The News, Trump vs Putin...

Fretwired

You have to admire Trump - mouthing off about missile attacks for two days and 'bigging-up' what he's going to do. It seems a Syrian airfield runway is the target and by giving notice the Russians and Syrians can pull people out. This is a staged and symbolic attack that offers a PR opportunity to both sides. No one gets killed, there's no escalation and by Monday everything is as it was with the Syrians happily bombing their own people again.

Freebird

Frankly, I'm about as terrified as these two ..

https://www.rt.com/news/423800-nebenzia-haley-kiss-shake-hands/

Fretwired

Maybe Trump's not a total chump. Strikes called off .. US and Russia are in talks.

VimFuego

I'm no fan of trump, but it does seem that his tactics may be effective. They certainly lack subtlety or finesse, but looking at N Korea for example, and mebbe Syria, he does seem to be getting results. 

Phil_aka_Pip

Fretwired said:

impmann said:

ICBM said:

As usual, we will be joining the US in bombing whether there is any proof of who carried out the chemical attack, or whether it will achieve anything even if it is proved to be the Assad government, because our government is afraid of ‘losing influence’ with the US or some such nonsense.

At least Cameron had the sense to put it to Parliament, and when he lost the vote had to stand up to Obama and say no. If anything that really *did* show influence - Obama changed his mind. Trump is a different proposition admittedly...

The reason she won't go Parliament with this is that she needs a good war to up her ratings with the knuckle-draggers. And she knows she'd be on a sticky wicket.

Thing is, this *could* be a fork in the road moment concerning world peace... with someone as barking mad as Trump facing off with someone else as barking mad as Putin, with nobody acting as a voice of reason (or too scared to say no to 'The Donald' in case he retaliates) this is a bit scary.

Frankly, 'punishing' Syria isn't going to acheive anything other than starting more military action where nobody is going to win. Most thinking people would question such a decision, including those in Parliament - even her own party aren't 100% behind such an action. Frankly, if Trump wants to drop missiles on Syria why not let him... its not like he's going to need our help at this stage...

A Times survey has found that less that 25% of people support action and that within Tory voters that is much lower. Bombing people is a vote loser. This will boost Corbyn.

I'd like to think that survey is right. It's not as if our previous military interventions in the Middle East (or elsewhere for that matter) have left the world a safer place.

impmann

Fretwired said:

Maybe Trump's not a total chump. Strikes called off .. US and Russia are in talks.

Trouble is, with that sort of tactic one day, someone will call his bluff. Then we are all fucked.

Fretwired

impmann said:

Fretwired said:

Maybe Trump's not a total chump. Strikes called off .. US and Russia are in talks.

Trouble is, with that sort of tactic one day, someone will call his bluff. Then we are all fucked.

Putin will play a long game as he's basically in the job for life. Trump will be gone to be replaced by someone else. Trump's a businessman not a warmonger so he uses business principles to bully his opponents. I don't think Putin knows what to make of him. It's in no one's interests for this to escalate so I'm sure that if they're talking a compromise will be reached.

If there's a strike I'm sure it will be symbolic - Trump won't want to kill any Russians.

And the Chinese are now offering talks to end the trade dispute. Trump could have two more wins to add to his N. Korea breakthrough. It could all go pear-shaped but he's doing better than his predecessor at getting results.

ICBM

Fretwired said:

Maybe Trump's not a total chump. Strikes called off .. US and Russia are in talks.

VimFuego said:

I'm no fan of trump, but it does seem that his tactics may be effective. They certainly lack subtlety or finesse, but looking at N Korea for example, and mebbe Syria, he does seem to be getting results. 

Or more likely the US military have told him that the options if it doesn't work, or the consequences if the Russians (or Chinese in the case of North Korea) get drawn in, are bad, very bad or much worse than that.

poopot

Heartfeltdawn

poopot said:

Frankly my dear, I'm going to grab you by the pussy. 

JAYJO

poopot said:

 Dont worry its a metal bin. Once i put the lid on you wont feel a thing.

DrJazzTap

VimFuego said:

I'm no fan of trump, but it does seem that his tactics may be effective. They certainly lack subtlety or finesse, but looking at N Korea for example, and mebbe Syria, he does seem to be getting results. 

He has to get the meetings set up first. It's all just been gumpf and showboating at the moment. 
Frankly the thought of a meeting between the world's two biggest narcissists fills me with dread.

VimFuego

DrJazzTap said:

VimFuego said:

I'm no fan of trump, but it does seem that his tactics may be effective. They certainly lack subtlety or finesse, but looking at N Korea for example, and mebbe Syria, he does seem to be getting results. 

He has to get the meetings set up first. It's all just been gumpf and showboating at the moment. 
Frankly the thought of a meeting between the world's two biggest narcissists fills me with dread.

maybe, but he's closer to a solution than anyone who came before him. Bush created a quagmire in Iraq and Afghan, Obama created one in Libya and the one in Syria. So far, for all his obnoxiousness, Trump is ahead of the game. 

Freebird

Don't forget Trump is being goaded into taking action by many people in Washington and around the Western world, so he has to play against them as well as Russia, China, Iran, etc. A lot of folks would like nothing more than to see him fail, even if it took a disastrous war to achieve it.

Heartfeltdawn

VimFuego said:

maybe, but he's closer to a solution than anyone who came before him. Bush created a quagmire in Iraq and Afghan, Obama created one in Libya and the one in Syria. So far, for all his obnoxiousness, Trump is ahead of the game. 

Whereas Bush and Obama fucked other people's nations, Trump's just going for his own.  

Heartfeltdawn

Freebird said:

Don't forget Trump is being goaded into taking action by many people in Washington and around the Western world, so he has to play against them as well as Russia, China, Iran, etc. A lot of folks would like nothing more than to see him fail, even if it took a disastrous war to achieve it.

I doubt it. The number of liberals who would be happy to accept a bloody war if it meant Trump failed is very very small. Their hopes all rest with Mueller. 

JezWynd

Shit, meet fan...

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/apr/12/james-comey-book-trump-unethical-untethered-to-truth-a-higher-loyalty

Funkfingers

impmann said:
someone will call [Trump's] bluff. Then, we are all fucked.

Putin already did that.

If Trump meant business, he would have bombed a few targets in Syria on Wednesday and made some chest-beating pronouncements before the international press on Thursday. 

As with certain other dubious military interventions in the region, the POTUS needed a few heads of allied governments to sign up so as to prevent the action being unilateral. It would appear that prime minister May is less craven than Blair was in 1990.

darthed1981

There are a few possibilities for the current delay.

One is that both sides are talking behind the scenes to prevent an escalation.

The other is that the western allies are preparing for a strike to potentially start a war.

There are no signs near me of a major mobilisation, or of reserves being called in.

This is a good sign it's all just dick waving.

ICBM

My guess is that Western intelligence has reported that the Russians are deadly serious about defending Syrian airspace and now it’s not looking quite so much like a walk in the park as it usually is for bombing someone who can’t shoot back from a safe distance.

Macron is even more of a fool if he’s thinking of doing anything alone too.