There are eyewitnesses telling the BBC now that they saw Russian vehicles leaving the airbase yesterday, but I don't know if it was before or after the attack.
So, let's review, yeah?
Our allies didn't know about the attack.
The UN didn't know.
Congress didn't know.
Putin? He knew.
This is one of those situations where the constitution (democracy) is little more than an inconvenience and a distraction to our monarch.
I bet Trump had the best collection of toy soldiers as a boy.
He couldn't wait to go to war... and now he has.
Oops, I mean we have!
I don't think there's any way Putin didn't know about this. Personally, I'm calling it security theatre. Trump wants a tough guy hug from cable and now he's got it. Assad is awful but it's unclear if this did any substantial thing to stop him from using chemical weapons or just slaughtering people. A 180 degree turn in a day is a little crazy. But I've been told the guy just wants peace.
Why is it that our "wonderful" mainstream media have failed to mention the unconstitutionality of Trump's actions? Is it just a matter of their cluelessness?!
Don't forget what Trump said in 2012:
So we know how he thinks, and his numbers are terrible. Also, did you see the new jobs numbers? I thought that Trump was going to bring back jobs, but he's not even meeting the expected rate of growth. Wag the dog?
The CNBC article I linked to in another thread said that the WH told Russia that it was going to attack. And the other article I linked talks about how Putin loyalists are descending on DC to keep the GOP in line. It also seems that Russia is a bit miffed that things are taking so long. What Trump really wants, I believe, is a big showy attack on the Islamic State, one including Russia.
Anyway, North Korea is next. It's a good thing a warmonger didn't get elected though. That crazy lady was talking about a negotiated peace, or at least a safe zone to stop the flood of refugees out of the nation (though Putin wants that flood to continue, as he sees it destabilizaing the EU and points to Brexit and the National Front as evidence).
Let's be honest, those idiots love a "tough" guy.
There is a reason to intervene to stop atrocities or genocide but this needs to be done first through the UN. The first step is to document what has occurred and then decide whether or not to take action. But this process takes a certain amount of patience which is something Trump completely lacks.
War is a great media event. Makes for easy headlines. If it bleeds, it leads.
I believe the atrocities happened. I don't believe this action prevents atrocities. The Syrian people have enemies on all sides and no friends now. Help for the refugees is needed, not bombs. But bombs are what they will get, from Assad, from Putin, from Trump.
Could this be one of those "foreign entanglements?"
President Washington warned us about those...
" It was not authorized by Congress as required by the U.S. Constitution."
Bush was correct!
Well, first I think getting further entangled in Syria's civil war is a stupid idea. Second, the Constitution is silent on the ability of the President to launch a military action. It does say that only Congress can declare war..something the U.S. has not done since 1941. U.S. Presidents, however, have been authorizing military action since the first President Adams in 1797 with the Quasi War with France. Same with Jefferson and the Barbary States...all the way up to President Obama with Libya.
I am really curious. Would you rate this war crime better or worse than the ones Obama committed?
I think you're trying to say something, but I don't know what, so, y'know, make sense.
My apologies, didn't realize your short term memory was a little dull... those Oscars must have been really good. Being that the United States under Obama was in Syria in violation of international law, do you think this attack is a notch higher on the war crime scale or is it a toss up?
I think you're trolling. That's what I think.
If you believe that I'm trolling, then you are commenting on a subject you are not familiar with. Surely you can answer a simple question. Don't be scared, I don't bite.
You come at me, referring to an encounter I don't recall (though I do recall saying something about the Oscars, which only tells me that they are more interesting than you) and asking be a question that's the very definition of bait, and you expect me to treat you like anything other than a troll?
Nope. Not gonna happen. Bye now.