• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Clinton supports bombs

Chillfolks

Chillfolks

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2016
Messages
20,692
Reaction score
11,234
Location
VA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Hillary Clinton: US should 'take out' Assad's air fields - CNNPolitics.com



It appears that Kancles the War Hawk supports the US and Trump administration bombing Syrian airfields. She believes this will help stop the Russian backed Assad.

So is the only person who could loose to Trump right about bombing and possibly bringing up a military confrontation with Russia the right thing to do? Or is her opinion like her candidacy and totally wrong for America?
 
.....
 

Attachments

  • 15895164_1214673228623688_8808714500422641427_n.jpg
    15895164_1214673228623688_8808714500422641427_n.jpg
    22.4 KB · Views: 73
Chillfolks said:
Hillary Clinton: US should 'take out' Assad's air fields - CNNPolitics.com



It appears that Kancles the War Hawk supports the US and Trump administration bombing Syrian airfields. She believes this will help stop the Russian backed Assad.

So is the only person who could loose to Trump right about bombing and possibly bringing up a military confrontation with Russia the right thing to do? Or is her opinion like her candidacy and totally wrong for America?
Click to expand...

That makes a lot of sense tactically and operationally.

However, strategically, the Russian Air Force is operating from those airfields, and if we kill some Russians or blow up some Russian Air Force aircraft, then we're in a shooting war with Russia.

I meant what I said though, it does make a lot of sense tactically and operationally. Assad is using his helicopters and the Russian Air Force to attack his one people, and a barrel bomb from one of his helicopters was how he deployed the Chorine Gas attack a few years ago (it was videoed from the ground), and he probably deployed the Sarin Gas attack this week the same way, via helicopter barrel bomb.

If Russia pulls their guys and equipment out, then we can do that. You see, in addition to the risk of killing Russians and blowing up their stuff, the Russians gave Syria a number of S-400 anti-aircraft missile batteries - they are badass dangerous (arguably the most effective Anti-Aircraft System on the globe) and very difficult to take out. They would more than likely shoot down some of our drones, aircraft, or even potentially our cruise missiles if we fire them from stand-off systems like subs, B-52's/B-2's over the Med, or surface ships at sea.

This situation is beyond complicated, to say the least.

To remove Assad, you first have to sever his ties to Russia, and since Syria has Russia's only warm water port that cannot be blocked by plugging the Bosphorus Straight, Putin isn't going to do that.
 
Last edited:
Phys251 said:
.....
Click to expand...

The question doesn't have anything to do with Trump.

It's a relevant question about something Hillary is saying NOW.

It's actually YOU deflecting TO Trump here.

No opinions on what Hillary said?
 
Harshaw said:
The question doesn't have anything to do with Trump.

It's a relevant question about something Hillary is saying NOW.

It's actually YOU deflecting TO Trump here.

No opinions on what Hillary said?
Click to expand...

Donald took the White House. Not Hillary. Therefore, Donald's opinion is the one that bears watching. Try to keep up.
 
Beaudreaux said:
That makes a lot of sense tactically and operationally.

However, strategically, the Russian Air Force is operating from those airfields, and if we kill some Russians or blow up some Russian Air Force aircraft, then we're in a shooting war with Russia.

I meant what I said though, it does make a lot of sense tactically and operationally. Assad is using his helicopters and the Russian Air Force to attack his one people, and a barrel bomb from one of his helicopters was how he deployed the Chorine Gas attack a few years ago (it was videoed from the ground), and he probably deployed the Sarin Gas attack this week the same way, via helicopter barrel bomb.

If Russia pulls their guys and equipment out, then we can do that. You see, in addition to the risk of killing Russians and blowing up their stuff, the Russians gave Syria a number of S-400 anti-aircraft missile batteries - they are badass dangerous (arguably the most effective Anti-Aircraft System on the globe) and very difficult to take out. They would more than likely shoot down some of our drones, aircraft, or even potentially our cruise missiles if we fire them from stand-off systems like subs, B-52's/B-2's over the Med, or surface ships at sea.

This situation is beyond complicated, to say the least.

To remove Assad, you first have to sever his ties to Russia, and since Syria has Russia's only warm water port that cannot be blocked by pluggin the Bosphorus Straight, Putin isn't ging to do that.
Click to expand...

Trump is in the same situation as his predecessor, except Obama was smart enough not to bomb, is Trump willing to risk a shooting war with his bud Putin, doubt it. Its a strip of land without oil, not worth it to the establishment.
 
Phys251 said:
Donald took the White House. Not Hillary. Therefore, Donald's opinion is the one that bears watching. Try to keep up.
Click to expand...

The topic of the thread is what Hillary Clinton said about bombing Assad's airports. We have kept up.
 
Phys251 said:
Donald took the White House. Not Hillary. Therefore, Donald's opinion is the one that bears watching. Try to keep up.
Click to expand...

Zzzzzzzt. Nice try.

Trump is not the only topic in the world.
 
yankintx said:
Trump is in the same situation as his predecessor, except Obama was smart enough not to bomb, is Trump willing to risk a shooting war with his bud Putin, doubt it. Its a strip of land without oil, not worth it to the establishment.
Click to expand...

We have a moral duty. This has nothing to do with Obama at this point, nor does it have to do with any supposed relationship between Trump and Putin.

If people can't see this outside of colored partisan glasses, then this country and the world are in real trouble.

Go to LiveLeak.com and do a search for "Assad Gas Attack" then click on the warning that pops up because of the horrific nature of the material, watch the videos of the adults and kids foaming at the mouth and gasping for air (be warned, it extremely disturbing) and then get back to me about how this is not important and blah, blah Trump/Putin are butt buddies, etc.
 
Beaudreaux said:
The topic of the thread is what Hillary Clinton said about bombing Assad's airports. We have kept up.
Click to expand...

The last paragraph of the OP was a clear attempt to relitigate the election. The election is over. Donald took the White House.

Now if we want to have a calm, clear, rational discussion about private citizen Hillary Rodham Clinton's personal views on Syria, then maybe we can hit the reset button and attempt precisely that.
 
Phys251 said:
The last paragraph was a clear attempt to relitigate the election. The election is over. Donald took the White House.

Now if we want to have a calm, clear, rational discussion about private citizen Hillary Rodham Clinton's personal views on Syria, then maybe we can hit the reset button and attempt precisely that.
Click to expand...

The OP was a left handed BS way of talking about the Hillary comment, but it was still about the comment and Hillary. Not about Trump.

Hillary is a former First Lady, Senator, US Secretary of State, and the most recent national candidate for President of the United States of America of the Democratic Party. When she makes a comment of this type, it's not like talking about a cup cake recipe that's some personal view of a private citizen.
 
Beaudreaux said:
The OP was a left handed BS way of talking about the Hillary comment, but it was still about the comment and Hillary. Not about Trump.
Click to expand...

And that's what poisoned the OP. It came across as when Donald *still* talks about his bigly electoral victory, despite the fact that it's been settled and decided and he's president now.

Hillary is a former First Lady, Senator, US Secretary of State, and the most recent national candidate for President of the United States of America of the Democratic Party. When she makes a comment of this type, it's not like talking about a cup cake recipe that's some personal view of a private citizen.
Click to expand...

Also true. She's not in a position of power now, but she is in a position of experience. So when she speaks, yeah, it may be worth it to listen.
 
Phys251 said:
And that's what poisoned the OP. It came across as when Donald *still* talks about his bigly electoral victory, despite the fact that it's been settled and decided and he's president now.



Also true. She's not in a position of power now, but she is in a position of experience. So when she speaks, yeah, it may be worth it to listen.
Click to expand...

Your posts are meant solely to derail this thread. I'm done helping you do that and I shouldn't have taken the bait before. I gave my actual opinion on this thread topic in an earlier thread, and would be happy to talk to you about that if you choose to do so.
 
Phys251 said:
Also true. She's not in a position of power now, but she is in a position of experience. So when she speaks, yeah, it may be worth it to listen.
Click to expand...

But earlier you said

Phys251 said:
Donald took the White House. Not Hillary. Therefore, Donald's opinion is the one that bears watching. Try to keep up.
Click to expand...

Please try to keep up with your own opinions is Trump the one to watch bears with or should we pay attention to Kankles when she says Bomb bomb bomb bomb Syria?
 
Phys251 said:
And that's what poisoned the OP. It came across as when Donald *still* talks about his bigly electoral victory, despite the fact that it's been settled and decided and he's president now.



Also true. She's not in a position of power now, but she is in a position of experience. So when she speaks, yeah, it may be worth it to listen.
Click to expand...

Which is what this thread is about, but YOU didn't want that; you wanted it to be about Trump instead.
 
Beaudreaux said:
That makes a lot of sense tactically and operationally.

However, strategically, the Russian Air Force is operating from those airfields, and if we kill some Russians or blow up some Russian Air Force aircraft, then we're in a shooting war with Russia.

I meant what I said though, it does make a lot of sense tactically and operationally. Assad is using his helicopters and the Russian Air Force to attack his one people, and a barrel bomb from one of his helicopters was how he deployed the Chorine Gas attack a few years ago (it was videoed from the ground), and he probably deployed the Sarin Gas attack this week the same way, via helicopter barrel bomb.

If Russia pulls their guys and equipment out, then we can do that. You see, in addition to the risk of killing Russians and blowing up their stuff, the Russians gave Syria a number of S-400 anti-aircraft missile batteries - they are badass dangerous (arguably the most effective Anti-Aircraft System on the globe) and very difficult to take out. They would more than likely shoot down some of our drones, aircraft, or even potentially our cruise missiles if we fire them from stand-off systems like subs, B-52's/B-2's over the Med, or surface ships at sea.

This situation is beyond complicated, to say the least.

To remove Assad, you first have to sever his ties to Russia, and since Syria has Russia's only warm water port that cannot be blocked by plugging the Bosphorus Straight, Putin isn't going to do that.
Click to expand...



It makes sence only if we exclude what Russia may do in retaliation. Untill we get them on board or at least no actively working against us then we can bomb away. As it stands Trump is exactly like Obama, royally screwed at ever turn in this situation.
 
Phys251 said:
And that's what poisoned the OP. It came across as when Donald *still* talks about his bigly electoral victory, despite the fact that it's been settled and decided and he's president now.



Also true. She's not in a position of power now, but she is in a position of experience. So when she speaks, yeah, it may be worth it to listen.
Click to expand...

The only one "poisoning the thread" is you with your meaningless and off topic pictures.
 
Chillfolks said:
It makes sence only if we exclude what Russia may do in retaliation. Untill we get them on board or at least no actively working against us then we can bomb away. As it stands Trump is exactly like Obama, royally screwed at ever turn in this situation.
Click to expand...

Did you read my entire post? Seems like you pulled the REPLY trigger and started typing after only reading the first few words.
 
Beaudreaux said:
Your posts are meant solely to derail this thread. I'm done helping you do that and I shouldn't have taken the bait before. I gave my actual opinion on this thread topic in an earlier thread, and would be happy to talk to you about that if you choose to do so.
Click to expand...

It's not bait. It is very difficult to have a good discussion under a bad OP. That's not my problem, Beudreaux, and I refuse to apologize for a sin that I did not make.

Anyway, back to whatever's left to salvage from the OP. What's to do with the crappy situation known as Syria is anyone's guess. Basically it's either we let the situation run its course, which will mean even more atrocities and a likely restoration of Assad's power, or go in there and attack somehow. Hillary tends to be fairly hawkish and leans towards the latter, it seems.
 
Beaudreaux said:
Did you read my entire post? Seems like you pulled the REPLY trigger and started typing after only reading the first few words.
Click to expand...


I actually agree that on paper bombs look good, the Russian involvement screws that up as it is currently.
 
Chillfolks said:
Hillary Clinton: US should 'take out' Assad's air fields - CNNPolitics.com



It appears that Kancles the War Hawk supports the US and Trump administration bombing Syrian airfields. She believes this will help stop the Russian backed Assad.

So is the only person who could loose to Trump right about bombing and possibly bringing up a military confrontation with Russia the right thing to do? Or is her opinion like her candidacy and totally wrong for America?
Click to expand...

Hopefully Trump won't get sucked into this crap and be fooled by an obvious false flag, chemical attack.
 
Beaudreaux said:
We have a moral duty. This has nothing to do with Obama at this point, nor does it have to do with any supposed relationship between Trump and Putin.

If people can't see this outside of colored partisan glasses, then this country and the world are in real trouble.

Go to LiveLeak.com and do a search for "Assad Gas Attack" then click on the warning that pops up because of the horrific nature of the material, watch the videos of the adults and kids foaming at the mouth and gasping for air (be warned, it extremely disturbing) and then get back to me about how this is not important and blah, blah Trump/Putin are butt buddies, etc.
Click to expand...

Oh I agree, we should do something to help those folks stuck in the middle, but as I said earlier Trumps constant lies have weekend Americas moral compass. If I was a foreign power I would look at Donny's track record with the truth, and proceed with caution. It would be reassuring to think Trump may actually do something to help those folks, will not happen, its not worth starting a war over a piece of the desert which contains zero oil, wont happen.
 
Beaudreaux said:
Did you read my entire post? Seems like you pulled the REPLY trigger and started typing after only reading the first few words.
Click to expand...

Use of military force, along with gov't spying, are certainly two issues that cross party lines, as we see in this thread with both sides of the aisle and as we saw four years ago, when neither party's leaders would support Obama going in after the British parliament said no .
 
Beaudreaux said:
The OP was a left handed BS way of talking about the Hillary comment, but it was still about the comment and Hillary. Not about Trump.

Hillary is a former First Lady, Senator, US Secretary of State, and the most recent national candidate for President of the United States of America of the Democratic Party. When she makes a comment of this type, it's not like talking about a cup cake recipe that's some personal view of a private citizen.
Click to expand...

HRC has now given trump cover for going after ASSad/Syria. Her remarks about having a no fly zone are in disagreement with Obama.

Obama did not have the support of the international community nor his own party in congress to attack Syria. trump has the support of his party, though we won't be seeing a new AUMF any time soon .
 
NIMBY said:
HRC has now given trump cover for going after ASSad/Syria. Her remarks about having a no fly zone are in disagreement with Obama.

Obama did not have the support of the international community nor his own party in congress to attack Syria. trump has the support of his party, though we won't be seeing a new AUMF any time soon .
Click to expand...

There are no good answers or options at this point for US action in Syria that do not end up putting us toe to toe with Russia and Iran. There was a small window years ago when this all started with the Arab Spring, but no one, Democrat or Republican and especially not the American people were ready to go into another Middle East country with ground troops. And, that's what it will take - ground troops. Lots and lots of ground troops.

(glad to see you back, BTW)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom