Important Announcement regarding the Alternative Views Subforum

[Evangelical]

If we examine the facts we can see that the US was wrong to strike Syria.

1. No approval by the UN. It was an act of war against a sovereign state. Syria has never invited the US to involve itself in its affairs. If any other country did it, it would be a declaration of war. Hypocrisy and double standards is one reason why many countries are questioning the legitimacy of the action.

2. No proof it was the Syrian government before the strike, or after..

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

If we examine the facts we can see that the US was wrong to strike Syria.

1. No approval by the UN. It was an act of war against a sovereign state. Syria has never invited the US to involve itself in its affairs. If any other country did it, it would be a declaration of war. Hypocrisy and double standards is one reason why many c

2. No proof it was the Syrian government before the strike, or after..

But supporters of Trump, in the news and otherwise, say, that Assad using chemicals weapons is a clear and present danger to America's homeland.

Sounds like what Dubya said about Iraq.

And talking about Iraq, Trump explained in an interview that he sent 59 missiles to Iraq, while he and Xi were eating the most wonderful chocolate cake you've ever seen.

There was no purpose in the 59 missiles, as can be seen now, except they made Trump great again, after his health care reform failure.

So who knows what he's gonna do if his tax reform fails. He'll prolly preemptively strike North Korea, with 59 nukes, to look great again.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by awareness

But supporters of Trump, in the news and otherwise, say, that Assad using chemicals weapons is a clear and present danger to America's homeland.

Sounds like what Dubya said about Iraq.

And talking about Iraq, Trump explained in an interview that he sent 59 missiles to Iraq, while he and Xi were eating the most wonderful chocolate cake you've ever seen.

There was no purpose in the 59 missiles, as can be seen now, except they made Trump great again, after his health care reform failure.

So who knows what he's gonna do if his tax reform fails. He'll prolly preemptively strike North Korea with 59 nukes.

To my knowledge, North Korea is the only country which has threatened America directly, and with nukes too. Nothing has really been done about that until now. Yet most effort is spent in the middle east. Stupid policy.

I believe Trump is doing the right thing on North Korea, even if he nukes it. The sooner he strikes the better because if and when they do get an ICBM with nukes, they will use it. That is what defectors have said. Why? Because America killed off 20% of the population, napalm etc, nasty stuff. They have not forgotten. If given the chance, I am sure they would want to pay America back in kind - any one of the major cities would balance the scales in terms of civilian deaths I would think. Ironically, back then it was America threatening North Korea and China with nuclear war. Japan did nasty things to Korea as well during WW2, so NK would have no problem sending a nuke to Tokyo, for example. While the rest of the world has moved on, they are still living in the 1950's post WW2 mindset, where carpet bombing entire populations with napalm and threatening (and even carrying out) a nuclear strike is acceptable. Man for man I'd say a North Korean is tougher than South Koreans or Americans, so they need to be prepared for that too. So I think Trump should take NK out as soon as possible, and not mess about in Syria.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

T
I believe Trump is doing the right thing on North Korea

Well maybe. Maybe not. With this statement on Fox and Friends :

“They’ve been talking with this gentleman for a long time. You read Clinton’s book, he said, ‘Oh, we made such a great peace deal,’ and it was a joke.

You look at different things over the years with President Obama. Everybody has been outplayed, they’ve all been outplayed by this gentleman and we’ll see what happens. But I just don’t telegraph my moves.”

He sure looks like he knows nothing about NK leadership.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

To my knowledge, North Korea is the only country which has threatened America directly, and with nukes too. Nothing has really been done about that until now. Yet most effort is spent in the middle east. Stupid policy.

I believe Trump is doing the right thing on North Korea, even if he nukes it...

Anyone can bomb the country. Can he do that without provoking China to war? What happens to NK afterwards, is the current leadership still in place? Is there any way to prevent a catastrophic war with South Korea? If not who installs the new leadership, US or China? NK is a waste case, how do you keep them from all starving to death? How does this brain washed country respond to their "dear leader" being forcibly removed?

Japan is teetering on the brink of bankruptcy, China cannot afford a drop in exports, NK is on the verge of starvation, what happens when you add to this mix a South Korea in a catastrophic war?

[Evangelical]

It has been revealed that the "Armada" which was supposedly sailing towards North Korea has not even left. They were heading in the opposite direction.

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/04/18/po...ump/index.html

It was fake news, propagated by the government. Spicer answered questions about it as if it was a certainty. This fake news seems to have been sourced to the same person who erroneously claimed that 20% of Syria's airforce was destroyed.

This is really a silly thing to do because NK could have launched a preemptive attack in this past week and the American forces were not even there yet!

The white house has yet again shown its incompetence in getting its facts wrong and shows a breakdown in communication between the decision makers in the white house and the naval commanders. If they cannot get even simple things like this correct how can they manage the country.

It turns out that Trump has been misguiding the public. This "show of force" is a routine deployment in the Pacific anyway, there is no great "Armada" that has been constructed for the purpose of going to North Korea.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Anyone can bomb the country. Can he do that without provoking China to war? What happens to NK afterwards, is the current leadership still in place? Is there any way to prevent a catastrophic war with South Korea? If not who installs the new leadership, US or China? NK is a waste case, how do you keep them from all starving to death? How does this brain washed country respond to their "dear leader" being forcibly removed?

Japan is teetering on the brink of bankruptcy, China cannot afford a drop in exports, NK is on the verge of starvation, what happens when you add to this mix a South Korea in a catastrophic war?

All they really need to do is replace the NK leadership with ones who will not pursue nuclear revenge against the Americans. How they do that is the question.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by awareness

But supporters of Trump, in the news and otherwise, say, that Assad using chemicals weapons is a clear and present danger to America's homeland.

Sounds like what Dubya said about Iraq.

And talking about Iraq, Trump explained in an interview that he sent 59 missiles to Iraq, while he and Xi were eating the most wonderful chocolate cake you've ever seen.

There was no purpose in the 59 missiles, as can be seen now, except they made Trump great again, after his health care reform failure.

So who knows what he's gonna do if his tax reform fails. He'll prolly preemptively strike North Korea, with 59 nukes, to look great again.

That was hilarious. Imagine you are sitting peacefully in Iraq watching the news when you hear the President of the US claim he just sent 59 tomahawks to bomb you?! What did we do?! 9/11 all over again.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

If we examine the facts we can see that the US was wrong to strike Syria.

1. No approval by the UN. It was an act of war against a sovereign state. Syria has never invited the US to involve itself in its affairs. If any other country did it, it would be a declaration of war. Hypocrisy and double standards is one reason why many countries are questioning the legitimacy of the action.

2. No proof it was the Syrian government before the strike, or after..

1. If the UN didn't approve why did they applaud? The UN needs the US to take the lead. Since Russia is on the Security conference and can reject any strike it is obvious that Russia can hold the entire UN hostage.

2. According to the US they did have proof.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

1. If the UN didn't approve why did they applaud? The UN needs the US to take the lead. Since Russia is on the Security conference and can reject any strike it is obvious that Russia can hold the entire UN hostage.

2. According to the US they did have proof.

1. That's like a rapist saying "I raped her and she seemed to enjoy it afterwards". The problem is whether they enjoyed it or not, but that they were not asked first.

2. If they had proof, they did not show it. There was no need to strike suddenly and without warning. They should have got the consensus from the UN first before taking action. It seems like the US expects everyone to abide by international law but themselves. Trump had no authority under international law to attack Syria.