The attack on Syria

[Thorgalaeg]

OK, fair enough. Well, Russian products are famous by its durability, less complexity and reasonable prices. USA products by being high tech and very expensive. At the end of the day is a matter of politics. Any country will buy to the fellow countries of his "bloc". Except Saudi Arabia that has lots of money and doesnt know how to spend it.

 

[red_elk]

Wait... Pentagon claims that Barzeh research center was hit by 76 missiles, none of which was shot down.
https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2...ssian-and-syrian-claims-of-shot-down-missiles

Seventy six??

 

[Thorgalaeg]

Maybe the tried to make a hole through the center of earth and attack China.

 

[Kyriakos]

Maybe the tried to make a hole through the center of earth and attack China.

What you don't see in the pic is the chinese embassy. Which used to be there ^^

 

[red_elk]

Let's see...
Russian general staff says US used 30 missiles against research center (23 of them hit the target). Another 4,12,18 and 12 missiles against four military airfields (Duvali, Dumeir, Blay, Shairat).
Sounds sensible.
US says 76 missiles were used against research center only

Perhaps the problem is that none of mentioned airfields was hit.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I'm not comparing apples and oranges. Tim's argument was that USA is allegedly better in advertising and selling its tomahawk missiles to other countries.

If the US were willing to sell them, Russia would buy tomahawk missiles.

 

[red_elk]

If the US were willing to sell them, Russia would buy tomahawk missiles.

Obviously not. Russia would require to refit launch platforms to NATO standards in order to use them, whereas Russia have its own analogues with at least similar effectiveness.
See SS-N-27 Sizzler, for example.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Obviously not. Russia would require to refit launch platforms to NATO standards in order to use them, whereas Russia have its own analogues with at least similar effectiveness.
See SS-N-27 Sizzler, for example.

Yeah yeah yeah...I'm more than familiar with Russian military technological equivalence or superiority. Been there, got the tee shirt.

How's those titanium hulled submarines doing?

 

[Sommerswerd]

How do you think Clinton would respond to chemical weapon use, if she were president now? Especially a second use as in this case? If this does turn out to be a one-night strike against a relatively small number of targets, it's smaller than what I would expect her response to be - a sustained campaign of strikes not unlike the Libyan intervention, although smaller in scale and intended duration. Any sustained campaign would be much harder for Putin not to respond to.

Not that Trump isn't a dangerous warmonger as well, of course. This could very easily spiral out of control, especially if he starts seeing this as a reliable way to direct coverage away from his scandals, or if Bolton gets him to launch more attacks in the future.

I don't know if I buy the "it would have been way worse if Hillary cause she's a big warmonger" thing. Trump's voters were being sold on the idea that he was getting us out of the Middle East police business, whereas Hillary would continue with that status quo. This seems like more status quo to me.

How about over "what seems like there is a sliver of a chance that maybe it was a false flag attack"?

By the way, can we put some sort of lid on the escalation panic? The Russians aren't leaving any personnel that they would be willing to go to war with the US over standing around the target zones, and even with an idiot in the white house the US military isn't going to start a war with Russia over an intercepted missile. As someone cynically said, the US will blow up Russia's pet Syrians and the Russians will retaliate by blowing up the west's pet Syrians and the only people who will really care are Syrians, who no one really gives a damn about anyway.

This seems about right.

 

[red_elk]

Yeah yeah yeah...I'm more than familiar with Russian military technological equivalence or superiority.

No, I'm more familiar with Russian military technological equivalence or superiority.
How's your tomahawks sales going?

 

[Thorgalaeg]

Tactical Tomahawk is selling pretty well, thank you.

 

[Akka]

I realize you read that claim somewhere, and immediately believed it because it fit your preconceived idea. As in the past about Libyam you made up your mind based on propaganda a long time ago.I'd like to know where it came from.

You're the one comparing Assad to the Spanish Republican fighting a fascist dictator and you try to give lessons about "believing claims because it fits preconceived ideas" ? Pot, kettle ? Please ?

 

[red_elk]

- Hey Vassily, we need to blow up some stuff in Syria, are you ok with that?
- Sure thing, dear Nikky. Our friend Bashar has a barn just south of Damascus, perfect for target practice!

 

[Sommerswerd]

- Hey Vassily, we need to blow up some stuff in Syria, are you ok with that?
- Sure thing, dear Nikky. Our friend Bashar has a barn just south of Damascus, perfect for target practice!

They play so nice together... if one didn't know better you might think they were colluding or something

 

[Thorgalaeg]

Someone is in love with someone.

 

[Bootstoots]

I don't know if I buy the "it would have been way worse if Hillary cause she's a big warmonger" thing. Trump's voters were being sold on the idea that he was getting us out of the Middle East police business, whereas Hillary would continue with that status quo. This seems like more status quo to me. This seems about right.

Sure, he's still blowing stuff up in Syria and never did disengage from the Middle East. But I'm not sure Hillary would have restricted herself to a one-night strike against a small number of targets, especially the second time in a year that a chemical weapons use hit the media.

 

[innonimatu]

You're the one comparing Assad to the Spanish Republican fighting a fascist dictator and you try to give lessons about "believing claims because it fits preconceived ideas" ? Pot, kettle ? Please ?

I wasn't the one bringing the spanish civil war, into this, in case you didn't notice. I did mock the one who invoked it. If there were parallels to be made, it wouldn't be the ones he was making. Too subtle for you.

And in the meanwhile we learned that your country bombs others based on social media "proof".

 

[inthesomeday]

Sure, he's still blowing stuff up in Syria and never did disengage from the Middle East. But I'm not sure Hillary would have restricted herself to a one-night strike against a small number of targets, especially the second time in a year that a chemical weapons use hit the media.

The whole point is it’s becoming increasingly evident Trump’s not gonna do that either. I mean a year ago one would think he’d call for a full withdrawal from the Middle East with the way he was being sold.

 

[Bootstoots]

Perhaps some people deluded themselves into thinking that, but it was never plausible with the way he's repeatedly endorsed military action, including torture and the like, along with expanding aid to Israel and spending more on the military. The only thing that really ever was plausible with him is that he'd dispense with attempts at nation-building and would try not to antagonize Russia, not that he'd withdraw from the Middle East entirely.

 

[Sommerswerd]

Sure, he's still blowing stuff up in Syria and never did disengage from the Middle East. But I'm not sure Hillary would have restricted herself to a one-night strike against a small number of targets, especially the second time in a year that a chemical weapons use hit the media.

I guess w'ell never know for sure will we?... so I'm just flat out rejecting rank speculation that "Hillary would've been worse cause... reasons." Its just some lameass weaksauce and I'm not letting it slide. Trump is the POTUS, and he's doing the same Middle East interventionist BS that folks said "he wouldn't do that, so that's why we're voting for him, she's a warmonger!"

This Syria business is straight up egg-on-face, for those folks, period, and I'm not allowing any irrelevant Hillary whataboutism to distract from that.