By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - US launches missiles at Syrian Base following chemical attack

Goatseye said:

What is a globalist?

to actually answer your question: it's their new word for jews



Around the Network
numberwang said:
It seems nobody got killed, so an actual precision strike to destroy some gear.

Bigger question is if this is the beginning of a new regime change campaign and perpetual war?

Doesn't surprise me that McCain throws up the 2 horn signal



Fuck Trump. Hypocritical pos. He said he wouldn't get involved. There was no threat against the US or its allies. Just the USA acting like the world police again.



Eh, I live my life as stray from the media and news on worldwide matters, as it is mostly negative stuff. Although I can't really do anything to make the situation better for the victims in Syria, so I'll just go back to ignoring this type of news.

It was a nice read though.



Valdath said:
Rab said:
It just doesn't make sense for Assad to attack with chemical weapons against civilians when the Syrian Gov is winning against oppositions forces and ISIS, being in the process of peace negotiations and having the US standing back letting him get on with it, what possible benefit would Assad have to get the whole international community off side, what? It just does not add up

McCain met with ISIS just a week ago.

 

it was clearly an attack by the "moderate rebels".

 

I can't believe Trump was stupid enough to believe the most dumb false flag in history.

 

Or maybe he's overrreacting to prove he has nothing to do with Russia, which would be even more retarded, just let CNN feed garbage to the dumb sheep, this will change nothing.

 

Globalists win again, they always do.

There are some good news though. Le Pen still hates the idea and condemned the attack. If she wins, we will finally have a major power besides BRICS against interventions... 



Around the Network
AsGryffynn said:
Valdath said:

McCain met with ISIS just a week ago.

 

it was clearly an attack by the "moderate rebels".

 

I can't believe Trump was stupid enough to believe the most dumb false flag in history.

 

Or maybe he's overrreacting to prove he has nothing to do with Russia, which would be even more retarded, just let CNN feed garbage to the dumb sheep, this will change nothing.

 

Globalists win again, they always do.

There are some good news though. Le Pen still hates the idea and condemned the attack. If she wins, we will finally have a major power besides BRICS against interventions... 

France vote against ppl in second turn usually, so Le Pen have no luck to win, if this was in one single turn she could have 45% luck to win, but not on a 2 turn vote.



Saeko said:
AsGryffynn said:

There are some good news though. Le Pen still hates the idea and condemned the attack. If she wins, we will finally have a major power besides BRICS against interventions... 

France vote against ppl in second turn usually, so Le Pen have no luck to win, if this was in one single turn she could have 45% luck to win, but not on a 2 turn vote.

Hopefully something ruins Macron or Fillon does something to drag him down with him, since he agrees more with Le Pen than he does with the economist dude. 



Aeolus451 said:
kopstudent89 said:

Mate. So many sides have used chemical weapons. And has there been legitimate proof it was used or was a chemical plant targetted on purpose or accidentally? We have to stop accepting every piece of news just cause media reports it. I remember the first few years where the rebels where all a peaceful army and ISIS or any extremist islamist war thugs were never part of it even though they were from the start.

News keeps changing to satisfy a certain narrative, and only give a snap shot of the current affairs without examining the layers of it and I can assure you the Syrian war is one of the most complex wars in modern history. 

In any case this is a bad move and I hope it doesn't escalate. This could lead to much worse than the chemical attack and I think it should be put in perspective to such a response from the Trump adminstration

If this was first time someone used a chemical weapon after Trump has been in office and the air strike was his response to it then I support it more or less.  

I've heard that one before a few times before it being proven wrong but an excuse for war is a good enough excuse right? 

 



kopstudent89 said:
Aeolus451 said:

If this was first time someone used a chemical weapon after Trump has been in office and the air strike was his response to it then I support it more or less.  

I've heard that one before a few times before it being proven wrong but an excuse for war is a good enough excuse right? 

 

Nonsense. Who says were going to war? That's a rhertorical question btw. Don't always have to jump to the worst case scenario. What is the main reason in why Trump ordered the air strike, do you think? I wonder if it has something to do with his so called ties to russia. 



Aeolus451 said:
kopstudent89 said:

I've heard that one before a few times before it being proven wrong but an excuse for war is a good enough excuse right? 

 

Nonsense. Who says were going to war? That's a rhertorical question btw. Don't always have to jump to the worst case scenario. What is the main reason in why Trump ordered the air strike, do you think? I wonder if it has something to do with his so called ties to russia. 

Btw it was a strike that had a previous warning and didn't do much damage. It looked to be more show than actual war signal imo but obviously I'm just speculating. It also coincided with him having the worst approval rating in the first few months of presidency in the modern era. Seems all strangely connected somehow.

That all said I don't think russia will be too happy with this.