Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?
Posted: Thu Apr 06, 2017 10:32 pm
by Elvis
Buy Raytheon NOW! This war is a-go-go!!
Since 1991, in unprovoked attacks on other countries, the United States has fired approximately 2,008 Tomahawk missiles, killing thousands of men, women and children, at a cost of about $3,430,000,000 tax US dollars.
These are established facts that neocon apologists around the world would prefer to forget, because their moral outrage and bloodlust over mere allegations might evaporate.
Fifty Tomahawk missiles is a huge amount of destructive power. Trump probably just killed some more beautiful children.
The Tomahawk (US /ˈtɑːməhɔːk/ or UK /ˈtɒməhɔːk/) is a long-range, all-weather, subsonic cruise missile named after the Native American axe. Introduced by McDonnell Douglas in the 1970s, it was initially designed as a medium to long-range, low-altitude missile that could be launched from a surface platform. It has been improved several times, and after corporate divestitures and acquisitions, is now made by Raytheon. Some Tomahawks were also manufactured by General Dynamics (now Boeing Defense, Space & Security).[4][5]
...
Type Long-range, all-weather, subsonic cruise missile
Place of origin United States
Service history
In service 1983–present
Used by United States Navy Royal Navy
Production history
Manufacturer General Dynamics (initially) Raytheon/McDonnell Douglas
Unit cost US$1.59m (FY2014)[1] (Block IV)
Specifications
Weight 2,900 lb (1,300 kg), 3,500 lb (1,600 kg) with booster
Length
Without booster: 18 ft 3 in (5.56 m)
With booster: 20 ft 6 in (6.25 m)
Diameter 20.4 in (0.52 m)
Warhead Nuclear: W80 warhead (retired)[2]
Conventional: 1,000 pounds (450 kg) High explosive
or Submunitions dispenser with BLU-97/B Combined Effects Bomb or PBXN
Detonation mechanism FMU-148 since TLAM Block III, others for special applications
Engine Williams International F107-WR-402 turbofan using TH-dimer fuel and a solid-fuel rocket booster
Wingspan 8 ft 9 in (2.67 m)
Operational range
Block II TLAM-A – 1,350 nmi (1,550 mi; 2,500 km) Block III TLAM-C, Block IV TLAM-E – 900 nmi (1,000 mi; 1,700 km)
Block III TLAM-D – 700 nmi (810 mi; 1,300 km)[3]
Speed Subsonic; about 550 mph (890 km/h)
Guidance system GPS, INS, TERCOM, DSMAC, active radar homing (RGM/UGM-109B)
Launch platform Vertical Launch System (VLS) and horizontal submarine torpedo tubes (known as TTL (torpedo tube launch))
Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?
Posted: Thu Apr 06, 2017 11:36 pm
by PufPuf93
Elvis » Thu Apr 06, 2017 5:18 pm wrote:That reminds me—for years we've been told that poison gas attacks in Syria could only be Syrian government actions because the gas was dropped from helicopters and the Syrian military didn't have any planes and ISIS didn't have any helicopters.
First, we've seen big military helicopters shepherding the infamous long lines of ISIS-branded Toyata trucks traveling across the desert.
Second, it always struck me as pretty unlikely that the Syrian military would no airplanes whatsoever capable of dropping cannisters.
Now, we're being told that the Syrian government delivered the gas in planes—we have the exact times the planes left the airfield!
It's completely possible that since the last helocopter drops the Syrain government has managed to repair or otherwise obtain some planes.
(At least Robert Siegel on NPR is still saying that the gas attacks are "apparently" the work of the Assad government.)
Recall long ago we were told that Saddam Hussein shipped his air force and WMD and Scuds into Syria and said that the war materials were buried in the sand.
Bad guys must have found them.
Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?
Posted: Fri Apr 07, 2017 3:52 am
by Nordic
Can't help but wonder who Mulligan was the first time round.
Definition of mulligan
: a free shot sometimes given a golfer in informal play when the previous shot was poorly played
Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?
Posted: Fri Apr 07, 2017 4:01 am
by Nordic
Looks like some of the victims of the "deadly" "gas attack" are miraculously coming back to life:
But it appears that your fat orange hero is right on board with the neocon agenda to bomb Syria. Guess he fell for the phony gas attacks too.
Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?
Posted: Fri Apr 07, 2017 9:32 am
by seemslikeadream
everybody loves a bomber and now everybody loves trump
he cares about Syrian children so much....BUT DON'T SEND THEM HERE!!!
Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?
Posted: Fri Apr 07, 2017 9:34 am
by seemslikeadream
how can I be so mad and so sad all at the same time?
who could have ever thought the great orange hero would do such a thing? In total there are 100 users online :: 4 registered, 3 hidden and 93 guests (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
but I get chided for being so pissed off at the crap being constantly thrown at me..that's the most important thing around here ...scold SLaD
Malcolm Nance Retweeted
John AravosisVerified account @aravosis 9h9 hours ago Trump today blamed Obama for the deadly chemical weapon attack in Syria. Trump didn’t blame Russia, which backs Assad. Trump blamed America.
YOU ARE THE FUCKING PRESIDENT NOW ASSHOLE TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR SOMETHING...ANYTHING
GET OFF THE FUCKING TWEETER AND LOOK AT THIS .....YOU ARE THE FUCKING PRESIDENT NOW ASSHOLE
ARE YOU GOING TO USE THESE BODIES AS AN EXCUSE TO START WAR ASSHOLE? WHO'S PLANES WERE USED TO DROP THE CHEMICALS...YOUR BFF?
WHY ARE YOU SECRETLY POSITIONING HUNDREDS OF U.S. TROOPS ON THE GROUND IN SYRIA?
YOU DON'T WANT ANY OF THESE CHILDREN COMING TO THE U. S. YOU JUST WANT THEM DEAD
Assad Apparently ‘Gasses’ Civilians Days After Tillerson Hints He Can Stay in Power Evidence of a sophisticated chemical weapons attack by the Assad regime suggests the dictator in Damascus thinks he’s now got Trump’s carte blanche to kill as he likes. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2 ... s-gas.html
Has Trump deferred to Russia in Syria?
By Juan Cole | Apr. 3, 2017 |
By Juan Cole | (Informed Comment) | – –
Elizabeth Palmer reported from Ankara last Thursday that Secretary of State Rex Tillerson had difficult and inconclusive discussions with Turkish president Tayyip Erdogan concerning Syria. After the meeting he said publicly, that the “longer-term status of President (Bashar) Assad will be decided by the Syrian people.”
CBS and other news organizations argued that Tillerson’s statement signals a shift in US policy from that of the Obama administration, which called for Syrian president Bashar al-Assad to step down.
This point is true as far as it goes. But it also has to be said that the Obama administration decided at the time of the fiasco of the red line over chemical weapons use (when Obama could not get the UK parliament to support joint Anglo-American action) in September of 2013, that it was unwise to try to unseat al-Assad. From that time till now, the US Air Force has never deliberately targeted a Syrian military or governmental facility.
So regardless of rhetoric, Obama behaved as though he believed what Tillerson just openly said.
Still, it is a little startling to have the US abruptly speak about Syria exactly the way the Russians do. Michael Jansen notes that the US is now decisively on the other side from the Syrian rebels, who have been demanding at the Kazakhstan peace talks that al-Assad step down as a prerequisite to new elections and national reconciliation. Jansen reports that one reason the rebels make this demand is that their electoral analysis suggests to them that if free and fair elections were held in Syria, al-Assad would likely win.
This analysis is correct. The regime probably has 80% of the population under its authority now– all the major cities plus some of the countryside, whereas the rebels have only a couple urban enclaves and then mostly rural villages. Moreover, populations like those in Aleppo, Latakia and Damascus are grateful to be living under even a brutal one-party state rather than under the mostly fundamentalist rebels, some of whom are openly allied with the al-Qaeda-linked Syrian Conquest Front (formerly Jabhat al-Nusra or the Support Front).
Syria is probably about 6% Christian, 3% Druze, 14% Allawi, 2% Shiite, 10% Kurdish– i.e. about 35% minorities. Then of the 65% that are Sunni Arabs, a majority are secular-minded and, as in West Aleppo, are just as afraid of al-Qaeda and ISIL as are the minorities. So al-Assad would almost certainly get a majority of the votes in any free and fair election at the moment. That doesn’t mean people like living under a one-party state or one that tortures. It just means that the rebel opposition turned to an extremist Sunni discourse that scared the minorities and secularists. The Saudi-backed Army of Islam, tagged as ‘moderate’ by Obama’s CIA, thundered against the wretched Allawi heretics, as they called them, and no state erected by this Saudi candidate would offer a decent life to Syria’s minorities.
So if the rebel private polling is correct, then what Tillerson is really saying is that Syrians are stuck with al-Assad, and that the Trump administration is sanguine about that prospect.
Saying this publicly puts Tillerson and Trump on the same side as Russia and Iran in Syria, but poses a set of problems for US relations with Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Turkey, who have been supporting one or another of the increasingly fundamentalist rebel groups now bunched up in Idlib Province in the north or East Ghouta near Damascus, etc.
In essence, Tillerson is telling the Gulf Cooperation Council, including the Saudis, and Turkey that their side in Syria has lost.
Worse for the Erdogan government in Turkey is that the US still seems determined to use the post-Communist YPG Kurdish militia to expel ISIL from its Syrian capital of Raqqa. Turkey views the YPG as indistinguishable from the PKK terrorist group it is battling in eastern Anatolia. Erdogan had high hopes that Trump would drop this Obama policy. Instead. Trump’s Secretary of Defense, Jim Mattis, appears to have doubled down on the alliance with Syria’s Kurds. The Kurds will want a loose federalism in Syria after ISIL is gone, within the matrix of which they can erect an all but independent Kurdish mini-state. Such a development is Ankara’s worst nightmare.
At the same time, Trump seems to be peeved at Erdogan and at Egyptian strong man Abdel Fattah al-Sisi for not stepping up to wage the war on ISIL in the country’s east.
BBC Monitoring translated a discussion on Russia’s NTV from last Friday:
Channel One accused the USA of trying “to break up Syria into small pieces”, “to weaken Bashar al-Assad”, “to destabilise Iran”, “to put pressure on the Turkish president who is out of control” and “of course, to weaken Russia’s influence in the region”.
‘According to Channel One and NTV, the USA has promised Kurds in Iraq an independent state. Creating an independent Kurdish state, a pundit told Channel One, “poses a direct threat to national security and the territorial integrity” of the states which have Kurdish enclaves on their territory. As a result, “the whole system of regional security will be destroyed”, he said.
According to NTV, Tillerson and Erdogan, who met in Ankara on 30 March, had “difficult talks” and reached no agreement on Kurds. The US support for the Kurds is aimed “against President Erdogan”, a pundit told NTV.
“We will be witnessing a conflict emerging between the USA and Turkey before our very eyes,” another pundit told NTV.
And Channel One described relations between the USA and Turkey as being “on the point of a nervous breakdown”.’
in Russian 1900 gmt 31 Mar 17
In fact, the US is unlikely to have promised the Kurds their own state. But maybe a loose federalism. The use of the YPG isn’t aimed at Erdogan; it is just Pentagon pragmatism. The YPG are the only ones willing to step up and take ISIL on. And while US relations with Turkey have been better, they aren’t on the verge of breakdown, however much the Russian intelligentsia are hoping for that.
So, yes, Tillerson is speaking a different language about Syria than did Obama. But Trump’s concrete policies and those of Obama with regard to Syria seem to show a great deal of continuity.
—–
Related video:
CGTN: “Hundreds flee clashes for control of Tabqa, Syria”
We should stay the hell out of Syria, the "rebels" are just as bad as the current regime. WHAT WILL WE GET FOR OUR LIVES AND $ BILLIONS?ZERO
Donald J. TrumpVerified account
@realDonaldTrump
What will we get for bombing Syria besides more debt and a possible long term conflict? Obama needs Congressional approval.
Donald J. Trump ✔@realDonaldTrump If Obama attacks Syria and innocent civilians are hurt and killed, he and the U.S. will look very bad!
2:26 PM - 30 Aug 2013
635 635 Retweets 306 306 likes
Donald J. Trump ✔@realDonaldTrump How bad has our "leader" made us look on Syria. Stay out of Syria, we don't have the leadership to win wars or even strategize.
4:28 PM - 30 Aug 2013
Donald J. Trump ✔@realDonaldTrump "@mguarino64: @realDonaldTrump " How would you treat the Syria situation if president ?" I'd let them all fight with each other-focus on US!
6:09 AM - 1 Sep 2013
Donald J. Trump ✔@realDonaldTrump 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.
8:55 PM - 2 Sep 2013
Donald J. Trump ✔@realDonaldTrump "@BigSexyBDAvis: @realDonaldTrump mr trump would attack Syria or no?" No, lets make our country great again as they fight their war!
8:45 PM - 3 Sep 2013
Donald J. Trump ✔@realDonaldTrump What I am saying is stay out of Syria.
9:00 PM - 3 Sep 2013
1,502 1,502 Retweets 1,112 1,112 likes
Donald J. Trump ✔@realDonaldTrump AGAIN, TO OUR VERY FOOLISH LEADER, DO NOT ATTACK SYRIA - IF YOU DO MANY VERY BAD THINGS WILL HAPPEN & FROM THAT FIGHT THE U.S. GETS NOTHING!
8:20 AM - 5 Sep 2013
Donald J. Trump ✔@realDonaldTrump Russia is sending a fleet of ships to the Mediterranean. Obama’s war in Syria has the potential to widen into a worldwide conflict.
3:45 PM - 5 Sep 2013
Donald J. Trump ✔@realDonaldTrump President Obama, do not attack Syria. There is no upside and tremendous downside. Save your "powder" for another (and more important) day!
Donald J. Trump ✔@realDonaldTrump Don't attack Syria - an attack that will bring nothing but trouble for the U.S. Focus on making our country strong and great again!
6:59 AM - 9 Sep 2013
Donald J. Trump ✔@realDonaldTrump Obama must now start focusing on OUR COUNTRY, jobs, healthcare and all of our many problems. Forget Syria and make America great again!
Donald J. Trump ✔@realDonaldTrump We should stop talking, stay out of Syria and other countries that hate us, rebuild our own country and make it strong and great again-USA!
12:29 AM - 13 Sep 2013
Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?
Posted: Fri Apr 07, 2017 10:36 am
by Mulligan
Trump sure acted quickly. I guess the whole anti-globalist thing wasn't politically expedient anymore. Or maybe he's been a neocon warhawk the entire time?
Reports that Bannon is on the way out reinforce that.
Good, they were fascist tankie white supremacist communist indie rocker Assadist children and clearly don't deserve to live
Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?
Posted: Fri Apr 07, 2017 11:31 am
by seemslikeadream
runway in tact....check
dead civilians....check
chemical weapons still there...check
tell Putin so he can tell Assda ....check
need more bombs now ...check
everyone loves trumpy now.....check
Russian mob who?...check
Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?
Posted: Fri Apr 07, 2017 12:25 pm
by liminalOyster
This is a reality show. I suspect Putin and Trump are just building up to a big wet kiss that audiences will be talking about for weeks to come.
Russian warship steams toward US destroyers that launched Syria strikes
A Russian warship entered the eastern Mediterranean Friday and was heading toward the area where two U.S. Navy destroyers launched missile strikes into Syria, Fox News has learned.
The Russian frigate, Admiral Grigorovich RFS-494, crossed through the Bosphorus Strait “a few hours ago” from the Black Sea, according to a U.S. defense official.
The Russian warship is now in the eastern Mediterranean steaming in the direction of the U.S. warships.
The Admiral Grigorovich is armed with advanced Kalibr cruise missiles.
Also Friday, one of the American destroyers that launched the missiles into Syria started heading to an undisclosed location to rearm.
The U.S. struck a Syrian airbase in retaliation for this week's gruesome chemical weapons attack against civilians, including infants and small children, military officials said.
The frigate was bound for the Syrian port of Tartus on a routine voyage, the Russian news agency TASS reported Friday, citing a military-diplomatic source.
"The Russian ship armed with cruise missiles Kalibr will visit the logistics base in Tartus, Syria," the source said.
The ship was near the Black Sea straits, Tass reported. It left on a voyage after stopping at Novorossiisk for supplies and taking part in a joint exercise with Turkish ships in the Black Sea.
Re: US troops surround Syria on the eve of invasion?
Posted: Fri Apr 07, 2017 12:29 pm
by Rory
They should remake the Pepsi ad with the #resistance marching on DC, then Ivanka joins them and hands $hillary a little model Raytheon branded Tomahawk Cruise Missle, and then they all join arms and party together with the Capitol as the backdrop
