It became known why Trump bombed Syria.

[OneUnderBridge]

Who didn't know that the Republicans would "wag the dog" once they got into office? They start wars every time they are elected. It is an easy read! There WILL BE WAR; mark my words. Syria was just the beginning.

[Villy_wongaa]

Who didn't know that the Republicans would "wag the dog" once they got into office? They start wars every time they are elected. It is an easy read! There WILL BE WAR; mark my words. Syria was just the beginning.

It seems to me that you are really right about the war. It will be, because the corresponding politician has come to power. Obama would not have done this, which Trump is already doing.

[Lancusters]

Who didn't know that the Republicans would "wag the dog" once they got into office? They start wars every time they are elected. It is an easy read! There WILL BE WAR; mark my words. Syria was just the beginning.

Personally I of anything bad do not see this. If the whole world is afraid and says nothing, then someone needs to show their strength and to destroy a dictator who threatens the world with nuclear war. If this is not done now then it will be even more death and destruction.

[Yuuto]

I think that Trump wanted to achieve a specified goal with that move, and im sure it is in the interest of the United States goverment.
However I dont think we can justify bombing independent countries just to show or proove something to the leader of other country.
Politics should be made without usage of force or army, but unfortunately, in modern times we can see that the goverments are trying to overcome each other in arming themselves.

Im really concerned about current both political and military situation all over the globe, I think that the latest news just dont give us anything we should be happy about.

[Sithara007]

I think that Trump wanted to achieve a specified goal with that move, and im sure it is in the interest of the United States goverment.
However I dont think we can justify bombing independent countries just to show or proove something to the leader of other country.
Politics should be made without usage of force or army, but unfortunately, in modern times we can see that the goverments are trying to overcome each other in arming themselves.

I was disappointed not because he attacked Syria, but because he went back on his promises Check these tweets:





There are a lot of people who voted for Donald Trump because they though that he was not as war-crazy as Hillary (he also claimed that he is against foreign military interventions). They are going to be very disappointed with his latest actions.

[rokkiBalboa]

I think that Trump wanted to achieve a specified goal with that move, and im sure it is in the interest of the United States goverment.
However I dont think we can justify bombing independent countries just to show or proove something to the leader of other country.
Politics should be made without usage of force or army, but unfortunately, in modern times we can see that the goverments are trying to overcome each other in arming themselves.

I was disappointed not because he attacked Syria, but because he went back on his promises Check these tweets:

http://www.infiniteunknown.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Trump-tweet-Syria.jpg

https://m.elitestatic.com/m/2281d58a2011a5bb/Trump-Syria-tweet.jpg

There are a lot of people who voted for Donald Trump because they though that he was not as war-crazy as Hillary (he also claimed that he is against foreign military interventions). They are going to be very disappointed with his latest actions.

Maybe you were mistaken. I, for example, see several threats to the world, and therefore there must be someone who is able to respond without talking.

[jstern]

lol so OP is saying that Trump wanted tot show the Chinese premier that he has balls and doesn't even think of people's opinion.And is ready to go solo on international issues if be it

Yeah, that doesn't sound stable.

But it's just the OP's imagination. We don't know the real reasons.

[jstern]

If he did the bombing because of this, then it makes sense. Because nobody believes that Assad used chemical weapons. He's already winning and there is no reason or whatsoever for him to do so.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9PoRUVviiQ

Sometimes you just need to show who the boss is.

So many fat people there.

[Snail2]

Who didn't know that the Republicans would "wag the dog" once they got into office? They start wars every time they are elected. It is an easy read! There WILL BE WAR; mark my words. Syria was just the beginning.

Personally I of anything bad do not see this. If the whole world is afraid and says nothing, then someone needs to show their strength and to destroy a dictator who threatens the world with nuclear war. If this is not done now then it will be even more death and destruction.

Are you aware of that NK offered peace terms twice to Obama and once to Trump and also offered halting their nuke program in exchange for suspending the US/SK/Jap military exercises on their borders? Of course they were instantly turned down every time. Just Google it.

[Sithara007]

Who didn't know that the Republicans would "wag the dog" once they got into office? They start wars every time they are elected. It is an easy read! There WILL BE WAR; mark my words. Syria was just the beginning.

Personally I of anything bad do not see this. If the whole world is afraid and says nothing, then someone needs to show their strength and to destroy a dictator who threatens the world with nuclear war. If this is not done now then it will be even more death and destruction.

Are you aware of that NK offered peace terms twice to Obama and once to Trump and also offered halting their nuke program in exchange for suspending the US/SK/Jap military exercises on their borders? Of course they were instantly turned down every time. Just Google it.

If Iran and the DPRK succeeds in building nuclear weapons (It seems to me that the North Koreans have already succeeded in doing it), then the blame must fall on the United States. The arrogance of the Americans is the reason why more and more countries are pursuing nuclear ambition now.

[Snail2]

If Iran and the DPRK succeeds in building nuclear weapons (It seems to me that the North Koreans have already succeeded in doing it), then the blame must fall on the United States. The arrogance of the Americans is the reason why more and more countries are pursuing nuclear ambition now.

Well, if you have nukes and something what can take it to US soil, then even the US will politely knock on your door instead of kicking it in and bringing you love, freedom, democracy in 500 lbs packages (or sometimes 21600 lbs packages if their Viagra stock running low). So yes, having nukes and rockets is a lucrative option for everyone who have natural resources what the US might need, I guess.

[Marcus_2017]

Who didn't know that the Republicans would "wag the dog" once they got into office? They start wars every time they are elected. It is an easy read! There WILL BE WAR; mark my words. Syria was just the beginning.

Personally I of anything bad do not see this. If the whole world is afraid and says nothing, then someone needs to show their strength and to destroy a dictator who threatens the world with nuclear war. If this is not done now then it will be even more death and destruction.

Are you aware of that NK offered peace terms twice to Obama and once to Trump and also offered halting their nuke program in exchange for suspending the US/SK/Jap military exercises on their borders? Of course they were instantly turned down every time. Just Google it.

If Iran and the DPRK succeeds in building nuclear weapons (It seems to me that the North Koreans have already succeeded in doing it), then the blame must fall on the United States. The arrogance of the Americans is the reason why more and more countries are pursuing nuclear ambition now.

I would not be surprised if you help them with Russian. I think that America needs to act differently. Any country should know that as soon as she appears nuclear ambitions, she immediately becomes a target for America. Evil is easier when it is still small. Then maybe wanting to develop nuclear weapons will be less.

[Eternu]

I was disappointed not because he attacked Syria, but because he went back on his promises Check these tweets:





There are a lot of people who voted for Donald Trump because they though that he was not as war-crazy as Hillary (he also claimed that he is against foreign military interventions). They are going to be very disappointed with his latest actions.

All i see from this tweets is that he was against bombing Syria in that moment, and maybe he was right. That tweets doesn't prove anything, because best thing in one moment does not necessarily mean it is bast option for ever. After some time situation change, and new measures are demanded. Its simple as that. But that, only they knows.

[Sithara007]

I would not be surprised if you help them with Russian. I think that America needs to act differently. Any country should know that as soon as she appears nuclear ambitions, she immediately becomes a target for America. Evil is easier when it is still small. Then maybe wanting to develop nuclear weapons will be less.

If that was the case, then the Americans must have attacked Pakistan many decades back. Pakistan is a rogue nation, and they have dozens of nuclear weapons now. And also, why did the Americans attacked Iraq and Libya? These nations were not planning to make nuclear weapons.

[Barrymore]

I would not be surprised if you help them with Russian. I think that America needs to act differently. Any country should know that as soon as she appears nuclear ambitions, she immediately becomes a target for America. Evil is easier when it is still small. Then maybe wanting to develop nuclear weapons will be less.

If that was the case, then the Americans must have attacked Pakistan many decades back. Pakistan is a rogue nation, and they have dozens of nuclear weapons now. And also, why did the Americans attacked Iraq and Libya? These nations were not planning to make nuclear weapons.

Not in a hurry. These countries are still ahead. I don't know 100%, but can be American policy will be directed towards reduction of nuclear weapons. Once it is impossible to negotiate so will wreck the economy of these countries. Russia is second in line.

[GreenBits]

If Iran and the DPRK succeeds in building nuclear weapons (It seems to me that the North Koreans have already succeeded in doing it), then the blame must fall on the United States. The arrogance of the Americans is the reason why more and more countries are pursuing nuclear ambition now.

Well, if you have nukes and something what can take it to US soil, then even the US will politely knock on your door instead of kicking it in and bringing you love, freedom, democracy in 500 lbs packages (or sometimes 21600 lbs packages if their Viagra stock running low). So yes, having nukes and rockets is a lucrative option for everyone who have natural resources what the US might need, I guess.

LOL, I nevered considered this, but you have a point. NK is kind of resource batren, I believe we get rare earths from them. But, a deterrent is a deterrent; what's good for the goose is good for the gander. But with that being said, nukes where a can of worms we should have never opened, as humans. For the collateral damage this technology causes, nukes should be banned across the board. But this won't happen; I'm a realist no way US or Russia is lowering the gun first.

[Sithara007]

Not in a hurry. These countries are still ahead. I don't know 100%, but can be American policy will be directed towards reduction of nuclear weapons. Once it is impossible to negotiate so will wreck the economy of these countries. Russia is second in line.

All the super-powers should negotiate among themselves to bring down the number of nuclear weapons. What is the point in having thousands of nukes, when just a few hundred can make our planet uninhabitable for the next 1 million years? These nuclear warheads must be decommissioned and converted in to nuclear fuel for the reactors.

[OneUnderBridge]

Republicans start wars so that they can increase their wealth. War is a tool that the Republicans utilize to increase their profits. They are not humanitarians and they do not care about anything else but money. Republican's do not want peace-they want war!

[Lancusters]

Not in a hurry. These countries are still ahead. I don't know 100%, but can be American policy will be directed towards reduction of nuclear weapons. Once it is impossible to negotiate so will wreck the economy of these countries. Russia is second in line.

All the super-powers should negotiate among themselves to bring down the number of nuclear weapons. What is the point in having thousands of nukes, when just a few hundred can make our planet uninhabitable for the next 1 million years? These nuclear warheads must be decommissioned and converted in to nuclear fuel for the reactors.

It will not lead to solving the problem with nuclear weapons. What do you care if these countries will reduce the number of weapons capable of 5 times to destroy the earth to such a level that it will last for 2-3 times. Still they are dangerous for the planet, but they don't completely reduce.

[Sithara007]

Not in a hurry. These countries are still ahead. I don't know 100%, but can be American policy will be directed towards reduction of nuclear weapons. Once it is impossible to negotiate so will wreck the economy of these countries. Russia is second in line.

All the super-powers should negotiate among themselves to bring down the number of nuclear weapons. What is the point in having thousands of nukes, when just a few hundred can make our planet uninhabitable for the next 1 million years? These nuclear warheads must be decommissioned and converted in to nuclear fuel for the reactors.

It will not lead to solving the problem with nuclear weapons. What do you care if these countries will reduce the number of weapons capable of 5 times to destroy the earth to such a level that it will last for 2-3 times. Still they are dangerous for the planet, but they don't completely reduce.

Any reduction in the number of nuclear warheads is welcome. There is no chance of a complete eradication of the nukes, at least by the United States, Russia and China. So we will go for something which is practicable.