From 2013.

HuMcK said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Airspace cleared.
Birds in the air.
Tweets galore.
Press worldwide announces attack is coming


This was a big bluff used for intelligence gathering and intimidation.

I'm guessing we had all sorts of drones, satellites and listening devices glued to Syria when all these "indicators" pointed to an eminent attack. The coalition got to see where Russia moved assets, where they joined Syrians and where they separated from Syrians. They got to see what areas received beefed up protection, what communication was silenced and what was increased. I'm guessing all of that info is now being analyzed for a VERY precise attack. Who knows, maybe they even pinpointed Assad's location.

Mattis is no dummy. I'm sure he collected tons of info yesterday and pushed the Syrians and the Russians a little closer to where he wants them.

---

This is being very charitable. I dont understand the extremely loud and drawn out windup to this, it just seems so...staged.

---

Yes. It was staged and for the reasons I listed above.


In football, you put a player in motion to expose the type of coverage you're facing. That's what we did yesterday.

(Edit) how many hours straight can you keep your defenses on alert and at peak performance level? At some point that wanes and they develop *****s in the armor.

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Airspace cleared.
Birds in the air.
Tweets galore.
Press worldwide announces attack is coming


This was a big bluff used for intelligence gathering and intimidation.

I'm guessing we had all sorts of drones, satellites and listening devices glued to Syria when all these "indicators" pointed to an eminent attack. The coalition got to see where Russia moved assets, where they joined Syrians and where they separated from Syrians. They got to see what areas received beefed up protection, what communication was silenced and what was increased. I'm guessing all of that info is now being analyzed for a VERY precise attack. Who knows, maybe they even pinpointed Assad's location.

Mattis is no dummy. I'm sure he collected tons of info yesterday and pushed the Syrians and the Russians a little closer to where he wants them.

---

This is being very charitable. I dont understand the extremely loud and drawn out windup to this, it just seems so...staged.

---

Yes. It was staged and for the reasons I listed above.


In football, you put a player in motion to expose the type of coverage you're facing. That's what we did yesterday.

(Edit) how many hours straight can you keep your defenses on alert and at peak performance level? At some point that wanes and they develop *****s in the armor.

---

Right off the top I have to lol that the word ch!nks is somehow censored on this site. Cant even make a good armor allegory, smh.

I hear you, but that's not really how this kind of thing works. This is supposedly going to hit a list of static targets that have been been known about for a good while, so there would seemingly be no need to make noise and see what shakes out. Shaking the tree is a good technique to use in an investigation, but broadcasting a strike like this just gives the group being hit more opportunity to remove or protect assets (like Russia did e.g. by removing their pilots from the airbase before the last strike we did). The current cynical view is that Trump's tone towards Russia demonstrably changed after his last phone convo with Putin, and this loudly staged production is part of some act so Trump can seem tough on Russia as Mueller closes in. I don't know what to believe honestly, but I know that this was the most foreshadowed gas attack (Russia was saying/warning at least 5 days in advance that the rebels were planning a "false flag" gas attack) and retaliatory strike I've ever heard of. Something here just feels "off" to me.

See what I mean? Loud warnings mean personnel can abandon potential targets.

situation normal

money pit $$ dog & pony show of bombs...

we are so fked

You have to love the way Trump keeps warning daddy by telling him to "get ready"

cinque said:

---

You have to love the way Trump keeps warning daddy by telling him to "get ready"

---

We gonna do this damn thing or not? Strikes aren't as useful when the enemy has time to prepare for them.

corncob pipe said:

---

we take the bait every single time... what foolishness

---

Trump needs to get off Twitter once and for all .

HuMcK said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Airspace cleared.
Birds in the air.
Tweets galore.
Press worldwide announces attack is coming


This was a big bluff used for intelligence gathering and intimidation.

I'm guessing we had all sorts of drones, satellites and listening devices glued to Syria when all these "indicators" pointed to an eminent attack. The coalition got to see where Russia moved assets, where they joined Syrians and where they separated from Syrians. They got to see what areas received beefed up protection, what communication was silenced and what was increased. I'm guessing all of that info is now being analyzed for a VERY precise attack. Who knows, maybe they even pinpointed Assad's location.

Mattis is no dummy. I'm sure he collected tons of info yesterday and pushed the Syrians and the Russians a little closer to where he wants them.

---

This is being very charitable. I dont understand the extremely loud and drawn out windup to this, it just seems so...staged.

---

Because that is what armies do to throw off their enemy. It has worked for thousands of years. From inflatable tanks, extra campfires, fake radio signals, etc. So yeah this does seem staged because it probably was to gather more intelligence.

HuMcK said:

---

From 2013.

---

1. Did anyone say when we are going to attack?

2. Did anyone say where?

NO is the answer to both of them.

This is no different than Germany knowing the allies were going to do a cross channel invasion at some point. They knew it was coming... sometime.... and somewhere along the french coast...... but they never knew the exact location or the exact date/time.

HuMcK said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Airspace cleared.
Birds in the air.
Tweets galore.
Press worldwide announces attack is coming


This was a big bluff used for intelligence gathering and intimidation.

I'm guessing we had all sorts of drones, satellites and listening devices glued to Syria when all these "indicators" pointed to an eminent attack. The coalition got to see where Russia moved assets, where they joined Syrians and where they separated from Syrians. They got to see what areas received beefed up protection, what communication was silenced and what was increased. I'm guessing all of that info is now being analyzed for a VERY precise attack. Who knows, maybe they even pinpointed Assad's location.

Mattis is no dummy. I'm sure he collected tons of info yesterday and pushed the Syrians and the Russians a little closer to where he wants them.

---

This is being very charitable. I dont understand the extremely loud and drawn out windup to this, it just seems so...staged.

---

Yes. It was staged and for the reasons I listed above.


In football, you put a player in motion to expose the type of coverage you're facing. That's what we did yesterday.

(Edit) how many hours straight can you keep your defenses on alert and at peak performance level? At some point that wanes and they develop *****s in the armor.

---

Right off the top I have to lol that the word ch!nks is somehow censored on this site. Cant even make a good armor allegory, smh.

I hear you, but that's not really how this kind of thing works. This is supposedly going to hit a list of static targets that have been been known about for a good while, so there would seemingly be no need to make noise and see what shakes out. Shaking the tree is a good technique to use in an investigation, but broadcasting a strike like this just gives the group being hit more opportunity to remove or protect assets (like Russia did e.g. by removing their pilots from the airbase before the last strike we did). The current cynical view is that Trump's tone towards Russia demonstrably changed after his last phone convo with Putin, and this loudly staged production is part of some act so Trump can seem tough on Russia as Mueller closes in. I don't know what to believe honestly, but I know that this was the most foreshadowed gas attack (Russia was saying/warning at least 5 days in advance that the rebels were planning a "false flag" gas attack) and retaliatory strike I've ever heard of. Something here just feels "off" to me.

---

Perhaps the static target is part of the deflection. Make them guess which one or ones. Move stuff around which disturbs their operations and then move them back at some time and then hit them.

HuMcK said:

---

See what I mean? Loud warnings mean personnel can abandon potential targets.

---

So what if this guy doesn't know the place. I'm sure we have a satellite or two watching them, drones, and a U2.

I highly doubt they moved large numbers of troops and no one watched where they went.

"Time when attack could hurt the most is gone"

HuMcK said:

---

Guy Noir said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

We don't need to be the worlds policeman .

Don't see France, England or Germany getting involved .

Stay clear.

---

I agree with staying clear, but the UN and other countries might get involved now that chemical weapons were used again by the Syrian government.

Hopefully there will be a single action that responds to the chemical weapon attack then we get out out. I would like to see us get out of Iraq and Afganistan too. Maybe if we reduced troops in Germany, S. Korea and Japan we might be able to take a run at balancing our budget.

---

This lofty dream of balancing the budget by scaling back military commitments is incongruous with the Trump admin's substantial increases in defense spending and deep tax cuts. Russia and China would absolutely be on board with removing US forces from those areas though.

---

Funny you blame the bases on Trump's defense spending. It's been 8 decades and about 15 presidents worth of foreign policy.

trey3216 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Guy Noir said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

We don't need to be the worlds policeman .

Don't see France, England or Germany getting involved .

Stay clear.

---

I agree with staying clear, but the UN and other countries might get involved now that chemical weapons were used again by the Syrian government.

Hopefully there will be a single action that responds to the chemical weapon attack then we get out out. I would like to see us get out of Iraq and Afganistan too. Maybe if we reduced troops in Germany, S. Korea and Japan we might be able to take a run at balancing our budget.

---

This lofty dream of balancing the budget by scaling back military commitments is incongruous with the Trump admin's substantial increases in defense spending and deep tax cuts. Russia and China would absolutely be on board with removing US forces from those areas though.

---

Funny you blame the bases on Trump's defense spending. It's been 8 decades and about 15 presidents worth of foreign policy.

---

Obama (marginally) shrank the DoD budget, and took a lot of **** for it. Conversly, one of Trump's main campaign planks was to increase defense spending ("rebuild the military")...

So yes, I guess you're right, I do attribute to Trump the things that he does.

We had a carrier group pull out of Virginia yesterday headed to the Middle East. If we were going to blow up an aspirin factory or just make a single strike, we could have done that from England, Germany or Diego Garcia. I think we/coalition will make a significant strike. Mad Dog Mattis doesn't appear to me to be the kind of guy that would hit them with a little pin *****. (Pr!ck)

Relatively strong words on Russia for not holding up their end of the 2013 agreement.

"America does not seek an indefinite presence in Syria"

If France and UK joined our strike .....fine.

Can't help but wonder if Germany is going to stay on the sidelines .

Canada2017 said:

---

If France and UK joined our strike .....fine.

Can't help but wonder if Germany is going to stay on the sidelines .

---

I'm not sure why you are so bent on Germany getting involved. They typically don't do so in offensive military action since that whole little thing in the 1940s that put them in a bad light.....

But they do get involved in support roles.

Like in the fight against ISIS. No air strikes but support. Same in Afghanistan.

Plus it takes more for them to get involved than it does for our country to attack.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/germany-wont-take-part-in-possible-syria-military-strike/2018/04/12/54f7ff3a-3e56-11e8-955b-7d2e19b79966_story.html?utm_term=.3764855ccf3a

Don't our resident leftists keep saying how Angela Merkel is tough on Putin ? Merkel is such a 'world leader' ?

Well where is the fat slob NOW when it matters ?

Crash Davis said:

---

---

Not a constitution expert, but I believe there's a difference between "state of war" and "authorization of military force".

Canada2017 said:

---

Don't our resident leftists keep saying how Angela Merkel is tough on Putin ? Merkel is such a 'world leader' ?

Well where is the fat slob NOW when it matters ?

---

Some people like talk.

Well at least France and UK stepped up.

Really surprised and pleased France did . They do have a long history/connection with the people of Syria.

Putin is going to respond . He has to or his military alliances will be a laughing stock world wide.

This could explode into WW3 very easily .

Hope our military units are on full alert .