Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Rand Paul is pissed: https://twitter.com/DrRandPaul
Also, Russia apparently weren't warned about the airstrikes, according to CNN and Fox News, and the State Department and key US allies were completely out of the loop about the US strike: https://twitter.com/John_Hudson/status/850160864497991681
edited 6th Apr '17 7:06:51 PM by Bat178
![]()
The country in general is war weary, for all that we've got disgusting loudmouths talking about just going over there and taking over. A lot of people probably voted for him under the delusion that he wouldn't get us involved in more conflicts. So I'm kind of not really surprised that some of his supporters are quite angry.
Just googled the threat and currently the Express is the only source for it.
ETA: Truth be told, we're not going to be done with the Middle East until a united front of democratic states is formed and that ain't happening until somebody kills off the dictators. Either locals or foreigners, that place is nowhere near done with war. We left way too early and if it doesn't fall on us, it's going to fall on Europe, Africa, Asia, and the Middle East to fix that mess.
edited 6th Apr '17 7:06:24 PM by Journeyman
Also, in reference to a post further up: Putin's stuck with Trump for now. I'm pretty sure the guy doesn't have the world conspiracy level control over our system just yet to just get rid of Trump now that the guy's in office. Let's not make Putin out to be more powerful than he already is, ok?
Welp, page topper.
edited 6th Apr '17 7:08:16 PM by AceofSpades
I remember in 2003, sitting around in shock and dismay, exchanging messages with friends on a board, all of horrified by what was happening, many of us drinking in depression as the Iraq war started. A lot of us were feeling numb and shellshocked that something impossible and we knew to be horrible was happening.
This is giving me vague flashbacks to that moment.
| Wandering, but not lost. | If people bring so much courage to this world...◊ |All I can say is, if Putin really does have nothing on Trump, and Trump is somehow not tainted by Russia (even with his Staff clearly being tainted by them), then the next 3 Years are going to be the most tense since the 1950's!
I thought the next Cold War was going to start with the next Democrat President, not under freakin' "I can be friendly with Putin" Trump!
If the U.S. attacks Syria and hits the wrong targets, killing civilians, there will be worldwide hell to pay. Stay away and fix broken U.S. 6:55 PM - 2 Sep 2013
edited 6th Apr '17 7:15:27 PM by Eschaton
![]()
![]()
Yes, Trump's tweets criticizing Obama are almost prophetic of how he's doing as POTUS
One good thing at least.
Which prediction is that?
First off, bear in mind that Trump doesnt micro-manage military actions. That's done through the military chain of command, and they wont let him do anything truly dangerous.
Second, get a grip. Russia doesn't really care. Why would they? Their interests in Syria are not being threatened. Of course, Putin has to make some symbolic statements in support of his allies. But he isn't about to take the immense risk of confronting us.
Heavy Russian casualties might have a negative effect on Russian public opinion. Russia might become more confrontational in the weeks and months ahead. But no one is about to attack us.
Finally, if this action saves a few civilians who might have been victims of future chemical attacks, then it can only be a good thing. I wish I believed that this marked a new era of the US taking the plight of Syrian civilians more seriously, and could alter the balance of power there, but I rather doubt that. Trump shows every sign of wanting to smack Assad around a bit, and then he will likely lose interest. Nothing fundamental is likely to change.
I'm done trying to sound smart. "Clear" is the new smart.I can't really condemn Trump for this, since it's the kind of thing I'm inclined to support and would have supported if Hillary Clinton had ordered such a strike.
Hard not to see it as an attempt to improve poll numbers though, especially since Trump isn't allowing any Syrian refugees, and this is a 180 from opinions he expressed as recently as like a week ago. And no, I don't believe that this is Everyone Has Standards on his part.
Also, there's no way that any Russians were killed in this. There's no way that he didn't get permission from them first they weren't clued in ahead of time.
So, a few minutes ago was catching up on a Pokemon game. Get a text from a friend: "Turn on the News, we're at War." WTF? Now we're here. (I might have been imagining far worse when I read that...)
Anyway, I don't think the State Department much exists to be in the loop. OTOH, Trump does seem to have pulled off a sneak attack.

Just a reminder: The president can, in fact, order military action without it being an official declaration of war. Obama did it pretty frequently, and I in fact recall a lot of people complaining about it in this thread. The right to legally declare an official war I'm pretty sure still rests with Congress, and Obama went so far as to publicly ask/demand Congress declare such against Syria because the Republicans were making a whole lot of noise about the Syrian situation. Predictably, they declined to actually do so because that would have put the responsibility on them.
Just felt like we needed that reminder of the technical details of what, exactly, is within who's wheelhouse to do.
But yeah, this is a reaction specifically to what Assad did, so I don't know that's going to lead to a larger conflict. It's extremely distressing, though, as it probably doesn't help. There are those who think the attack was Assad testing what the new boundaries are, but I kind of have my doubts.