It was a political stunt. We deconflicted with Russian and Iran meaning we advised them (but the military is quick to say that is not the same thing as "cooperating" with them. We hit former command and control sites and didn't target any of Syria's leaders including Generals. It should be noted the timing of this occurred within hours of revelations that Mueller has the evidence Trump's right hand man Cohen was in fact in Prague (presumably colluding with Putin's people).

PartyBear said:

---

It was a political stunt. We deconflicted with Russian and Iran meaning we advised them (but the military is quick to say that is not the same thing as "cooperating" with them. We hit former command and control sites and didn't target any of Syria's leaders including Generals. It should be noted the timing of this occurred within hours of revelations that Mueller has the evidence Trump's right hand man Cohen was in fact in Prague (presumably colluding with Putin's people).

---

The strike didn't just happen after that revelation, it was slow-walked to occur after that revelation.

HuMcK said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

It was a political stunt. We deconflicted with Russian and Iran meaning we advised them (but the military is quick to say that is not the same thing as "cooperating" with them. We hit former command and control sites and didn't target any of Syria's leaders including Generals. It should be noted the timing of this occurred within hours of revelations that Mueller has the evidence Trump's right hand man Cohen was in fact in Prague (presumably colluding with Putin's people).

---

The strike didn't just happen after that revelation, it was slow-walked to occur after that revelation.

---

All part of the Russian collusion.

They first say this...




Then he says this...

Jack and DP said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

It was a political stunt. We deconflicted with Russian and Iran meaning we advised them (but the military is quick to say that is not the same thing as "cooperating" with them. We hit former command and control sites and didn't target any of Syria's leaders including Generals. It should be noted the timing of this occurred within hours of revelations that Mueller has the evidence Trump's right hand man Cohen was in fact in Prague (presumably colluding with Putin's people).

---

The strike didn't just happen after that revelation, it was slow-walked to occur after that revelation.

---

All part of the Russian collusion.

---

I am open to hearing an explanation for why this strike couldn't have occurred on Tuesday or Wednesday. Why wait all the way until Friday, talking about it loudly until then? Israel rained fire down on the T-4 airbase in Syria 5 days ago without any public wind-up or warning. I just flipped through the big 3 cable news channels, and they're all talking about Syria instead of a key piece of the (increasingly credible) Steele Dossier being corroborated or Trump's personal lawyer being no-knock raided by the FBI.

HuMcK said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

It was a political stunt. We deconflicted with Russian and Iran meaning we advised them (but the military is quick to say that is not the same thing as "cooperating" with them. We hit former command and control sites and didn't target any of Syria's leaders including Generals. It should be noted the timing of this occurred within hours of revelations that Mueller has the evidence Trump's right hand man Cohen was in fact in Prague (presumably colluding with Putin's people).

---

The strike didn't just happen after that revelation, it was slow-walked to occur after that revelation.

---

You mean the joint strike with Britain and France? Those two also slow walked it to keep the other headlines out of our news media?

Dubbicans said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

It was a political stunt. We deconflicted with Russian and Iran meaning we advised them (but the military is quick to say that is not the same thing as "cooperating" with them. We hit former command and control sites and didn't target any of Syria's leaders including Generals. It should be noted the timing of this occurred within hours of revelations that Mueller has the evidence Trump's right hand man Cohen was in fact in Prague (presumably colluding with Putin's people).

---

The strike didn't just happen after that revelation, it was slow-walked to occur after that revelation.

---

You mean the joint strike with Britain and France? Those two also slow walked it to keep the other headlines out of our news media?

---

All coalition partners were reportedly ready to go on Tuesday night (our time). Why did we wait until Friday? It's entirely possible that the delay had nothing to do with the regularly scheduled Friday news dumps, but there was a delay, and I've yet to hear an explanation for it.

HuMcK said:

---

Dubbicans said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

It was a political stunt. We deconflicted with Russian and Iran meaning we advised them (but the military is quick to say that is not the same thing as "cooperating" with them. We hit former command and control sites and didn't target any of Syria's leaders including Generals. It should be noted the timing of this occurred within hours of revelations that Mueller has the evidence Trump's right hand man Cohen was in fact in Prague (presumably colluding with Putin's people).

---

The strike didn't just happen after that revelation, it was slow-walked to occur after that revelation.

---

You mean the joint strike with Britain and France? Those two also slow walked it to keep the other headlines out of our news media?

---

All coalition partners were reportedly ready to go on Tuesday night (our time). Why did we wait until Friday? It's entirely possible that the delay had nothing to do with the regularly scheduled Friday news dumps, but there was a delay, and I've yet to hear an explanation for it.

---

I'm so glad we have someone w/ top security clearance and who was in the meetings at the Pentagon and w/ our President to give us the play by play what happened and is happening. Thanks HuMcK

riflebear said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Dubbicans said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

It was a political stunt. We deconflicted with Russian and Iran meaning we advised them (but the military is quick to say that is not the same thing as "cooperating" with them. We hit former command and control sites and didn't target any of Syria's leaders including Generals. It should be noted the timing of this occurred within hours of revelations that Mueller has the evidence Trump's right hand man Cohen was in fact in Prague (presumably colluding with Putin's people).

---

The strike didn't just happen after that revelation, it was slow-walked to occur after that revelation.

---

You mean the joint strike with Britain and France? Those two also slow walked it to keep the other headlines out of our news media?

---

All coalition partners were reportedly ready to go on Tuesday night (our time). Why did we wait until Friday? It's entirely possible that the delay had nothing to do with the regularly scheduled Friday news dumps, but there was a delay, and I've yet to hear an explanation for it.

---

I'm so glad we have someone w/ top security clearance and who was in the meetings at the Pentagon and w/ our President to give us the play by play what happened and is happening. Thanks HuMcK

---

I'm still waiting to hear the counterargument. I can't help but notice that you didn't even make an attempt at one.

Jack and DP said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

It was a political stunt. We deconflicted with Russian and Iran meaning we advised them (but the military is quick to say that is not the same thing as "cooperating" with them. We hit former command and control sites and didn't target any of Syria's leaders including Generals. It should be noted the timing of this occurred within hours of revelations that Mueller has the evidence Trump's right hand man Cohen was in fact in Prague (presumably colluding with Putin's people).

---

The strike didn't just happen after that revelation, it was slow-walked to occur after that revelation.

---

All part of the Russian collusion.

---

I'm reminded of this tweet.

HuMcK said:

---

Dubbicans said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

It was a political stunt. We deconflicted with Russian and Iran meaning we advised them (but the military is quick to say that is not the same thing as "cooperating" with them. We hit former command and control sites and didn't target any of Syria's leaders including Generals. It should be noted the timing of this occurred within hours of revelations that Mueller has the evidence Trump's right hand man Cohen was in fact in Prague (presumably colluding with Putin's people).

---

The strike didn't just happen after that revelation, it was slow-walked to occur after that revelation.

---

You mean the joint strike with Britain and France? Those two also slow walked it to keep the other headlines out of our news media?

---

All coalition partners were reportedly ready to go on Tuesday night (our time). Why did we wait until Friday? It's entirely possible that the delay had nothing to do with the regularly scheduled Friday news dumps, but there was a delay, and I've yet to hear an explanation for it.

---

I can be a cynic for sure, and Trump talks outnof both sides of his mouth, but in this case, judging by some of the information out there, including some of the imbedded tweets from the previous page, it looks like Russsia hadn't received the notice until Thursday. So I think a sound argument can be made that Friday was a better day for the strategic goals.

Trump's Syrian muscle flexing isn't worth the potential risks.

Not militarily, politically or economically.

Some get all 'warm and fuzzy' with these missle strikes. Subconsciously equate them to video games played on the living room computer.

Till the US gets hit back.....and the body bags roll in.

Canada2017 said:

---

Trump's Syrian muscle flexing isn't worth the potential risks.

Not militarily, politically or economically.

Some get all 'warm and fuzzy' with these missle strikes. Subconsciously equate them to video games played on the living room computer.

Till the US gets hit back.....and the body bags roll in.

---

Militarily this is something that's needed to be done for years. We have precision systems and we should use them. It's why ISIS has been rolled back in Northern Iraq. It's why we've been so effective in the Pakistani wasteland by the border. There's very little risk for us in this case.

Edit: but Congress should have ownership of these things too. And when they don't, even when I believe it's strategically correct, it's not the way I like doing business.

Many in Syria are trying to understand why the world views the killing of Syrian women and children with chemical weapons more heinous than slaughtering them by more conventional means. I wonder the same thing?

Jack and DP said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

It was a political stunt. We deconflicted with Russian and Iran meaning we advised them (but the military is quick to say that is not the same thing as "cooperating" with them. We hit former command and control sites and didn't target any of Syria's leaders including Generals. It should be noted the timing of this occurred within hours of revelations that Mueller has the evidence Trump's right hand man Cohen was in fact in Prague (presumably colluding with Putin's people).

---

The strike didn't just happen after that revelation, it was slow-walked to occur after that revelation.

---

All part of the Russian collusion.

---

and more impressive, Trump who bows down to Putin was able to get the U.K. and France to be a part of this conspiracy. Truly impressive!

LIB,MR BEARS said:

---

Jack and DP said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

It was a political stunt. We deconflicted with Russian and Iran meaning we advised them (but the military is quick to say that is not the same thing as "cooperating" with them. We hit former command and control sites and didn't target any of Syria's leaders including Generals. It should be noted the timing of this occurred within hours of revelations that Mueller has the evidence Trump's right hand man Cohen was in fact in Prague (presumably colluding with Putin's people).

---

The strike didn't just happen after that revelation, it was slow-walked to occur after that revelation.

---

All part of the Russian collusion.

---

and more impressive, Trump who bows down to Putin was able to get the U.K. and France to be a part of this conspiracy. Truly impressive!

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Trump's Syrian muscle flexing isn't worth the potential risks.

Not militarily, politically or economically.

Some get all 'warm and fuzzy' with these missle strikes. Subconsciously equate them to video games played on the living room computer.

Till the US gets hit back.....and the body bags roll in.

---

Syria isn't going to hit back.

bularry said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Trump's Syrian muscle flexing isn't worth the potential risks.

Not militarily, politically or economically.

Some get all 'warm and fuzzy' with these missle strikes. Subconsciously equate them to video games played on the living room computer.

Till the US gets hit back.....and the body bags roll in.

---

Syria isn't going to hit back.

---

None of this stops the suffering of the Syrian innocents. Why are we doing this?

cinque said:

---

bularry said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Trump's Syrian muscle flexing isn't worth the potential risks.

Not militarily, politically or economically.

Some get all 'warm and fuzzy' with these missle strikes. Subconsciously equate them to video games played on the living room computer.

Till the US gets hit back.....and the body bags roll in.

---

Syria isn't going to hit back.

---

None of this stops the suffering of the Syrian innocents. Why are we doing this?

---

What targets were struck last night?

We're not bombing civilians. Relax.

Dubbicans said:

---

cinque said:

---

bularry said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Trump's Syrian muscle flexing isn't worth the potential risks.

Not militarily, politically or economically.

Some get all 'warm and fuzzy' with these missle strikes. Subconsciously equate them to video games played on the living room computer.

Till the US gets hit back.....and the body bags roll in.

---

Syria isn't going to hit back.

---

None of this stops the suffering of the Syrian innocents. Why are we doing this?

---

What targets were struck last night?

We're not bombing civilians. Relax.

---

And as I said, none of this stops the suffering of the Syrian people. Pay attention.

cinque said:

---

Dubbicans said:

---

cinque said:

---

bularry said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Trump's Syrian muscle flexing isn't worth the potential risks.

Not militarily, politically or economically.

Some get all 'warm and fuzzy' with these missle strikes. Subconsciously equate them to video games played on the living room computer.

Till the US gets hit back.....and the body bags roll in.

---

Syria isn't going to hit back.

---

None of this stops the suffering of the Syrian innocents. Why are we doing this?

---

What targets were struck last night?

We're not bombing civilians. Relax.

---

And as I said, none of this stops the suffering of the Syrian people. Pay attention.

---

When Assad isn't using chemical weapons, yes, yes it does.

Platitudes ......that's all you've got 'cingue'.

No one is able to 'stop the suffering ' of the Syrian people.

Except possibly the Syrians themselves.

Dubbicans said:

---

cinque said:

---

Dubbicans said:

---

cinque said:

---

bularry said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Trump's Syrian muscle flexing isn't worth the potential risks.

Not militarily, politically or economically.

Some get all 'warm and fuzzy' with these missle strikes. Subconsciously equate them to video games played on the living room computer.

Till the US gets hit back.....and the body bags roll in.

---

Syria isn't going to hit back.

---

None of this stops the suffering of the Syrian innocents. Why are we doing this?

---

What targets were struck last night?

We're not bombing civilians. Relax.

---

And as I said, none of this stops the suffering of the Syrian people. Pay attention.

---

When Assad isn't using chemical weapons, yes, yes it does.

---

No it doesn't.

Are we going to hit more tonight? Clearly, this can't be enough.

tommie said:

---

Are we going to hit more tonight? Clearly, this can't be enough.

---

Clearly ? What is 'enough' ?

How many Syrians do we have to kill to suit your standard ?

tommie said:

---

Are we going to hit more tonight? Clearly, this can't be enough.

---

Folks we aren't trying to do enough. We didn't do anything that changes anything in Syria. We aren't going to war. This was just a symbolic message about chemical weapons and something to get the investigation developments out of the top stories for a cycle or two.

fubar said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Crash Davis said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Crash Davis said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Crash Davis said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Crash Davis said:

---

---

Where were these guys when Obama's was bombing ISIS? Oh that's right it was Obama and they didn't care then.

---

You might want to sit a few plays out.



https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2013/08/27/amash-syria-strike-unquestionably-unconstitutional-without-congressional-approval/?utm_term=.a2450105c614

---

Lol. Go read my post again and try again.

---

Were you not suggesting that the guys in my post (Massie and Amash) that are criticizing unauthorized attacks were silent during the Obama administration? What am I missing?

You said they didn't care when Obama did it...all the evidence is to the contrary.

---

Read my post again but was very clear what I said.

---

I have read your post multiple times.

I posted two tweets. One from Congressman Massie and one from Congressman Amash. Both tweets expressed displeasure regarding potential unauthorized attacks in Syria.

You said, "Where were these guys when Obama's was bombing ISIS? Oh that's right it was Obama and they didn't care then."

I posted links that completely dismantle the notion that they "didn't care" about unauthorized attacks during the Obama administration.

It's ok to just own it and admit you were wrong.

---

Isis

---

Why in the blue hell would Congressmen complain about Obama (or Trump, for that matter) bombing Isis when Congress authorized it?

And are you really so dense as to offer articles from Business Insider to bolster your claim that Russian fighters are crap?

---

Sigh. Such short memories around here.

https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/apr/27/congress-still-not-specifically-authorizing-islami/

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2011/03/22/world/africa/22powers.html


https://www.cnn.com/2014/09/23/politics/countries-obama-bombed/index.html

Crash Davis said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Crash Davis said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Crash Davis said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Crash Davis said:

---

---

Where were these guys when Obama's was bombing ISIS? Oh that's right it was Obama and they didn't care then.

---

You might want to sit a few plays out.



https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2013/08/27/amash-syria-strike-unquestionably-unconstitutional-without-congressional-approval/?utm_term=.a2450105c614

---

Lol. Go read my post again and try again.

---

Were you not suggesting that the guys in my post (Massie and Amash) that are criticizing unauthorized attacks were silent during the Obama administration? What am I missing?

You said they didn't care when Obama did it...all the evidence is to the contrary.

---

Read my post again but was very clear what I said.

---

I have read your post multiple times.

I posted two tweets. One from Congressman Massie and one from Congressman Amash. Both tweets expressed displeasure regarding potential unauthorized attacks in Syria.

You said, "Where were these guys when Obama's was bombing ISIS? Oh that's right it was Obama and they didn't care then."

I posted links that completely dismantle the notion that they "didn't care" about unauthorized attacks during the Obama administration.

It's ok to just own it and admit you were wrong.

---

You have focused on only one country and bombing.

Look above for evidence they didn't care then.

cowboycwr said:

---

Crash Davis said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Crash Davis said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Crash Davis said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Crash Davis said:

---

---

Where were these guys when Obama's was bombing ISIS? Oh that's right it was Obama and they didn't care then.

---

You might want to sit a few plays out.



https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2013/08/27/amash-syria-strike-unquestionably-unconstitutional-without-congressional-approval/?utm_term=.a2450105c614

---

Lol. Go read my post again and try again.

---

Were you not suggesting that the guys in my post (Massie and Amash) that are criticizing unauthorized attacks were silent during the Obama administration? What am I missing?

You said they didn't care when Obama did it...all the evidence is to the contrary.

---

Read my post again but was very clear what I said.

---

I have read your post multiple times.

I posted two tweets. One from Congressman Massie and one from Congressman Amash. Both tweets expressed displeasure regarding potential unauthorized attacks in Syria.

You said, "Where were these guys when Obama's was bombing ISIS? Oh that's right it was Obama and they didn't care then."

I posted links that completely dismantle the notion that they "didn't care" about unauthorized attacks during the Obama administration.

It's ok to just own it and admit you were wrong.

---

You have focused on only one country and bombing.

Look above for evidence they didn't care then.

---

One of the links you posted literally quotes Justin Amash calling out Obama:

"When there is no imminent threat to our country, he cannot launch strikes without authorization from the American people, through our elected representatives in Congress."

"No United Nations resolution or Congressional act permits the president to circumvent the Constitution."

Pretty damn consistent message from Amash regardless of who is in the White House.

Dubbicans said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Dubbicans said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Jack and DP said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

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 .

---

Put in responses by getting the hell out of the way. Russia/Iran doesn't stand a chance against US/Saudi/Israel.

---

I realize opinions are a numbers game......get a few million people together and they all think they each have 'it' figured out.

But exactly how do you figure we'd 'beat' Russia so easily. They match us in nukes, have a far larger conventional army.

Only our Navy is clearly superior . Our civilians ? Not the best when times get tough.

---

Numbers of soldiers don't matter when we are able to bomb them at will.

---

Exactly how do you figure the US can ' bomb them at will' ?

The Russian Air Force is the equal to ours.

This is no video game Trump is playing. Millions of people could die......instantly .

---

Russian fighters are crap. They would get destroyed by ours very quickly.

---

You are wrong. Russia's fighters are sophisticated. What's even more pressing is their IADS capability and the sophistication of their 4th Gen main battle tanks.

We may 'win,' but conventional conflict between world powers is really a situation where nobody wins. We just don't die as much.

---

Sorry but I'm right.

http://www.businessinsider.com/china-russia-stealth-jets-no-chance-us-f-35-f-22-2017-8

I mean there is no way we are worried about 10 prototype fighters. Ten. Yawn.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a18659251/russia-su-57-syria-f-22/

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2017/08/24/new-russian-stealth-fighter-jet-revealed.html


Their 4th gen tanks are still in prototype and test phases. Again a massive yawn. The bulk of their tank force is made up of T-72 variants. (The ones we destroyed at will in Iraq)

So while they may have some good stuff in development it isn't in production yet or being produced enough for a war.

---

If only it was as simple as air to air or force on force. First, not having a stealth capability is not the same as incapable. This isn't the Iraqi Air Force; TTPs and training in Russia actually happen. When you say we can bomb troops at will, you completely ignore their IADS (extremely sophisticated) and assume away all risk because of our technology. It's unwise and it's also not accurate. We have 187 F-22s in the inventory give or take. Assuming even decent readiness, you probably have 100 of those that you can fly. Depending on sortie generation and where they launch from, you need tanker support, forward airfields, etc. Let's assume that the F-22 is completely undetectable. Things that aren't: tankers and airfields. You don't need to shoot down an F-22 to make it useless. And every F-22 in our inventory can't generate the sorties to defeat and adversary the size of the Russian Army.

As far as T-72s go, and argue the majority of their inventory is actually T-80s and T-90s, and again, when couple with sophisticated IADS it's hardly shooting fish in a barrel. Additionally, they don't need every unit to be equipped with T-14s (their 4th gen tank). That item is sophisticated enough to make the solution to killing and destroying it extremely complex.

Bottom line is fighting against Ivan isn't a walk in the park and would lead to death totals not seen since the end of WWII. Thats a fact. And it's not something anyone in our country has a true appetite for l, especially in an age when the feedback loop is near instantaneous thanks to social media.

---

You don't like facts much do you?

Here is some simple math. Tell me which is more.

8,900

Or

4,000.

Because the first number is the total T-72 tanks that Russia has.

The second is the other kinds it has.

Th rest of your post is just full of hypotheticals that aren't even close to true. You seem to forget we have bases close to Russia and can refuel there or would be refueling over friendly skies not the middle of Russia.

PartyBear said:

---

tommie said:

---

Are we going to hit more tonight? Clearly, this can't be enough.

---

This was just a symbolic message about chemical weapons and something to get the investigation developments out of the top stories for a cycle or two.

---

Sure was nice of U.K. and France to help Trump put the investigation 'developments ' on the back page for a 'cycle or two'.

That Trump sure is slick . If only he wasn't Putin's friend, lackey and co conspirator.

I didn't have time to read the article. I'll read it tonight.

I do remember both Rs and Ds have been on both sides of the issue.

Again, without reading it, I think the word "sustained" is key.

https://www.npr.org/2011/06/16/137222043/why-the-war-powers-act-doesnt-work

Canada2017 said:

---

Platitudes ......that's all you've got 'cingue'.

No one is able to 'stop the suffering ' of the Syrian people.

Except possibly the Syrians themselves.

---

Some of the men that should be there are running people over in France and Germany rather than defending their homeland

cinque said:

---

bularry said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Trump's Syrian muscle flexing isn't worth the potential risks.

Not militarily, politically or economically.

Some get all 'warm and fuzzy' with these missle strikes. Subconsciously equate them to video games played on the living room computer.

Till the US gets hit back.....and the body bags roll in.

---

Syria isn't going to hit back.

---

None of this stops the suffering of the Syrian innocents. Why are we doing this?

---

That's not the point, sadly.

Assad is most assuredly returning to power. How that impacts dissident groups remains to be seen