Sign in to follow this  
NipkowDisc

the MOAB Bomb used first time ever by President Donald J. Trump

121 posts in this topic

Lawrence O’Donnell then asks whether Syrian President Bashar al-Assad would have used banned chemical weapons without first checking with Putin, his primary protector and patron, who was ultimately responsible for overseeing Syria’s elimination of its chemical weapons under previous international agreements.

 

This reasoning leads him to ask why Putin would agree to such an atrocity. The answer: because it moves the media attention away from the Russia investigations in a dramatic way. According to O’Donnell:

 

“It changes the conventional wisdom about the dynamic between Vladimir Putin And Donald Trump.”

 

The problem is that no one is really sure whether this is what Putin wanted all along. If that proves to be the case, then as O’Donnell concludes:

 

 

“Everyday that’s a good day for President Trump, is a good day for President Putin.”

 

http://occupydemocrats.com/2017/04/08/msnbc-just-blew-lid-off-trump-putins-syrian-conspiracy/

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lawrence O’Donnell then asks whether Syrian President Bashar al-Assad would have used banned chemical weapons without first checking with Putin, his primary protector and patron, who was ultimately responsible for overseeing Syria’s elimination of its chemical weapons under previous international agreements.

 

This reasoning leads him to ask why Putin would agree to such an atrocity. The answer: because it moves the media attention away from the Russia investigations in a dramatic way. According to O’Donnell:

 

“It changes the conventional wisdom about the dynamic between Vladimir Putin And Donald Trump.”

 

The problem is that no one is really sure whether this is what Putin wanted all along. If that proves to be the case, then as O’Donnell concludes:

 

 

“Everyday that’s a good day for President Trump, is a good day for President Putin.”

 

http://occupydemocrats.com/2017/04/08/msnbc-just-blew-lid-off-trump-putins-syrian-conspiracy/

didn't susan rice say that all chemical weapons had been removed from syria back in 2014?

 

doan tell us that all-knowing Barack made a boo-boo. :o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

didn't susan rice say that all chemical weapons had been removed from syria back in 2014?

 

doan tell us that all-knowing Barack made a boo-boo. 

 

They probably were removed. And then Syria got some more. It's not too hard to figure out, if you try.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lawrence O’Donnell then asks whether Syrian President Bashar al-Assad would have used banned chemical weapons without first checking with Putin, his primary protector and patron, who was ultimately responsible for overseeing Syria’s elimination of its chemical weapons under previous international agreements.

 

This reasoning leads him to ask why Putin would agree to such an atrocity. The answer: because it moves the media attention away from the Russia investigations in a dramatic way. According to O’Donnell:

 

“It changes the conventional wisdom about the dynamic between Vladimir Putin And Donald Trump.”

 

The problem is that no one is really sure whether this is what Putin wanted all along. If that proves to be the case, then as O’Donnell concludes:

 

 

“Everyday that’s a good day for President Trump, is a good day for President Putin.”

 

http://occupydemocrats.com/2017/04/08/msnbc-just-blew-lid-off-trump-putins-syrian-conspiracy/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I can say is that I lived in France a long time-- off and on for the last 50 years. Although I never became a citizen, I felt like I knew the country very well because I had college degrees in the French language and the French culture , French politics and in French history.

 

I went to college there and I have many friends and Associates there.I worked for the French government.

 

And as much as I knew and as smart as I thought I was - - I always realized that I was a foreigner and I would never truly understand their country and their culture the way they viewed it from their own native background.

 

Better than that - - I knew that as a foreigner, I have no right to tell them or lecture them on issues about their country and their culture.

 

I had that much intelligence and politeness not to tell people in France how they should be living or how they should be running their politics because no matter what my status was, as the resident or as a guest worker or whatever, I knew I was still a foreigner and I behaved at such.

 

Well I certainly have my opinions and I would share them if asked and I would certainly share my opinions with other Americans to Enlighten them, whether I was in the United States or in France. But I never had the audacity or maybe I was just too well brought up, to think that a foreigner in France had the right to think she knew more then the French people knew about their own country.

 

Masha is probably going to drop this thread for a while (you wouldn't believe the look on her face as she read your reply!), but I'd like a little clarification, if you don't mind.

 

You made a statement. She proved it false, citing not one, but two authoritative sources. Your reply chastises her for that.

 

Now, here's the part I don't get -- why?

 

Was it because she, a poor little immigrant, had the audacity to tell you, a TRUE AMERICAN, one of your pet beliefs is absolutely, provably, 100% wrong?

OR was it because you think, as a TRUE AMERICAN, all of your beliefs and statements are automatically, unequivocally true (no matter what the facts are), and she, a poor little immigrant, was wrong to question it?

OR was it because she, a poor little immigrant, showed she knows more about the U.S., and you, a TRUE AMERICAN, can't have these smart-alecky, upstart immigrants running around telling the truth?

 

Maybe you're referring to a different post of hers and quoted the wrong one by mistake. Hmm . . . what she thinks makes the U.S. great is different from your viewpoint, but she was sure to include things like " It has at all times been my impression . . ." and "I feel . . .," which means she's offering her opinion, not trying to tell anyone what to think. The remainder of that post simply relates what recent polls show.

 

Do I have to remind you she, a poor little immigrant, had to pass tests on U.S. history, culture, and laws (a test many who were born here fail)? Do I have to tell you the lengths she goes to every time she disagrees with someone, sometimes spending hours reading journal articles and research papers, before daring to post her disagreement? Do I have to dig out cites on how valuable foreign observations are because locals often can't see the forest for the trees? (The same reasoning prevents doctors from treating themselves or their families, explains why industry consultants get high fees, and is why police departments are always subject to civilian oversight.)

 

My family has been here about 120 years. I studied history and politics in schools planted squarely in the Midwest. You'd think I'd know a thing or two about this country. But she never stops surprising me -- her insights into American culture and society are refreshing, enlightening, and 100% spot-on. 

 

Last July, you proselytized against  Melania, saying her being born in the Ukraine (another mistake -- she's Slovene!) makes her unfit to be a first lady, making me wonder what you have against Ukrainians. Or is it you just hate anyone showing how wrong you are?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW.......

 

"by making the Tomahawk cruise missile his weapon of choice when he attacked Syria, whether intentionally or inadvertently, he made money off it.

How? A 2015 Business Insider report shows that in Donald Trump’s portfolio are shares in Raytheon (RTN), the defense contractor which makes all sorts of goodies for the military, including the Tomahawk missile.

According to Reuters Business:

 

Reuters Business @ReutersBiz

JUST IN: Shares of Tomahawk cruise missile maker Raytheon up 2.1 percent in premarket trade after U.S. missile strike in Syria.

 

7:02 AM - 7 Apr 2017

 

Bill Palmer writes in The Palmer Report, “we’ve now reached the phase where Trump has ordered military action which has given direct financial benefit to a company that he owns stock in.”

And as Palmer explains, those missiles he fired were worth about $100 million and will now have to be replaced. Moreover, they were a poor choice of weapon against an enemy airfield (the airfield was very quickly back in operation),...

 

http://www.politicususa.com/2017/04/08/trumps-for-profit-presidency-ugly-turn-money-attacking-syria.html

<_<

 

 

 

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

BTW.......

 

"by making the Tomahawk cruise missile his weapon of choice when he attacked Syria, whether intentionally or inadvertently, he made money off it.

How? A 2015 Business Insider report shows that in Donald Trump’s portfolio are shares in Raytheon (RTN), the defense contractor which makes all sorts of goodies for the military, including the Tomahawk missile.

According to Reuters Business:

 

Reuters Business @ReutersBiz

JUST IN: Shares of Tomahawk cruise missile maker Raytheon up 2.1 percent in premarket trade after U.S. missile strike in Syria.

 

7:02 AM - 7 Apr 2017

 

Bill Palmer writes in The Palmer Report, “we’ve now reached the phase where Trump has ordered military action which has given direct financial benefit to a company that he owns stock in.”

And as Palmer explains, those missiles he fired were worth about $100 million and will now have to be replaced. Moreover, they were a poor choice of weapon against an enemy airfield (the airfield was very quickly back in operation),...

 

http://www.politicususa.com/2017/04/08/trumps-for-profit-presidency-ugly-turn-money-attacking-syria.html

<_<

 

 

 

 

 

$$$ Ca-ching $$$.  And that airfield looked amazingly deserted.  No vehicles, aircraft, etc.  Just a few broken down planes left for good effect and some kids who were probably playing nearby.  Did they carefully avoid hitting the airstrips themselves?  According to Moscow planes are taking off again from there.

Trump got choked up when he saw the images of the gas attack?  Where was the indignation when the dead baby washed up on the beach?  Or for the boy covered in blood in the ambulance.  Or the 4 children that Trump killed with his Tomohawk attack?  No, no, no.  We can't take refugees.  The Syrian people want to stay where they are.  This is not just a criticism of Trump but also of all those soulless Republicans on the hill and the yahoo Trump supporters as well.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to wonder about the classified information that so convinced Trump that it was Assad behind the gas attack.

 

This is the same President who was suspicious of the CIA and the accuracy other security agencies when it came to the reports of Russian leaks during the election.

 

It does add fuel to the fire of the belief by many that Trump is a man who "believes" classified evidence only when it is politically convenient for him to do so.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to wonder about the classified information that so convinced Trump that it was Assad behind the gas attack.

 

This is the same President who was suspicious of the CIA and the accuracy other security agencies when it came to the reports of Russian leaks during the election.

 

It does add fuel to the fire of the belief by many that Trump is a man who "believes" classified evidence only when it is politically convenient for him to do so.

 

The information that convinced Trump to attack Syria was his poll numbers. Even some of the Trumpists around here are saying how well it made the Russian collusion story go away. Mission Accomplished, indeed.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The information that convinced Trump to attack Syria was his poll numbers. Even some of the Trumpists around here are saying how well it made the Russian collusion story go away. Mission Accomplished, indeed.

 

Fair enough, and I fully see the basis for that cynicism.

 

Except the Russian collusion story WILL come back, and come back again and again - at least until the investigations are over. I certainly hope Trump doesn't find an excuse to fire or threaten to fire a missile every time that happens.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair enough, and I fully see the basis for that cynicism.

 

Except the Russian collusion story WILL come back, and come back again and again - at least until the investigations are over. I certainly hope Trump doesn't find an excuse to fire or threaten to fire a missile every time that happens.

 

Well, he did just send warships to Korea, so we'll see. As long as news pundits keep saying "Trump is truly presidential" every time he attacks another country, we may be in for a bloody four years.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, he did just send warships to Korea, so we'll see. As long as news pundits keep saying "Trump is truly presidential" every time he attacks another country, we may be in for a bloody four years.

 

And don't forget that Trump's poll numbers will undoubtedly be rising, as well. This is a man who craves popularity.

 

Hell of a thing for a man like this to exercise the military option simply because it benefits him politically.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

BTW.......

 

"by making the Tomahawk cruise missile his weapon of choice when he attacked Syria, whether intentionally or inadvertently, he made money off it.

How? A 2015 Business Insider report shows that in Donald Trump’s portfolio are shares in Raytheon (RTN), the defense contractor which makes all sorts of goodies for the military, including the Tomahawk missile.

According to Reuters Business:

 

Reuters Business @ReutersBiz

JUST IN: Shares of Tomahawk cruise missile maker Raytheon up 2.1 percent in premarket trade after U.S. missile strike in Syria.

 

 

 

If I ever boycott Raytheon, will start with one of their products that is closest to me. ;)

 

Four-New-12BY7A-12BV7-Raytheon-NOS-NIB-T

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

"Dan Rather had some strong words for journalists who fawned over the U.S. airstrike in Syria this week while asking few critical questions.

 

 

“The number of members of the press who have lauded the actions last night as ‘presidential’ is concerning,” Rather wrote in a Facebook post on Friday. “War must never be considered a public relations operation. It is not a way for an Administration to gain a narrative. It is a step into a dangerous unknown and its full impact is impossible to predict, especially in the immediate wake of the first strike.”

 

 

Cable news personalities on Friday seemed to equate the legitimacy of a U.S. president with dropping bombs. CNN’s Fareed Zakaria stated that “Donald Trump became president of the United States” when the strikes started, while The Washington Post’s David Ignatius said on MSNBC that the commander in chief had “put pure more umph, more credibility” back into “American power.” MSNBC’s Brian Williams went so far as to call the Tomahawk missiles ― which state-run Syrian media reported killed at least nine people, including four children — “beautiful.”

 

 

Rather pointed out that no matter what someone’s opinion on whether the airstrike was the correct course of action, the media’s job is to ask difficult questions, not drool over the spectacle of war:...

 

As Fusion editor Alex Pareene noted last month, equating dropping bombs with being “presidential” is especially dangerous in the era of Trump, who has demonstrated repeatedly that he cares deeply about how he’s treated on TV. The Intercept’s Glenn Greenwald made a similar point in an article published after the latest strikes. And some journalists, like MSNBC’s Chris Matthews, suggested that the strike could have been a calculated move on Trump’s part to turn press coverage in his favor....

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/dan-rather-airstrikes-trump_us_58e7f536e4b05413bfe3049d?

Just a comment from a real journalist--

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They probably were removed. And then Syria got some more. It's not too hard to figure out, if you try.

Actually Trump's good buddy Vlad is the one who said they had been removed - guaranteed.

 

As for using Tomahawk missles, apparently they are safest for US personnel.  Launched from up to 1,000 miles away so no danger of Syrian AF counterattack.  US planes might have been shot down by the Russian air defense system in Syria and that would have been embarassing to Trump and Putin.

The Tomahawk did send a "message" which apparently is all Trump and JCS wanted to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Dan Rather had some strong words for journalists who fawned over the U.S. airstrike in Syria this week while asking few critical questions.

 

 

“The number of members of the press who have lauded the actions last night as ‘presidential’ is concerning,” Rather wrote in a Facebook post on Friday. “War must never be considered a public relations operation. It is not a way for an Administration to gain a narrative. It is a step into a dangerous unknown and its full impact is impossible to predict, especially in the immediate wake of the first strike.”

 

 

http://www.huffingto...b05413bfe3049d?

 

Obama was cautious and wanted Congressional approval before committing to an air strike on Syria. He was always concerned about the consequences for his nation and the world for a rash, impulsive act. He is now being criticized for having done that in many quarters, at least in regards to Syria.

 

Trump is a gambler who, I strongly suspect, is not thinking very deeply about the future with his actions. He just reacts, a potentially disastrous attitude for any man to have in the Oval Office, even though he is now receiving much praise in many quarters for taking action against an atrocity.

 

But this same man was not similarly moved by even greater atrocities by Assad in the past, such as in 2013.

 

Yes, it feels momentarily good to take a moral stand with action against Assad's monstrous behaviour. But with the Russians and Iranians now so much in the mix, nobody knows where the Syrian missile attack may lead us.

 

Knee jerk flag wavers are now in abundance but that is all too predictable. We live in such a dangerous world. Trump's erratic behaviour (who the heck knows what he really feels about Syria now?) only adds to that sense of danger with his unpredictability. And who knows what either Putin or Assad or going to do in a response to the attack.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually Trump's good buddy Vlad is the one who said they had been removed - guaranteed.

 

As for using Tomahawk missles, apparently they are safest for US personnel.  Launched from up to 1,000 miles away so no danger of Syrian AF counterattack.  US planes might have been shot down by the Russian air defense system in Syria and that would have been embarassing to Trump and Putin.

The Tomahawk did send a "message" which apparently is all Trump and JCS wanted to do.

it is to trump's great credit that he was moved by images of dead murdered babies but then again...

 

 

why should that be any cause for distress to anyone who has no problem with the destruction of the human child in the womb?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While Assad may not use chemical weapons again, the airfield was back in operation in a few hours. Planes were once again killing and maiming civilians, including children.

Remeber, when far more civilians and babies were killed in the past, candidate Trump advised Pres. Obama to stay out of Syria.

 

Everyone has a right to change his mind, but be nice for Trump to explain what makes it right for him, but wrong for Pres. Obama.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While Assad may not use chemical weapons again, the airfield was back in operation in a few hours. Planes were once again killing and maiming civilians, including children.

Remeber, when far more civilians and babies were killed in the past, candidate Trump advised Pres. Obama to stay out of Syria.

 

Everyone has a right to change his mind, but be nice for Trump to explain what makes it right for him, but wrong for Pres. Obama.

because obama never would have changed his mind about his timidity slash prudent restraint.

 

obama well knew that innocent syrians were being slaughtered and did nothing. nobody forced him to wax phony strong with talk about a red line. he did that all by his lonesome perfect self...and then refused to accept any criticism that he was being weak.

 

trump has proven himself human enough to take action in the face of a murderous act of barbarism.

 

the only thing obama was concerned about was avoiding being faulted by his own far left crowd for betraying his own convictions against unilateralism and imperialism

 

 

obama only talked about the value of innocence. trump backs up his words with concrete action...

 

so right or wrong...he did something.

 

apart from the hit on bin laden obama never did anything again after that...except talk.

 

talk alone doan get it done. it just disheartens those who gave their trust. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It strikes me that Trump probably thinks the word "diplomacy" has something or other to do with a high school certificate.

 

 

Sepiatone

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While Assad may not use chemical weapons again, the airfield was back in operation in a few hours. Planes were once again killing and maiming civilians, including children.

Remeber, when far more civilians and babies were killed in the past, candidate Trump advised Pres. Obama to stay out of Syria.

 

Everyone has a right to change his mind, but be nice for Trump to explain what makes it right for him, but wrong for Pres. Obama.

 

The cruise missiles that were used has warheads designed to destroy large structures, not for runway destruction / denial.  Specialized weapons dropped from aircraft is needed if one wants to put it out of commission for some time.

 

800px-IMI_Runway_Attack_Munition.jpg

 

800px-F-111_with_Durandal.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The cruise missiles that were used has warheads designed to destroy large structures, not for runway destruction / denial.  Specialized weapons dropped from aircraft is needed if one wants to put it out of commission for some time.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Satellite view of damage done to the Syrian airfield. The runway is very much intact.

 

sy-ab8.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Satellite view of damage done to the Syrian airfield. The runway is very much intact.

 

sy-ab8.jpg

 

Just shows what a HS mission it was purely designed to bolster Trump's image.  Let's not tick of the Russians.

At least Trump made a handsome profit on the bombs that he dropped on those 4 kids.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

New Members:

Register Here

Learn more about the new message boards:

FAQ

Having problems?

Contact Us