• 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!

Did trump do the right thing

Did trump do the right thing in launching tomahawk missiles at a syrian airbase?

  • yes

    Votes: 49 41.5%

  • no

    Votes: 47 39.8%

  • not sure

    Votes: 22 18.6%
  • Total voters
    118
Masterhawk said:
Trump just ordered a missile strike on a Syrian airfield believed to house chemical weapons after hearing about a chemical attack killing between 58 and 100 people.

Syria missile strike: Trump authorizes action - CNNPolitics.com

What do you think?
Click to expand...

Though, it is not clear that it is the best of all possible actions it got it about right. After all, it's been quite a while since the red line was first crossed.
Having said this, it is probably too little.
 
Masterhawk said:
Trump just ordered a missile strike on a Syrian airfield believed to house chemical weapons after hearing about a chemical attack killing between 58 and 100 people.

Syria missile strike: Trump authorizes action - CNNPolitics.com

What do you think?
Click to expand...

My heart says no, since I am sick and tired of the U.S. getting involved in a shooting war anywhere in the Middle East. (Or Africa, S.E. Asia...hell ANYWHERE unless required by treaty obligations).

On the other hand, we just went through several days of people on the left whining about how he didn't "speak up" and "act immediately" after the gas attacks occurred.

It reminds me of something Trump had said about preferring action, rather than broadcasting his position and intentions. You know, don't let the enemy know what you are going to do before you do it?

So it is possible this action was based on his intent to act and waiting for his military advisors to recommend the best response with the least risk to American personnel.
 
Last edited:
Captain Adverse said:
My heart says no, since I am sick and tired of the U.S. getting involved in a shooting war anywhere in the Middle East. (Or Africa, S.E. Asia...hell ANYWHERE unless required by treaty obligations).

On the other hand, we just went through several days of people on the left whining about how he didn't "speak up" and "act immediately" after the gas attacks occurred.

It reminds me of something Trump had said about preferring action, rather than broadcasting his position and intentions. You know, don't let the enemy know what you are going to do before you do it?

So it is possible this action was based on his intent to act and waiting for his military advisors to recommend the best actions with the least risk to American personnel.
Click to expand...

60 Tomahawks is not war, it's a spanking.
 
chuckiechan said:
Memo to Putin: "Control your dog, or we will".
Click to expand...

At least as interesting as that message is the one to Xi, with whom Trump was having dinner. After all, he just told Xi that the Chinese must mind to their friend in North Korea or he would. That is the same message he had had Putin sent via our ambassadoress in the Security Council.
 
No. It's not enough. If we're going to bomb someone, we have to bomb the holy living ****e out of them. Unless we're prepared to take out Assad's entire military apparatus, we shouldn't do anything. In warfare with an enemy who recognizes no rules, there is no middle ground. Note the emphasis--if Syria were an opponent who would engage lawfully and honorably, half-measures might be possible.
 
This is where we get to see how good Trump can or can not play with Putin.

I dropped a theory in a different thread a few minutes ago.

This is going to be very interesting.
 
ashurbanipal said:
No. It's not enough. If we're going to bomb someone, we have to bomb the holy living ****e out of them. Unless we're prepared to take out Assad's entire military apparatus, we shouldn't do anything. In warfare with an enemy who recognizes no rules, there is no middle ground. Note the emphasis--if Syria were an opponent who would engage lawfully and honorably, half-measures might be possible.
Click to expand...

I think we had enough of that when "Shock and Awe" and "Bomb them back to the Stone Age!" ended poorly.
 
ashurbanipal said:
No. It's not enough. If we're going to bomb someone, we have to bomb the holy living ****e out of them. Unless we're prepared to take out Assad's entire military apparatus, we shouldn't do anything. In warfare with an enemy who recognizes no rules, there is no middle ground. Note the emphasis--if Syria were an opponent who would engage lawfully and honorably, half-measures might be possible.
Click to expand...

Not many good choices here.
If we took out Syria's entire military apparatus, the nasty groups that are arrayed against the equally nasty Assad would gain the upper hand.
Just a dismal area of the world.
I'm thankful everyday for being lucky enough to be a US citizen.
 
Masterhawk said:
Trump just ordered a missile strike on a Syrian airfield believed to house chemical weapons after hearing about a chemical attack killing between 58 and 100 people.

Syria missile strike: Trump authorizes action - CNNPolitics.com

What do you think?
Click to expand...

I think it was the correct response.

Syria used chemical weapons, reportedly from those airstrips, Trump takes out those airstrips so they can't use it any longer. (or at least without expending lots of time, effort, and money to rebuild) It was proportional and actually aimed correctly. Unlike Bush who attacked the completely wrong country for the supposed initial reasons given. And it was more than what Obama did during his term.

To be frank I'm actually surprised as hell that Trump actually listened to his advisors, did what they suggested, and stuck to his guns regarding the "red line".

I've said before that if I were President I'd withdraw all troops everywhere in the world except embassies and let it be known that if anyone attacked us or our allies or did something truly despicable we'd not waste one troop of ours on the ground...I'd just bomb the hell out of the responsible party. While we still have lots of troops in that area this action by Trump was imo close enough to what I advocate for that I like it. Kudos to President Trump on this one.
 
I think the usual trump haters are unusually silent about this
 
For the first time, I'm proud to have Trump as my President.
 
There is no win for the USA in Syria. The first pictures of some dead little girls by a cruise missile will make us just as bad as the cruel bastards who used the chemical weapons. The Arabs and Euro's will be marching in the streets waving their protest signs, and the American media will be on board with them.

Stay out of Syria.
 
Time will tell, it all depends what follows. Will it actually prevent more atrocities, will they remove Assad and would that create opportunities for ISIS, will it be followed by invasion and a circus show at the UN like Bush orchestrated? If it's just an airstrike and that puts a stop to attacks on civilians then yes, but i certainly have doubts
 
Kal'Stang said:
I've said before that if I were President I'd withdraw all troops everywhere in the world except embassies and let it be known that if anyone attacked us or our allies or did something truly despicable we'd not waste one troop of ours on the ground...I'd just bomb the hell out of the responsible party. While we still have lots of troops in that area this action by Trump was imo close enough to what I advocate for that I like it. Kudos to President Trump on this one.
Click to expand...

Right, we have bases in some crazy # of countries and some hundreds of thousands of troops in Germany of all places. The military budget could be 1/10 what it is now and still accomplish the airstrike that just took place

Yet Trump wants to make the budget even more bloated. Gotta keep that in mind even if he does 1 thing right. In fact, when looking at his motive for this i would not put it past him to mention the airstrike as reason to pass his budget
 
ashurbanipal said:
No. It's not enough. If we're going to bomb someone, we have to bomb the holy living ****e out of them. Unless we're prepared to take out Assad's entire military apparatus, we shouldn't do anything. In warfare with an enemy who recognizes no rules, there is no middle ground. Note the emphasis--if Syria were an opponent who would engage lawfully and honorably, half-measures might be possible.
Click to expand...

Great so you respond to 80 civilian deaths by killing 100,000 with bombs all over the place just like iraq. Makes a lot of sense man. Just like it makes sense for Trump to turn away all refugees (5 million) while pretending to care about these 80
 
chuckiechan said:
Memo to Putin: "Control your dog, or we will".
Click to expand...

Putin probably gave the green light, takes small heat off his puppet here with all the investigations and leaks about UAE back channels and hardly puts a dent in the civil war in syria
 
RetiredUSN said:
There is no win for the USA in Syria. The first pictures of some dead little girls by a cruise missile will make us just as bad as the cruel bastards who used the chemical weapons. The Arabs and Euro's will be marching in the streets waving their protest signs, and the American media will be on board with them.

Stay out of Syria.
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly. What are we even doing there anyway? This just breeds more terrorism against us.
 
Reading more...

One key member of the rebel said this is one of only 26 airfields that are used to target civilians. Makes me wonder if this is just a PR stunt or something

OTOH, interesting that the rebel group is called "Army of Islam" and i wonder if supporting them with further action is worth it. Could just be replacing one terrible regime with another
 
RetiredUSN said:
There is no win for the USA in Syria. The first pictures of some dead little girls by a cruise missile will make us just as bad as the cruel bastards who used the chemical weapons. The Arabs and Euro's will be marching in the streets waving their protest signs, and the American media will be on board with them.

Stay out of Syria.
Click to expand...

And what would little girls be doing inside a Syrian airforce base?
 
chromium said:
Reading more...

One key member of the rebel said this is one of only 26 airfields that are used to target civilians. Makes me wonder if this is just a PR stunt or something

OTOH, interesting that the rebel group is called "Army of Islam" and i wonder if supporting them with further action is worth it. Could just be replacing one terrible regime with another
Click to expand...

"PR stunt"... more accurately it is a message to Assad.
It's not an attempt to destroy Assad clearly, it's simply telling him that using chemical weapons is unacceptable to the US and if Assad does that again a larger scale attack will follow.
 
ecofarm said:
For the first time, I'm proud to have Trump as my President.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't go quite that far.
Trump's previous noxious behavior doesn't vanish because of one correct action.
However, I will say that this seems to be a measured response to a reprehensible event.
I also thought that when Trump spoke of the gassing on Wednesday evening, he seemed to be truly appalled by the event.
He wasn't his usual bloviating self.......he spoke as a concerned parent might speak.
Score one for Trump.
 
Last edited:
chromium said:
OTOH, interesting that the rebel group is called "Army of Islam" and i wonder if supporting them with further action is worth it. Could just be replacing one terrible regime with another
Click to expand...

It's pretty difficult to find any good guys in the ME.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom