrian government.


GAS ATTACK ONE DAY BEFORE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE
The reported Sarin gas attack of last April 4, was one day before the International conference on Syria in Brussels, Belgium: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-conference-idUSKBN176001
Decide for yourself...
Do we believe that President Assad is a complete imbecile that bombs his own people, one day before this conference?
Or is it more probable that the UK/US arranged a false flag attack, blame it on Assad, to make the most of the conference to condemn Assad?


GAS PIPELINE
According to the following article 2 gas pipelines are planned to go through Syria; either coming from Iran or Qatar.
Supposedly one of these is backed by Russia and the other by the USA: http://www.news.com.au/world/middle...t/news-story/74efcba9554c10bd35e280b63a9afb74
Of course in reality only one of these is really planned and the other is a decoy, as both Washington and Russia take their orders from London.


GOLAN HEIGHTS – WATER, OIL, AFEK
The Golan Heights that Israel has taken from Syria since 1981 are “strategically” important; like Israel has admitted (Israel admits this is the reason to keep it occupied).
There is a large amount of water there, while Israel (like Syria) has problems getting enough water: http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-is...-natural-resources-water-land-and-oil/5521207

One of the reasons to discredit Assad’s regime is to squash criticism of the annexation of the Golan Heights by Israel.
There is also a lot of oil in the Golan Heights.

For some years now the company Afek Oil and Gas (a subsidiary of New Jersey-based Genie Energy Ltd.) is exploring the possibilities for oil drilling in the Golan Heights.
Maybe you’ve never of Afek, but some of the investors are well-known. Names on the Strategic Advisory Board (SAB) include: Baron Jacob Rothschild, Dick Cheney, Rupert Murdoch, and James Woolsey: http://www.mintpressnews.com/what-rothschild-murdoch-cheney-and-israel-love-most-about-syria/209542/
The following video is mostly about this connection but also explores some other angles.
 
merkelstan said:
Maybe you might benefit from studying what effects culture has on quality of government.

[EDiT] To expand a bit: A typical libertarian thinks the only factor in determining state oppression is what degree of economic and social control falls under the purvue of the State. However history shows that the culture and race of the population out of which state actors are drawn, has an effect on the degree of corruption, arbitrary abuse of inhabitants, etc.
Click to expand...

Oh, why yes, thank you! I'll get right on that...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

PAF
Trump Orders Iran To Give Up Its "Perfectly Legal" Defensive Weapons
Replies
6
Views
82
jmdrake
jmdrake
PAF
Selling War: How Raytheon and Boeing Fund the Push for NATO’s Nuclear Expansion
Replies
1
Views
447
PAF
PAF
unknown
US Builds New Base In Northern Syria, Signaling Indefinite Occupation
Replies
3
Views
254
unknown
unknown
Anti Federalist
Three US troops killed by Iranian backed militia drone strike
2 3
Replies
40
Views
3K
unknown
unknown
jmdrake
Ukrainians Were The Top Group Of Resettled Refugees Under Trump
Replies
16
Views
2K
jmdrake
jmdrake
Back
Top