U.S. Attacks Syria

[ajax]

Russian Prime Minister Dimity Medvedev's Statement on the US Attack in Syria is a Must Read
http://www.targetliberty.com/2017/04/ru ... edevs.html

The Duran notes:

The normally soft-spoken and some would say closet liberal Russian Prime Minister Dimity Medvedev issued a deeply negative assessment of Donald Trump and the current state of US Russian relations,

Here's the statement:

That’s it. The last remaining election fog has lifted. Instead of an overworked statement about a joint fight against the biggest enemy, ISIS (the Islamic State), the Trump administration proved that it will fiercely fight the legitimate Syrian government, in a tough contradiction with international law and without UN approval, in violation of its own procedures stipulating that the Congress must first be notified of any military operation unrelated to aggression against the US. On the verge of a military clash with Russia.
Nobody is overestimating the value of pre-election promises but there must be limits of decency.
Beyond that is absolute mistrust. Which is really sad for our now completely ruined relations. And which is good news for terrorists.
One more thing. This military action is a clear indication of the US President’s extreme dependency on the opinion of the Washington establishment, the one that the new president strongly criticised in his inauguration speech. Soon after his victory, I noted that everything would depend on how soon Trump’s election promises would be broken by the existing power machine. It took only two and a half months.

[ajax]

Michael Savage, peacenik?

I am a conservative peacenick: Do you want war with Russia?
http://www.michaelsavage.wnd.com/2017/0 ... th-russia/

Michael Savage monologue

All day we’re talking about the Nuclear Option. Nuclear Option? What happens when the world goes nuclear? Today, the Congress decided to go nuclear … that is use the so called Nuclear Option to blow up the filibuster for a straight up or down vote on Supreme Court nominee Gorsuch. Even though Harry Reid started using the Nuclear Option in 2013 on lower court judges and Democrats and the media were all for it, now they’re acting like the world is coming to an end.

But they’re ignoring a possibility of the world really coming to an end.

Democrats have been poking the Russian bear since Trump won the election. The constant accusations of them fixing our election is not making them friendly towards us in the least. And why are they doing it? Because Trump said he could work with them?

But it doesn’t stop there. People in Trump’s own sphere are turning him towards the beating war drums. Dems and the establishment GOP both handcuffed loyal Trump advisers like Jeff Sessions, and now Devin Nunes, to take themselves out of any investigations on the Russia conspiracy. Steve Bannon, a close adviser is asked to step down from his NSC role.

Who got to you Mr. President? Who is whispering in your ear and could have made you make this dramatic of a change towards Russia in just three days?

I believe it’s the generals. Trump has given generals great power in his administration and they are using it to their advantage just like in WWI.

Like Trump, Woodrow Wilson ran on an America First platform. He was elected largely because he kept us out of the war in Europe. But someone got to him, too. They turned him to declare that ‘neutrality was no longer feasible or desirable.’ And after the war, when Wilson tried to rally the world for a lasting peace, and to form the League of Nations, our Congress wanted no part of it. And the deal that was reached to secure the peace in Europe became a punishment to the losers. And where did that lead? An even worse conflict were millions more died. That gave us the United Nations.

And what happened in that body yesterday? Nikki Haley, Trump’s pick for U.N. ambassador, laid the law down to Russia about the attacks in Syria, saying their acts were unconscionable, accusing them for their complicity in the deaths of children.

All of this is on the generals. Maybe Bannon was the one fighting with the generals, the only one standing against war, and now he’s gone. It’s generals who rushed world powers in WWI, and it’s happening again. Their powers increase with war. They shouldn’t want war, they should want peace.
President Trump came on the air with me and said if he was elected, he could talk to Russia even before he took office. That’s what making peace is about.

The Dems turned it into a crime and want to impeach him over it. The generals have gotten to him and turned him from peace with Russia. And the people standing in the way of war, like Steve Bannon, are being shown the door.
This beating of the war drums with Russia has to stop.

Read more at http://www.michaelsavage.wnd.com/2017/0 ... bSEIzti.99

[ajax]

[eddie]

UPDATE!

WASHINGTON—Amid concerns that a U.S. attack on a Syrian government air base would only escalate the ongoing conflict in the region, President Trump assured Americans Friday that his decision to order a missile strike came only after carefully considering every one of his passing whims. “I want to make it perfectly clear that the decision to launch a military intervention in Syria was the result of meticulously reviewing each fleeting impulse that I felt over the last 48 hours,” said Trump, adding that after learning of chemical weapons used by Bashar al-Assad’s forces to kill innocent Syrian civilians, he gathered his top military aides to pore over dozens of his sudden knee-jerk reactions to the situation. “I examined many different options that whirled through my mind in the moment, including authorizing drone strikes, deploying U.S. troops to Syria, sending in SEAL Team Six to take out Assad, getting up and grabbing a snack from the kitchen, doing nothing, and dropping all our nuclear bombs on Damascus at once. Ultimately, I concluded that an airstrike was the best option at that particular second.” Trump went on to say that if the Assad regime’s behavior continues, he will not hesitate to order further military action if he hasn’t already completely forgotten about Syria by then.

[ajax]

Trump supporter Michael Savage rips Trump.

[L4t3rD4yS41nT]

Trump is the only one allowed to kill innocent civilians. He's been doing it for weeks. When someone steps on his toes, it's go time.

Let's not forget that for nearly everyday of the Obama administration, Obama was launching rockets in the Middle East. Trump hasn't even come close to what the Obama administration did over there, yet.... Hopefully he wont come close. We go into WW3 there will be countless.

[L4t3rD4yS41nT]

url]https://consortiumnews.com/2017/01/18/o ... ng-legacy/[/url]

Sorry, I guess I should provide some information supporting my claim. There are plenty of other sources out there, Google is your friend.

[ajax]

Superb article from Glenn Greenwald. It is a bit long so I won't post the whole thing here, but it is a must read imo.

The Spoils of War: Trump Lavished With Media and Bipartisan Praise For Bombing Syria

[ajax]

Syria: US Missile Attack Killed Nine Civilians

US Airstrikes Kill 21, Mostly Civilians, in Northern Syria

[ajax]

[Silver]

Gadianton-run Mass Media organizations are so predictable. Remember how before the election the traitorous press claimed that Trump, who had no political experience, would start WW3? Now that same group of liars are praising Trump for killing brown people in another country. Not just any country, mind you. This is a country that borders Israel and has a Russian base. This is a country where uninvited US troops have already been inserted. So, Trumpsters, do you really want to be on the same side as the bought-and-paid-for liberal press? You Trump supporters better put on your tap shoes and see if you can dance your way out of this dilemma.

http://fair.org/home/five-top-papers-ru ... -critical/
Five Top Papers Run 18 Opinion Pieces Praising Syria Strikes–Zero Are Critical
By Adam Johnson

NYT: On Syria Attack, Trump's Heart Came First

Not The Onion.

Five major US newspapers—the New York Times, Washington Post, USA Today, Wall Street Journal and New York Daily News—offered no opinion space to anyone opposed to Donald Trump’s Thursday night airstrikes. By contrast, the five papers ran a total of 18 op-eds, columns or “news analysis” articles (dressed-up opinion pieces) that either praised the strikes or criticized them for not being harsh enough:

New York Times
After the Missiles, We Need Smart Diplomacy on Syria (4/7/17)
Acting on Instinct, Trump Upends His Own Foreign Policy (4/7/17) (originally headlined “On Syria Attack, Trump’s Heart Came First”—presumably changed due to social media mockery)
Trump Raises the Stakes for Russia and Iran (4/7/17)
Syria’s ‘Conundrum’: Limited Strikes Risk Entrenching Assad’s Strategy (4/7/17)

Washington Post
Editorial: Trump’s Chance to Step Into the Global Leadership Vacuum (4/7/17)
Trump Enforces the ‘Red Line’ on Chemical Weapons (4/6/17)
Trump Has an Opportunity to Right Obama’s Wrongs in Syria (4/6/17)
Syrian Opposition Leader: Trump Has a Chance to Save Syria (4/7/17)
Was Trump’s Syria Strike a Moral Impulse or a Policy Change? (4/7/17)
Will Trump’s Decision to Strike Syria Reset His Presidency? (4/7/17)
Trump Might Be Going to War. But He Has No Plans for Establishing Peace (4/7/17) (Though the piece has criticism of Trump, it starts by declaring that the missile strikes were “an appropriate response to an act of unspeakable horror.”)

Wall Street Journal
Editorial: Trump’s Syria Opportunity (4/7/17)
With Strike on Syria, Trump Sends a Global Message (4/7/17)

USA Today
Editorial: Trump Pulls the Trigger in Syria (4/7/17)
Syria Missile Strike Could Lead to Political Solution (4/7/17)

Daily News
Praise Trump’s Syria Action, but Question His Explanation (4/7/17)
Trump’s Syria Response Raises Urgent Questions (4/7/17)
Trump’s Syria Action: A Limited Strike for a Specific Purpose (4/7/17)

Some, such as “The Riddle of Trump’s Syria Attack” (New York Times, 4/7/17) and “Was That Syria Attack Legal? Only Congress Can Say” (USA Today, 4/7/17) were value neutral—neither expressly in support of the attacks nor opposing them.

Cable news coverage was equally fawning. In the hours immediately following the attack, MSNBC had on a seemingly never-ending string of military brass and reporters who uncritically repeated the assertion the strikes were “proportional” and “limited.” MSNBC didn’t give a platform to a single dissenting voice until four hours after the attacks began, when host Chris Hayes, according to his own account, had on two guests opposed to the airstrikes in the midnight slot. MSNBC host Brian Williams got into a bit of hot water when he lovingly admired a slick video sent over by the Pentagon showing tomahawk missiles being fired from US navy vessels (FAIR.org, 4/7/17).

CNN’s resident Serious Military Person Lt. Gen Mark Hertling repeated over and over—seemingly on script—that the strikes were “bold, tactical.” CNN’s Fareed Zakaria gushed praise on Trump Friday morning (4/7/17; FAIR.org, 4/7/17), telling host Alisyn Camerota, “I think Donald Trump became president of the United States…. This was a big moment.”

Due to the mostly bipartisan support for the airstrikes, it’s somewhat predictable that corporate media would follow suit. No need to debate the morality or utility of the strikes, because the scene played out per usual: Dictator commits an alleged human rights violation, the media calls on those in power to “do something” and the ticking time bomb compels immediate action, lest we look “weak” on the “global stage.” Anything that deviates from this narrative is given token attention at best. (end quote)

[sushi_chef]

:-B

[sushi_chef]

http://www.globalresearch.ca/forty-five ... ii/5584236
:-B

[sushi_chef]

dup :-B :-B

[Col. Flagg]

Assad's government had been working towards backing their currency (the pound) with gold while challenging the western bankers by doing the same thing Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi were doing... opening up their own oil bourse and only accepting gold or euros instead of dollars. This is the main reason why I did not and could note vote for Trump... he is clueless to what has been going on since 9/11 (and what 9/11 was all about) and not only began stocking his administration with globalists, neo-cons and CFR members, he started loading up the treasury with Goldman-Sachs bankers while clamoring for $50 billion more for the MIC as if they hadn't raped and pillaged the public purse enough over the last 16 years... unreal! So much for real change. :ymsick: