Bombs away is your punishment

[Boulevard of Brexit Dreams]

It seems like Trump's Syria strikes are a punishment for Assad's alleged chemical weapons attacks, rather than a concerted attempt to remove him

All I can think about when hearing about it is the line 'bombs away is your punishment' from Holiday

[pouty bitch]

6 minutes ago, Boulevard of Brexit Dreams said:

It seems like Trump's Syria strikes are a punishment for Assad's alleged chemical weapons attacks, rather than a concerted attempt to remove him

All I can think about when hearing about it is the line 'bombs away is your punishment' from Holiday

Well Holiday was written about Billie's hatred for the Bush administration, and now he hates Trump even more than Bush. It's as if Billie predicted that the future president would be an asshole.

[Eric]

5 minutes ago, G-L-O-R-I-A said:

Well Holiday was written about Billie's hatred for the Bush administration, and now he hates Trump even more than Bush. It's as if Billie predicted that the future president would be an asshole.

off topic but i find it hilarious that you kept that as your profile photo  

[Trotsky]

To say Trump is punishing Assad is to misunderstand Trump - because that is not his goal, his goal is to be seen appearing to punish Assad. Everyone gets their war boner on and forgets for a little while that his entire regime is corrupt and rotten to the core and his domestic agenda has variously failed or fucked up everything. 

[The Disappearing Boy]

This is such a difficult issue; the west has a poor track record when it comes to bombing the middle east to 'improve' things, but on the other hand, Assad shouldn't be allowed to get away with these things. Is it up to America to sort out the middle east? No idea.

 

Is there a more viable short term solution? I'm not sure there is. And what is the long term solution? I haven't got a clue.

[Boulevard of Brexit Dreams]

13 minutes ago, The Disappearing Boy said:

This is such a difficult issue; the west has a poor track record when it comes to bombing the middle east to 'improve' things, but on the other hand, Assad shouldn't be allowed to get away with these things. Is it up to America to sort out the middle east? No idea.

 

Is there a more viable short term solution? I'm not sure there is. And what is the long term solution? I haven't got a clue.

It really seems like there isn't any one good course of action regarding Syria

I doubt Syria could ever by stable under Assad again,given his many atrocities, and Syria will likely never be peaceful or stable under his rule

However, removing Assad would likely lead to another Libya or Iraq, not to mention confrontation with Russia

[Trotsky]

1 hour ago, The Disappearing Boy said:

This is such a difficult issue; the west has a poor track record when it comes to bombing the middle east to 'improve' things, but on the other hand, Assad shouldn't be allowed to get away with these things. Is it up to America to sort out the middle east? No idea.

 

Is there a more viable short term solution? I'm not sure there is. And what is the long term solution? I haven't got a clue.

 

My problem is that it's either a token show of force or a serious effort to destabilize Assad's regime, and both of those options have scary implications. If it's just a show, it's not going to change anything in Syria long term, and all that it ended up doing was letting Trump have a distraction from his utter failure as a President. Either it will further worsen tension with Russia, or the Russians gave their tacit permission for the strike which indicates a deep level of collusion.

The other possibility is that it signals the beginning of major policy change in which the United States actively tries to destroy Assad's government. That is much, much worse. Syria will have one of two ends: 1) Assad wins, stays in power, and gets away with his crimes or 2) The whole countries falls to the capricious tyranny of terror cells just like Libya. Then Daesh will rule. There is no chance, absolutely no chance, that any kind of pro-western, secular democracy will exist in Syria any time in the next decade and beyond. Assad is a great evil, yet he is still the lesser evil. Destroying his government will only make things exponentially worse.

Really, the entire global war on terror is a farce. Why is there still an occupation of Afghanistan? To prevent the Taliban from taking over? The original goal of invading Afghanistan was so that al-Queda would have no safe haven. But now al-Queda has safe haven in Libya, Iraq, and Syria thanks to the destabilizing effect of western intervention. To still be occupying Afghanistan is like trying to surgically remove an organ with tumors after the cancer has metastasized to the brain, lungs, kidney, liver and every other organ. And if Assad had to be taught a lesson for his war crimes, the West sure looks hypocritical considering what's been going on in Yemen. The USA and the UK have backed Saudi Arabia's state terror campaign, providing money and weaponry as the bloody aristocracy of Saudi Arabia bombs hospitals and funerals there. The House of Saud have even more blood on their hands than Bashar al-Assad, yet they're supposedly "allies."

It's kafkaesque, this terror war that's unfolded since 9/11, and everything continues to worsen.

[MillenniumFan]

It was my fear all along that Donald Trump might step into Bush's footsteps and looks like that might happen after all (his disastrous policy changes at home in favor of big business, already make him seem a lot like Bush). 

This is what you get if you vote a narcissistic buffoon into office, because you have too much fear of the most sensible option, which you regard as ''that daaamn faaar left guuuy who wants socialeeesm and communiiism, gaad daamnit!'' 

[Trotsky]

1 minute ago, MilleniumFan said:

It was my fear that Donald Trump might step into Bush's footsteps and looks like that might happen after all (his disastrous policy changes at home in favor of big business, already make him seam a lot like Bush). 

 

Nixon was evil but not stupid, Bush was stupid but not evil. With Trump, you get both. 

[DonaldTrump]

........

[MillenniumFan]

What are you talking about? How are we ''American Idiots'' (I'm not American by the way)? Most of us here are decisively not in favor of military action against Assad in this instance and I think I can also say on behalf of those people, that we were against Obama's planned intervention in 2013. 

[norcalgreendayfan]

6 hours ago, Boulevard of Brexit Dreams said:

It really seems like there isn't any one good course of action regarding Syria

I doubt Syria could ever by stable under Assad again,given his many atrocities, and Syria will likely never be peaceful or stable under his rule

However, removing Assad would likely lead to another Libya or Iraq, not to mention confrontation with Russia

It would have been stable if everyone stayed out of it and let Assad deal with these rebels but no the US had to go and funnel funds and weapons to the rebels which further destabilised things.

[Boulevard of Brexit Dreams]

"The representative from the Trump Administration has the floor"

Zieg Heil to the president Trumpster,
Bombs away is your punishment!

pulverize the Assad towers

who criticise your government!

[Trotsky]

I have to admit it, I'm skeptical. I've researched the chemical attack. I'm not a conspiracy person in general, I don't believe 9/11 was an inside job, I don't believe in the New World Order or lizards or Hillary Clinton sex trafficking children in the basement of a pizzeria. But something is wrong with the Syria situation.

Assad was winning. He was in a better position than he's ever been in years, more territory, rebel groups rather weak. He knew a chemical attack could provoke a reaction from the US, even potentially sow the seeds of invasion. He also knows that he needs Russia, and Russia will only prop him up so long as they can justify it. Of course, Russia is still propping up Assad and denying that it was a deliberate chemical attack by the Syrian government, they will do that regardless of the truth.

Yet it is still likely that if America invades, Russia will back down rather than risk World War 3. I don't want to get to that point and find out if I'm right - if Trump goes for a ground invasion of Syria you can bring back the fucking doomsday clock and consider purchasing a fallout shelter. I'm not saying it's safe for America to invade Syria, to the contrary it would be one of the most dangerous military decisions ever made in world history. But Assad risks that by deploying chemical weapons. He risks that, and knows he risks that. I don't doubt Assad is that evil, but could he be so stupid? To risk being overthrown by the US and NATO in a war that he is currently winning, after so stubbornly clinging to power?

I don't know. I wouldn't presume to know. It is entirely possible that the attacks are from Assad. But can I completely dismiss the idea that these chemicals were held by rebels? No, I can't. 

[Hero_Of_The_Hour]

19 hours ago, Boulevard of Brexit Dreams said:

"The representative from the Trump Administration has the floor"

Zieg Heil to the president Trumpster,
Bombs away is your punishment!

pulverize the Assad towers

who criticise your government!

Ok but lets not do this though because Assad is a fucking evil prick. International intervention in Syria was inevitable after that chemical weapons attack. Trump isn't "punishing" anyone. Changing the lyrics like this totally screws up the meaning of the original song. I mean you are comparing/replacing Bush pulverizing the Eiffel tower due to criticism of his government to Trump's intervention in Syria against Assad for launching a chemical weapons attack against innocent people including children. We all know Trump is milking the opportunity to distract people from the fact that he is a fucking disaster but that's besides the point. 

[Trotsky]

11 minutes ago, Hero_Of_The_Hour said:

Ok but lets not do this though because Assad is a fucking evil prick. International intervention in Syria was inevitable after that chemical weapons attack. Trump isn't "punishing" anyone. Changing the lyrics like this totally screws up the meaning of the original song. I mean you are comparing/replacing Bush pulverizing the Eiffel tower due to criticism of his government to Trump's intervention in Syria against Assad for launching a chemical weapons attack against innocent people including children. We all know Trump is milking the opportunity to distract people from the fact that he is a fucking disaster but that's besides the point. 

 

Stalin was an evil prick who murdered a fuckton of people, but Hitler was the bigger, more evil prick, and I can't help but feel that Assad is Stalin in this scenario. EDIT: To be clear, the "Hitler" in this scenario is Daesh, al-Qaeda and al-Nusra, I was not referring to Trump or any foreign power in Syria, I'm comparing the Syrian factions.

[Hero_Of_The_Hour]

1 minute ago, Trotsky said:

 

Stalin was an evil prick who murdered a fuckton of people, but Hitler was the bigger, more evil prick, and I can't help but feel that Assad is Stalin in this scenario. 

Which leaves us with Putin who I can't help but think is pulling the major strings.