Posted on 04/07/2017 12:01:33 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
A Government spokesperson said: “Overnight, the US has taken military action against the Syrian regime, targeting the airfield in Shayrut which was used to launch the chemical weapons attack earlier this week.
“The UK Government fully supports the US action, which we believe was an appropriate response to the barbaric chemical weapons attack launched by the Syrian regime, and is intended to deter further attacks.”
The news comes after the US launched 59 Tomahawk missiles on a Syrian airfield in a show of power against Bashar al-Assad.
In a statement, President Trump said: “Tonight I ordered a targeted military strike on the military airfield in Syria from where the chemical attack was launched.
“It is in the vital national security interests of the United States to prevent the spread and use of chemical weapons.
"There can be no dispute that Syria used banned chemical weapons, violated its obligations under the Chemical Weapons Convention, and ignored the urging of the U.N. Security Council."
It’s as if a lot of people here didn’t want Trump to be strong, decisive and morally clear. I don’t know why they voted for him.
We’re not going to war with Russia.
I agree. Why didn’t thy support Obama? He would have provided their craven approach to war crimes. I suppose some of these people have been so busy reading conspiracy theories and anti-American crap that they cannot support President Trump.
Everyone, left and right, keeps assessing Trump as if he’s just another D.C. politician. Naturally their assessments are always wrong.
the english poodle always licks our hand
Putin actually bailed on Assad just yesterday. He said the Russians were not indissolubly connected to Assad, but wanted to discuss it.
I don’t think Assad used chemical weapons, particularly considering the suspect sources of the claim that he did, but obviously everybody has come to consider him a problem. So we shall see what happens next.
I hope they have somebody decent lined up to replace him and not a nut bag jihadi “rebel.”
If putin is as smart as his admirers claim, he’ll replace assad soon. If he doesn’t, he values assad more than his relations with the rest of the world.
the source of Peskov’s alleged “not unconditional” statement. it’s very senior AP reporters. was the interview in English or Russian? how did the word “unconditional” come up? did the reporters feed it to Peskov. it doesn’t fit with the rest of Peskov’s comments:
6 Apr 12:49 PM ET: AP Interview: Kremlin support for Assad not unconditional
BY IAN PHILLIPS and KATE DE PURY
MOSCOW (AP) — President Vladimir Putin’s spokesman said Thursday that Russia’s support for Syrian President Bashar Assad is not unconditional, but that the country demands a full investigation of the suspected chemical attack on a rebel-held province in Syria before the United Nations takes any action...
Peskov told The Associated Press in an interview that “unconditional support is not possible in this current world,” but added that “it is not correct to say that Moscow can convince Mr. Assad to do whatever is wanted in Moscow. This is totally wrong.”
Moscow and Damascus “enjoy a relationship of cooperation, of exchange of views and full mutual support,” Peskov said. Assad and his army are “the only real power in Syria that can resist terrorists on the ground,” he said.
Peskov said Russia expects a full international investigation into the attack before the U.N. Security Council considers any resolution condemning the chemical attack that he described as “very tragic.” Doing otherwise, he said, would be “simply unfair in terms of international law.”...
Peskov said “there is a minor exchange of information going on” with Washington “but it’s far away from what is necessary.”
Moscow hopes “maybe the upcoming visit of State Secretary Tillerson in Moscow will somehow highlight the attitude of the American side toward the rising tensions in Syria,” he said.
http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/cae69a7523db45408eeb2b3a98c0c9c5/Article_2017-04-06-EU—Russia-Syria/id-67b4ff5852d74ae0a36759108118e4cf
Putin was advised of nothing btw.
6 Apr: Breitbart: Charlie Spiering: Rex Tillerson: Vladimir Putin Did Not Have Advance Notice of Strikes in Syria
“No contacts were made with Moscow, with President Putin,” Tillerson told reporters during a briefing with National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida...
According to the Pentagon, Russian ground forces in the area were given a “deconfliction” notice prior to the attack..
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/04/06/rex-tillerson-vladimir-putin-did-not-have-advance-notice-of-strikes-in-syria/
Q for anyone: Who’s running Syria: Russia or Iran? Answer me that question, and I’ll tell you how I feel about the strike.
We have always been at war eith east Asia.
That’s right... Let’s hide in the tall grass and hope the Russians aren’t too mad at us. I would rather be NUMBER 3 than NUMBER 1.
The video keeps looping the same few strikes of a very large airport complex, and never sweeps across the field....Rooskie propaganda.
Where did you see 23 of 59 made it to airbase?
AP reports US military reports 58 of 59 missiles hit airport, and Rooskies say 23 of 59...you believe Rooskies? Video is in Rooskie, you speak Rooskie?
Fox news reports airport almost completely destroyed.
Russians lie. You can tell a Russian is lying when a sound comes out of his mouth.
I think Putin knows that, and a lot of this action is almost to give him cover. The problem with Assad is that nobody likes him, and as long as he stays in power, ISIS has cover as “rebels.” Get rid of him, and ISIS has no cover.
And Russia knows this too.
Sadly, it’s true of putinistas too, but they’re worse. They know better.
That’s why putin and assad have never focussed their war on ISIS. They want it to be binary. The rubes, neophytes, knaves, dupes, dumb asses, and dopes swallow the putin/assad false alternative. Who wouldn’t accept an Alawite General pledging an end to the war, an end to attacks on civilians, and civilian government as long as there were guarantees of peace for all?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.