Russia has said it will shoot down any missiles fired at Syria, wherever they come from.

Donald Trump has tweeted a couple of hours ago
"Get ready Russia, because they will be coming, nice and new and "smart!" (among other comments).

Its a pretty bleak outlook.

The start of WW3?

They have also said that they will target vessels from which they are fired. Now that does not sound good.

The strange thing about humans is we never seem to learn from history.

I fail to see the point in air strikes to be perfectly honest.

Clearly the only way you are going to stop Assad gassing his own people is if you want to fight Russia.

If Putin wants to make Russia a pariah state, then just leave him to it.

All our bombs and missiles will do will make things worse, and all the possible outcomes here are not good.

Morally, of course we should do something, but we are not dealing with rational people (on both sides) here.

ClaretAndJew wrote:The strange thing about humans is we never seem to learn from history.

Eat, sleep, bomb repeat

I rewatched ‘Threads’ the other night, which for those who have never seen it, was an utterly terrifying 1980s drama about a nuclear attack on Sheffield. A conflict involving the US, USSR, Iran and other middle eastern states is how that started.

Plenty of rhetoric from both sides.. Tweet tweet tweet.. Nothing will happen only more tweets ..

Stock up on your tinned food and fresh water.

I think I best get packed off to Tuvalu or somewhere else a long way from any of the major powers likely to get involved here.

Typical! Clarets qualify for Europe and Putin blows it up.

conyoviejo wrote:Plenty of rhetoric from both sides.. Tweet tweet tweet.. Nothing will happen only more tweets ..

I really hope this is the case, but Trump in particular seems to be deliberately painting himself into a corner.

I fear this is more than rhetoric.

Is it all about oil,or who has the biggest dick?

He's just tweeted about peace talks with Russia after his tweet about missiles.

He's off his f**king rocker.

That Mueller investigation is really getting to him. You just hope that the people close to him can keep him focused on not blowing up the world.

Trump really doesn't care about anyone other than himself. If the world burns while he's tucked up in a bunker with ice-cream and burgers he won't mind.

Small consolation as the rest of us get vaporised that his apologists and dribbling followers will also have realised this, if a little late.

I'm personally very sceptical about these chemical weapons attacks. I mean why would Assad do this as he has the civil war pretty much sewn up. The 'Free Syrian Army', i.e. ISIS, has been virtually beaten with Russia's aid, and yet we feel a need to intervene? History has shown that we have a record of incredibly stupid interventions, destabilizing countries, and it would probably be an idea to check out the facts thoroughly. The 'White Helmets' were once again the first on the scene to report these 'atrocities' and I, for one, don't trust them.

There was a good thread on twitter linking the chemical attacks

I'll try to find it, but these things do get buried in lot of stuff from people who like their news to be slightly less fact based and more based on what they want to believe.

This guy is good on the whole chemical weapons thing

https://twitter.com/DanKaszeta?lang=en" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Why would Assad do it? Because he can punish them with impunity knowing he has the support of Russia and that any response from the West will be weak as they are so concerned about appeasement that any bombing will be strategic and only affect military targets. The Syrian bombers have already been moved to the Russian airbase.

The only thing I would disagree agree with above is that I think we are dealing with VERY rational people, be that Trump, Putin or even Assad. We are though dealing with people with a very different ideology to ourselves that make our domestic differences pale into nothing.

Russia want to regain a power axis, and contrary to the western liberal viewpoint (the general type of liberalism that we can ALL agree with) the Russians and Syrians do not disagree with one type of human dominating another (the World Cup slave labour in Qatar and the sweatshops in China being other examples).

Freedom must be defended. We have let those who oppose it expand into the world unchecked for too long, gain a foothold, and now it will be harder. I doubt we will see WW3 but things could go belly up, for sure. I just thank the stars that Corbyn isn't in power, backing up those who oppose freedom. History may say Trump was the saviour, daft as that may sound, and even though he is a narcististic toerag.

Hope we get the cricket season in first.

I'll agree that Putin and Assad are rational and know what they're doing. But there's nothing rational about someone who is in such a frenzy that they use terms like "gas killing animal". What does that even mean? Is Assad killing gas?

I don't disagree that a hard line from the US will actually have more success with the likes of Syria and Russia.

But I profoundly disagree with the notion that Trump is the man to do it. His motives are at best suspect and its looking increasingly likely that he's going to be under a lot of pressure from his misdemeanors at home.

The difficulty with these scenarios is that other countries will always feel morally compelled to try and resolve the issues but often end up causing more damage by doing so. Dropping a few bombs on Syria might well serve as a public rebuke to Assad but at what cost? Undoubtedly more Syrians would be killed and it risks escalating other tensions that would cost lives elsewhere too.

The notion that either Trump or Putin are acting (or threatening to act) in the interests of anybody other than themselves is ludicrous. Neither could give a flying one about chemical weapons being used on Syrians - it's just a proxy for a dick waving contest and shoring up support from other players in the region.

There has to come a time when the UK stops assuming it is obliged to offer a futile military response every time some tyrant oversteps the mark. Hopefully this will be that time.

Aye, one thing for sure is that support for a military intervention, even an air strike in the UK is negligible.

this is potentially very serious , just needs one incident to occur and that's it. terrible for those innocents in syria right now, but once putin and trump start facing off and not wanting to lose ground over this, it could escalate very rapidly.
we live in a sick world, and its atrocious to realise we have tub thumping idiots in charge of things. dioplomacy is required here more than ever, but i doubt common sense will prevail

The real people in charge of the USA use Trump as their puppet. The world thinks Trump is unstable and could do anything so he is the perfect bluff.

If the children supposedly affected by the chemical weapons attack had been obliterated by Assad's or Russian bombs or missiles there would have been no threats of military action from the outside world just condemnation of a horrific act. Watching the news earlier in the week a reporter from Beirut posed the question, asked by many in Syria apparently, as to why the threat of military intervention or direct involvement only happens when chemical weapons are used.

Those in Syria wanting to create a situation whereby the West became involved militarily would certainly know which buttons to press to bring that about. It seems that Theresa May does not want Macron to stand shoulder to shoulder with Trump and damage the so-called "Special Relationship" especially since the USA stepped up over the Salisbury poisoning incident.

If this escalates as many fear it would be bizarre indeed if many western countries did not decide to boycott the Football World Cup in Russia.

Something seems very odd about the increased aggression from both the Kremlin and the West.

It’s a shame the USA didn’t qualify for the World Cup, their stance on that would be interesting.

it might be hard for the conspiracy theorists to believe, but its not hard to draw the sensible conclusion that if you let people get away with the indiscriminate use of chemical weapons, and then that becomes the norm in a region where certain countries would react very dimly to a chemical weapons attack.

Doesn't mean we should get involved, but you cannot allow the normalization of chemical weapon use.

The nut case who runs Iran is from a sect that believes there will be one last great conflict bringing Israel in and their prophet will come back etc etc. Basket cases on all sides. As always the war mongers will be in bunkers and innocent people and soldiers will be cannon fodder.

dushanbe wrote:I rewatched ‘Threads’ the other night, which for those who have never seen it, was an utterly terrifying 1980s drama about a nuclear attack on Sheffield. A conflict involving the US, USSR, Iran and other middle eastern states is how that started.

Watched this film years ago when the Cold War was happening. It was scary stuff and stayed with me.

It might help if the USA didn't try and be the World Police. I would prefer it if the UN, Nato or other nations made statements. There are corrupt nations in the world but it is impossible to Police them all.

Lancasterclaret wrote:it might be hard for the conspiracy theorists to believe, but its not hard to draw the sensible conclusion that if you let people get away with the indiscriminate use of chemical weapons, and then that becomes the norm in a region where certain countries would react very dimly to a chemical weapons attack.

Doesn't mean we should get involved, but you cannot allow the normalization of chemical weapon use.

I kind of agree with this but it is a bit Corbyn esque. Is dialogue going to prevent Assad from doing this ?

Lancasterclaret

"... Assad gassing his own people..."

Evidence please!

SYRIA: Vanessa Beeley on The Corbett Report Discussing the White Helmet Propaganda Construct

"Contrary to what its multi-million dollar international PR campaign would have you believe, the “White Helmets” are not a group of volunteer search-and-rescue workers that sprang spontaneously out of the Syrian soil. When you peel back the layers of foreign financing and reveal the foreign intelligence operatives and murky lobbying groups at the heart of the organization, what you find is that the White Helmets are, in fact, a propaganda construct....."

http://21stcenturywire.com/2018/02/10/s ... construct/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Syria chemical attack was false flag operation by US, allies:

"The recent alleged chemical attack near Damascus was a “false flag” operation by the US and its allies to launch an attack against the Syrian government and prolong the wars in the Middle East, a geo-political expert in London says....

Former US Congressman and political analyst Ron Paul says the claim that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad "is gassing his own people is a total nonsense,” adding that the American neoconservatives, who want a perpetual war in the Middle East, are probably behind the recent chemical weapons attack in Syria....."

http://www.presstv.com/Detail/2018/04/1 ... dam-Garrie" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Tucker: What Do We REALLY Know This Time?

Syria: America's Response

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_cont ... 28aYkLRlm0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Comment:

"Is Tucker the only talking head on cable news willing to question this narrative? Only one I have seen so far. Good for him."

For the warmongering sheep:

Crosstalk RT ....live

Syrry iriots...

When there are so many cameras just waiting to show "atrocities", you have to ask yourself, "Is the UFC involved?"

dushanbe wrote:I rewatched ‘Threads’ the other night, which for those who have never seen it, was an utterly terrifying 1980s drama about a nuclear attack on Sheffield. A conflict involving the US, USSR, Iran and other middle eastern states is how that started.

Are you sure it was just a drama?

Sheffield is a bit of a dump and some of its residents do seem like they've mutated.

.

Worth pointing out that the US can't afford a war. They're about to have a massive budget deficit as a percentage of their GDP only seen once since WW2 and that was when the global economy crashed in 2008/09. (hey, fcburnley, remember how good Trump was gonna be for this? lol)

Even at the height of the Iraq and Afghan wars their budget deficit wasn't as huge as it's going to be because of Trump's tax cut last year, so how the hell are they gonna fund this new war Trump wants?

America is so ****** and it's entirely the Republican's doing.

Imploding Turtle wrote:Is Assad killing gas?

Killing Gas
/ˈkɪlɪŋ gas/
The act of holding in your farts until they disperse back into your body.

I fail to see how this warrants air strikes.

May wants to join military action without parliamentary consent. So none of our representatives get to represent us on this matter.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43719284" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If we go p!ss farting around in the Middle East again then this will play into Corbyns hands.

None of this sits well with me. The british government have been acting strange around Skirpal, and Syria as hurrendous as it is does not need to provoke ww3 ,it needs discussing and resolving politically. We need to be in talks fast with Russia. If they don't want to play ball, then I our next steps could be significant chess moves in history .
Theresa May appears to be trying to force a complete fall out here , pun intended. Don't poke the bear Theresa it will bite and if this gets hot fast what the hell is this country of snowflakes going to do other than melt.

Inchy wrote:If we go p!ss farting around in the Middle East again then this will play into Corbyns hands.

We shouldn't let shitheads like Assad use WMDs without consequence, so i agree that military action is justified. But i have absolutely no confidence in our government doing it for those reasons.

Imploding Turtle wrote:We shouldn't let shitheads like Assad use WMDs without consequence, so i agree that military action is justified. But i have absolutely no confidence in our government doing it for those reasons.

How is your marksmanship and hand to hand combat IT for when your enlisted. Can you take these guys out?

Imploding Turtle wrote:We shouldn't let shitheads like Assad use WMDs without consequence, so i agree that military action is justified. But i have absolutely no confidence in our government doing it for those reasons.

I agree. I think the majority of us are fed up of sending troops to the Middle East in the name of peace and safety, only to make things more unstable and radicalised.

Corbyn for all his faults is not a warmonger and is more likely to assess the situation before lobbing bombs at people. In all out war he would be useless because he doesn’t want to bomb anyone. However I think a lot of people believe we have rushed into conflict with poor results in recent years.

He could end up looking like the good guy if this goes t.ts up

Imploding Turtle wrote:May wants to join military action without parliamentary consent. So none of our representatives get to represent us on this matter.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43719284" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

She should really be going through parliment for this.

Alternatively, she could ask Campbell to knock together a dossier for her to justify it

Send the liverpool fans over.......sorted!

Inchy wrote:I agree. I think the majority of us are fed up of sending troops to the Middle East in the name of peace and safety, only to make things more unstable and radicalised.

Corbyn for all his faults is not a warmonger and is more likely to assess the situation before lobbing bombs at people. In all out war he would be useless because he doesn’t want to bomb anyone. However I think a lot of people believe we have rushed into conflict with poor results in recent years.

He could end up looking like the good guy if this goes t.ts up

Agreed.