Savage Henry Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 36 minutes ago, welshbairn said: Half an hour later and he's a hippy peacenik. https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/984032798821568513 Never worse? Well, there's East Berlin, and there's the Cuban Missile Crisis for starters. There's also Afghanistan in the 1980s. Not sure Trump's heard of them, I don't suppose. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DA Baracus Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 Trump genuinely needs to he killed. He's the biggest threat to humanity and seems determined to see millions, if not billions, of people die in nuclear wars 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 Hopefully Donald will use this as an excuse to stall and play peacemaker if Matis convinces him that the alternative has no good outcomes. https://www.opcw.org/news/article/opcw-will-deploy-fact-finding-mission-to-douma-syria/ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dorlomin Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 (edited) 28 minutes ago, Savage Henry said: Never worse? Well, there's East Berlin, and there's the Cuban Missile Crisis for starters. There's also Afghanistan in the 1980s. Not sure Trump's heard of them, I don't suppose. During Operation Able Archer 83 the Soviets thought it was a prelude to an actual attack and were hunkered down ready for war to break out. Russia has pretty good SAMS, so could in theory be a serious challenge to US intervention in Syria. But beyond a couple of Tomahawks and maybe some aircraft losses there is little more the two could really do to each other. Russia very likely lacks anything like the logistic tail to road march through Ukraine then Poland to get anywhere near the NATO core states like Germany. The American public have nothing like the appetite for the deaths and reserve call ups that would be needed to go the other way. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_Conventional_Armed_Forces_in_Europe Both sides are sort of matched, Russia has a huge chunk of old clunkers gathering rust with seals and other perishables long gone listed as reserves but you cannot take that into the field with modern man portable missiles and expect anything other than a lot of body bags to be returned. Edited April 11, 2018 by dorlomin 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RiG Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 From around 5 years ago... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zetterlund Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 51 minutes ago, renton said: The Russians hardly trying to dampen the flames either Launch sites in this scenario being US/NATO warships, submarines and airfields based in surrounding countries. That's a two way shooting match between major powers, something we've avoided for 70+ years if it were to come to pass.... Not sure how else they could have responded, being the defending party against an aggressor. The most fundamental responsibility of any government should be to avoid getting their country into a war, but the US for the last few years seems to have been doing everything possible to make this happen, with the UK recently joining in. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
renton Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 5 minutes ago, Zetterlund said: Not sure how else they could have responded, being the defending party against an aggressor. The most fundamental responsibility of any government should be to avoid getting their country into a war, but the US for the last few years seems to have been doing everything possible to make this happen, with the UK recently joining in. Well, the Russians aren't technically the defending party, the Assad Syrians are. That's a loophole a mile wide should the Russians wish to use it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotThePars Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 Not sure how else they could have responded, being the defending party against an aggressor. The most fundamental responsibility of any government should be to avoid getting their country into a war, but the US for the last few years seems to have been doing everything possible to make this happen, with the UK recently joining in. Didn’t Theresa May attempt to dampen the enthusiasm for strikes yesterday? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 6 minutes ago, NotThePars said: Didn’t Theresa May attempt to dampen the enthusiasm for strikes yesterday? She seems to be advocating waiting for confirmation about what happened before doing anything at least. Quote After a phone conversation with Mr Trump and a separate discussion with Mr Macron, a Downing Street spokesperson said: “They agreed that reports of a chemical weapons attack in Syria were utterly reprehensible and, if confirmed, represented further evidence of the Assad regime’s appalling cruelty against its own people and total disregard for its legal obligations not to use these weapons. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/syria-chemical-attack-douma-donald-trump-theresa-may-emmanuel-macron-chemical-weapons-white-house-a8298616.html 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crossbill Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dirty dingus Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 This petulant man child is going to take us all down with him. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HTG Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 2 hours ago, Savage Henry said: Never worse? Well, there's East Berlin, and there's the Cuban Missile Crisis for starters. There's also Afghanistan in the 1980s. Not sure Trump's heard of them, I don't suppose. Trump wasn't there. As a complete arsehole and narcissist, only stuff that he has personal involvement in will register as the best or worst of anything. People keep saying it but how in the name of f**k America got to this level of idiocy is unfathomable. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 13 minutes ago, HTG said: Trump wasn't there. As a complete arsehole and narcissist, only stuff that he has personal involvement in will register as the best or worst of anything. People keep saying it but how in the name of f**k America got to this level of idiocy is unfathomable. Trump supporters include large numbers of Evangelical Christians who genuinely believe in end of days, the rapture and all that bullshit and probably aren’t to fazed by Armageddon. However they will be significantly outnumbered by mainstream Republicans and we can only hope that these people will step in before Trump’s ego and posturing leads to an act of unthinkable and unreversible stupidity. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killiepiemuncher Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MONKMAN Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 I’m going to take a while guess and say, this isn’t going to end well. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zetterlund Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 3 hours ago, renton said: Well, the Russians aren't technically the defending party, the Assad Syrians are. That's a loophole a mile wide should the Russians wish to use it. The Russians will literally be defending themselves as they are stationed in the likely targets of missile strikes. If the US/UK/France go for it anyway in this knowledge then they must be clinically insane. I wouldn't actually be surprised if they went for alleged Iranian bases instead to avoid this risk. 3 hours ago, NotThePars said: Didn’t Theresa May attempt to dampen the enthusiasm for strikes yesterday? She threw in a cursory "if confirmed" yesterday but is back to "all the indications are that it was Assad" today. Which is a straight up lie. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WILLIEA Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 Patrick Cockborn, usually solid on the Middle East and certainly not a mouthpiece for London or Washington, thinks the evidence points towards a Syrian chemical attack. Not that firing a bunch of cruise missiles at them would do any good though. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/syria-chemical-weapons-attack-explained-douma-air-strikes-russia-assad-a8300086.html 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotThePars Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 Patrick Cockborn, usually solid on the Middle East and certainly not a mouthpiece for London or Washington, thinks the evidence points towards a Syrian chemical attack. Not that firing a bunch of cruise missiles at them would do any good though.https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/syria-chemical-weapons-attack-explained-douma-air-strikes-russia-assad-a8300086.html Big fan of Patrick (and Andrew) Cockburn. Have a lot of respect for journalists that do much more than just pontificate in their weekly column on whatever’s in the news. It’s undeniable that Patrick knows his stuff and has committed his time, energy and nearly his life into covering the wars in the Middle East. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forest of Dean Posted April 11, 2018 Share Posted April 11, 2018 1 hour ago, Zetterlund said: The Russians will literally be defending themselves as they are stationed in the likely targets of missile strikes. If the US/UK/France go for it anyway in this knowledge then they must be clinically insane. I wouldn't actually be surprised if they went for alleged Iranian bases instead to avoid this risk. Doubt it. Israel has bombed a number of Iranian targets (within Syria) and shot down Iranian drones. They will deal with them (they are getting a load of F35s now too). Russia has done or said nothing about this since Russia and Israel work closely together economically. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.