We Just Bombed Syria!

anvilrubi said:
We been bombing Syria
Click to expand...

We have been attacking ISIS in Syria. Tonight was a direct attack on Syria.

I'm glad to see Trump step up.
 
drkelly said:
We have been attacking ISIS in Syria. Tonight was a direct attack on Syria.

I'm glad to see Trump step up.
Click to expand...
If our previous administration has done something after the last time we might not be here.
 
My fear in all of this is if we were to get rid/help over throw Assad who's gonna take his place,That didn't work out so good w Hussein.
 
pokeybear.jpg
 
After the last 8 years I've grown so accustomed to waiting days before you even hear a spoken word from the WH that I was amazed when I saw the headlines this morning. Looks like Asshat found out there is a line in the sand.
 
Jus Jim said:
After the last 8 years I've grown so accustomed to waiting days before you even hear a spoken word from the WH that I was amazed when I saw the headlines this morning. Looks like Asshat found out there is a line in the sand.
Click to expand...
Yeah and the Fb debaters have lost their minds this morning.

Sent from my SM-S320VL using Tapatalk
 
shawn said:
The same guys that were accusing Trump of being in Putin's pocket are now screaming that Trump is going to set off a proxy war with the Russians in Syria.
Click to expand...
Yeah some dude on fb was bitchin because nobody was reporting on the gas attack now hes bitchin about WWIII.No matters what he does it gonna be wrong.
 
Turn them ISIS towel heads to dust.
 
I've stayed off my Facebook except to see pics of my nieces/nephews for that exact reason. When obama was elected we all were bitching but that lasted a day or two, not 6 mths!

As far as this goes, it's nice to see him doing what's needed. Hope he stays committed.
 
I'm not a military strategist but in my simple way of thinking bombing an airstrip that was used by the planes that delivered the gas is a pretty good ideal.Trumps not gonna be the kind to broadcast his plans and he shouldn't.I never understood why anybody would give that info out.You know it (the gassing) was a bad thing when Chuck Shumer approves of the bombings.Even Elizabeth Warren,of all people,half ass agreed w it.
 
1-tonmudder said:
My fear in all of this is if we were to get rid/help over throw Assad who's gonna take his place,That didn't work out so good w Hussein.
Click to expand...
Bingo. Therein lies the big challenge. The only way to do this is to back the rebellion forces and train them to take over, but they don't exactly like us too much, and that's who Russia is also fighting against. Hence why we've been hesitant to get involved for so long. We can win the fight with ease, but doing so in a manner than doesn't just leave another power vacuum and allow ISIS-like idealists to take over... making thing even worse for us... is the hard part.
1-tonmudder said:
I'm not a military strategist but in my simple way of thinking bombing an airstrip that was used by the planes that delivered the gas is a pretty good ideal.Trumps not gonna be the kind to broadcast his plans and he shouldn't.I never understood why anybody would give that info out.You know it (the gassing) was a bad thing when Chuck Shumer approves of the bombings.Even Elizabeth Warren,of all people,half ass agreed w it.
Click to expand...
Yep, but the problem is that by law he has to get Congressional approval first, which he didn't. This is an act of war against another country. Not a trivial matter. Back in 2013 when Obama brought up the notion it was shut down pretty quickly, he never would have gotten approval.
 
RatLabGuy said:
Yep, but the problem is that by law he has to get Congressional approval first, which he didn't. This is an act of war against another country. Not a trivial matter. Back in 2013 when Obama brought up the notion it was shut down pretty quickly, he never would have gotten approval.
Click to expand...
Easier to get forgiveness than permission.
 
RatLabGuy said:
Bingo. Therein lies the big challenge. The only way to do this is to back the rebellion forces and train them to take over, but they don't exactly like us too much, and that's who Russia is also fighting against. Hence why we've been hesitant to get involved for so long. We can win the fight with ease, but doing so in a manner than doesn't just leave another power vacuum and allow ISIS-like idealists to take over... making thing even worse for us... is the hard part.

Yep, but the problem is that by law he has to get Congressional approval first, which he didn't. This is an act of war against another country. Not a trivial matter. Back in 2013 when Obama brought up the notion it was shut down pretty quickly, he never would have gotten approval.
Click to expand...

It seems as though the vast majority of congress approves of what he did, but believe any further action needs their approval.
 
99JeepXJ said:
I've stayed off my Facebook except to see pics of my nieces/nephews for that exact reason. When obama was elected we all were bitching but that lasted a day or two, not 6 mths!

As far as this goes, it's nice to see him doing what's needed. Hope he stays committed.
Click to expand...
You are wrong. I bitched for 8 years 2 months and 16 days. Just saying!
 
RatLabGuy said:
Not a trivial matter. Back in 2013 when Obama brought up the notion it was shut down pretty quickly, he never would have gotten approval.
Click to expand...

Obama bombed all kinds of places without Congressional approval.
 
shawn said:
Obama bombed all kinds of places without Congressional approval.
Click to expand...
yes he did. In many cases the argument was made that it was in response to "non-state organizations" or wtfever the phrase is that was allowed after the 9/11 changes that authorized force for specific cases.
And in most cases, and probably rightfully so, he was similarly attacked for not going the prior approval route.
In this Syria case it is very clearly an attack on the state itself, and thus not subject to that exemption.
 
drkelly said:
It seems as though the vast majority of congress approves of what he did, but believe any further action needs their approval.
Click to expand...
yes. It's basically a procedural thing, which (importantly) shows respect to the governing body while also PR-wise showing it is broadly supported.
 
RatLabGuy said:
yes he did. In many cases the argument was made that it was in response to "non-state organizations" or wtfever the phrase is that was allowed after the 9/11 changes that authorized force for specific cases.
And in most cases, and probably rightfully so, he was similarly attacked for not going the prior approval route.
In this Syria case it is very clearly an attack on the state itself, and thus not subject to that exemption.
Click to expand...

He overthrew a government.
 
shawn said:
He overthrew a government.
Click to expand...
I'm not disagreeing with you. But the point is he's the guy in charge now (sort of). There's a legal distinction between attacking a country, and attacking a group inside a country that is not a representative of the country's primary government. One requires congressional approval, the other does not.
It's all legal semantic BS, set up to give the Pres more flexibility, but like all legalize ultimately muddies the water and makes things more complicated.
 
The argument is that it only takes Congressional approval to commit troops. Tomahawks and Hellfires don't count. But like my other comment earlier, you'll find that the people making the argument now that Trump has overstepped his authority are the same ones that defended Obama (or at least looked the other way) in similar circumstances.
 
Back
Top