Jump to content

Syria...

Will America launch an Attack on the Syrian Goverment?  

13 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Sign in to follow this  

Recommended Posts

Things have been heating up again on the international level following the Syrian regime's alleged chemical attack and Trumps vowing a deadly response. What will come of it?

Share this post


Link to post

That last option was too good to pass up... On that note, I have no idea what happened because I haven't been paying that much attention to the news in recent weeks.

Share this post


Link to post

I don't think so, at least I hope not...

Trump hasn't yet really made any decisions like these even if he has spoken about them, so I guess time will tell if he really is capable of it.

Share this post


Link to post

He ordered a small strike (80 tomahawks.. heh) last year, so I wouldn't put it past him to launch another volley. But Russia isn't playing ball this time around, and while Trump waged his twitter campaign, most of the Syrian air force moved to the Russian airstrips. The only way Trump can cause any damage now is by significantly upping the ante.

Share this post


Link to post

By the sounds of things so far, Option 1 seems to be the victor.

 

Unified military strike by the US, France, and UK to hit 3 sites related to Chemical Weapons Research, Storage, and Manufacture in Syria.

 

All and all, I was the one who voted No, I doubted any major operation would take place, and all things considered I'd say this was the "safe" targets to choose without much risk of a full escalation. But it looks and sounds like it'll be a slap on the wrist.

 

A bigger slap on the wrist than last year, to be sure, but one all the same.

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah, this was a proxy war that American lost back in 2015, when Russia took the initiative. From here, they really only had two options: escalate things and risk a much wider conflict, or cut losses and just pretend to do something for the sake of sustaining their rhetoric. Looks like they went with option B.

Share this post


Link to post

Hell, even Russia didn't back up their rhetoric. They threatened retaliation if anything happened, most they did was just public condemnation.

 

Granted, the 3 were very smart in that they specifically chose to not hit anything anywhere near Russian assets, but it bears noting that they basically called their bluff and nothing happened.

 

Which makes this whole thing interesting from a Cold War 2.0 perspective in that it basically just proved that neither party has any desire to actually engage WW3 at the present time over Syria, good for all of us.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in the community.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.