Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Sergarr]

Hillary what the fuck

Clinton said that if she were in power, she would have told the Russians they were "either with us or against us on this no-fly zone."

"It is time," Clinton said, "the Russians were afraid of us because we were going to stand up for the rights, the human rights, the dignity and the future of the Syrian people."

I thought for a year that you were not a fucking war-crazed warhawk, and now you say this garbage?

Fuck!

[Baffler]

Ron Paul, amongst others, is raising the possibility of it being a false flag attack.

All I can say is that I hope we get something out of it to replace 'Jet fuel can't melt steel beams'. It's 2017 for goodness sake, we need to stay with the times.

Of course it's a hoax. Why on Earth would the Syrian government order a massive chemical weapons strike on a tiny village with very little rebel presence, far from the frontline, in a front that the SAA is already advancing fairly rapidly on? It doesn't make sense, especially considering they handed over all of their chemical weapons to Kazakhstan for decommissioning after Nusra tried to pull exactly this back in 2013.

[Strife26]

Standard COA planning, with an idiot, uninformed leaker, sounds like. Of course, we live in a world where I would be terrified about the existence of plans to invade Canada, and the basis that Trump might throw a hissy and put them into action.

[Strife26]

Hillary what the fuck

...

I thought for a year that you were not a fucking war-crazed warhawk

I often find myself entirely unable to distinguish when you're being sarcastic/'playing a character' and when you're being sincere. This is one of those times.

Ron Paul, amongst others, is raising the possibility of it being a false flag attack.

All I can say is that I hope we get something out of it to replace 'Jet fuel can't melt steel beams'. It's 2017 for goodness sake, we need to stay with the times.

Of course it's a hoax. Why on Earth would the Syrian government order a massive chemical weapons strike on a tiny village with very little rebel presence, far from the frontline, in a front that the SAA is already advancing fairly rapidly on? It doesn't make sense, especially considering they handed over all of their chemical weapons to Kazakhstan for decommissioning after Nusra tried to pull exactly this back in 2013.

It certainly raises a lot of questions. Didn't Kerry himself say that Syria didn't have chemical weapons anymore? And really, what would Assad gain by doing this?

Result of breakdown in C&C capabilities, demonstrating continued chemical capabilities, entrenching Russian support, there's lots of options.

[Sergarr]

Hillary what the fuck

...

I thought for a year that you were not a fucking war-crazed warhawk

I often find myself entirely unable to distinguish when you're being sarcastic/'playing a character' and when you're being sincere. This is one of those times.

Well, in this case, I'm, uh, serious. I thought that the worst she could do is to start negotiations with Russia on the issue. That's what she told, some time after the debate in which she mentioned the whole "no-fly zone" thing. I thought that someone must have told her the possible consequences and beaten some permanent sense into her, since she never got into the subject of unilateral aggressive declaration like that again for the entire campaign.

But now, it seems that it was just temporary. She, apparently, thinks that we, the Russians, will just... fold, if the USA "calls their bluff" or something. I, uh, don't fucking think that political games like that are a smart thing to do.

EDIT:
The U.S. Strikes in Syria

The Trump administration targeted facilities belonging to President Bashar al-Assad, opening a new front in U.S. military operations.


Fuuuuuuuuuuuck!

[Strife26]

Well fuck.

https://twitter.com/AP/status/850156329671028736

[Frumple]

Welp. Hey serg, I think someone just called the bluff

I guess the question now is if we're about to be in open conflict with russia or if they'll suddenly swing in favor of their american connections, if only by not responding.

[TheDarkStar]

I guess the question now is if we're about to be in open conflict with russia or if they'll suddenly swing in favor of their american connections, if only by not responding.

It probably depends on whether any Russian soldiers were killed in the airstrike. If not, then Assad simply gets a strong reminder that the US will punish him for using chemical warfare/other things that the US sees as unacceptable. If so, then at the very least the US will have have a diplomatic crisis on its hands.

[Sergarr]

Welp. Hey serg, I think someone just called the bluff

I guess the question now is if we're about to be in open conflict with russia or if they'll suddenly swing in favor of their american connections, if only by not responding.

I hope that the initial Russian response is going to be the same as in Turkish situation - heavily fortify local expeditionary force, and say to not do it again, under the threat that next time, it'll be met with force.

I don't want to particularly go straight to WW3.

[Silverthrone]

Good Lord... That did not take long. Quite worrying. An understandable gesture, but rather clumsy. I wonder if it has struck the president and his staff what might happen if these affairs spiral out of control. This dreadful puppet theatre can still develop in even more nasty ways.

Now, it must be said that the Russians have not held their pet particularly tightly. President Al-Assad seems quite intent on digging himself deeper and deeper into hell when he is left to himself, and one can imagine how popular his latest jape must have been up in Kreml. He is their candidate and main stake through all this, it is only reasonable for them to maintain their support of him, but I do hope that their response will not be any more fierce than is necessary.

My, oh, my, oh, dear.

[Sergarr]

Hahaha, shiiiiiiiiiiit:

BREAKING: Trump calls on 'civilized nations' to join U.S. in 'seeking to end the slaughter and bloodshed in Syria.'

Coalition of the Willing 2.0, go!

fuuuuuuuuUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK

[Strife26]

It's a very serious show of force, at least. We'll see what happens.

[Silverthrone]

Well, bloody buggery pissflaps! It is five years too late for that! _{(EDIT: invading Syria on humanitarian grounds, that is)}

Further, 'all' that they have done so far is to bombard a military air base. That is an action with a comfortable degree of diplomatic wiggle-room. That statement, however, does not.

The Pentagon must be a very fascinating place, at the moment. All the generals and admirals, crying out in despair.

[Frumple]

... well, maybe we'll luck (?) out, congress won't retroactively approve the attack, and impeachment hearings start? Even if intervention is a good idea I can't think of many less qualified to oversee it than trump.

I doubt it, but eh. It'd be a silver lining in the shitstorm. Might even have a chance of diplomacy happening instead of unhesitating escalation.

... yeah, this is going to go to hell, isn't it?

[Strife26]

The United States set a red line and it got crossed. Takes a few years, but you can certainly trust the United States to follow through on promises. Once we've tried everything else.