Has Trump started WW3

Fretwired

ICBM said:

North Korea is the 'unknown unknown', but I can't see China tolerating them starting an actual war. The only real question would be whether China can stamp on them quickly enough.

China could wipe them off the face of the Earth. However, China is more likely to go for regime change and remove the idiot in charge and replace him with a pro-Chinese leader.

Historically Europe has always been a problem and the EU needs to be careful as it bangs on Putin's front door. The EU powers are obviously worried which is why they want an EU controlled armed forces.

Reverend

Lucky the Americans didn't vote for that warmonger Clinton, eh?

Where there Russians on the base? Was the base evacuated first? Did the Russians know already, and if so where they told directly or did they just know? Has it deflected attention from the railroading of Gorsuch onto the Supreme Court?

RandallFlagg

Has Trump started WW3? I would say no. If there is a WW3 then it's origins would be the cause of the unrest and shift of opinions that lead to Brexit and the election of Trump in the first place.

RandallFlagg

merlin said:

"Maaattt Daaamon"

ICBM

Fretwired said:

ICBM said:

North Korea is the 'unknown unknown', but I can't see China tolerating them starting an actual war. The only real question would be whether China can stamp on them quickly enough.

China could wipe them off the face of the Earth. However, China is more likely to go for regime change and remove the idiot in charge and replace him with a pro-Chinese leader.

Exactly - but they need to time it just right. If they leave it until Kim actually has a functioning nuclear missile and he's mad enough to fire it, all hell will break loose. The danger is leaving it long enough that they don't have time to react if he does.

My guess is that we've already passed the point at which the world would criticise them for doing it though. A fuss would be made in the UN, but in reality everyone breathes a sigh of relief - apart maybe from the US, and South Korea, who then have a border with China and very little prospect of ever getting a re-united Korea… although even that is probably preferable to having a lunatic next door.

Fretwired said:

Historically Europe has always been a problem and the EU needs to be careful as it bangs on Putin's front door. The EU powers are obviously worried which is why they want an EU controlled armed forces.

Then they need to stop antagonising the bear...

JezWynd

 All we know for certain is that people have died as a result of chemical weapons.

All I know is that people, presumably dead, have been photographed with captions saying they died from chemical attack. Children have been photographed in hospitals wearing breathing apparatus and a small hole in the ground has been photographed with a caption indicating it is the impact point of a chemical weapon.

A callous statement if the events portrayed are true and I'm not usually a conspiracy theorist (the cock up theory is so much more likely) but I think a more conclusive diagnosis should have been sought before letting the missiles fly.

When Trump took power I wrote that the one silver lining was Trump's seeming disinterestedness in taking on the world's problems. It now appears there's no silver lining lining at all to Trump's presidency.

VimFuego

RandallFlagg said:

Has Trump started WW3? I would say no. If there is a WW3 then it's origins would be the cause of the unrest and shift of opinions that lead to Brexit and the election of Trump in the first place.

it's origins started long before that. In recent times, you had the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, the overthrow of Ghadaffi, the spread of wahabism from Saudi Arabia that has led to both ISIS and the Syrian Civil War, you've had EU and NATO encroachment and expansionism onto Russian borders. All these were long before trump or brexit, your worldview is too narrow and restrictive.

HAL9000

VimFuego said:

HAL9000 said:

Sambostar said:

You all believed the propaganda about Assad using gas, not only once but twice, the veil of lies is so thin now it's like a burr veneer with the truth shining through like too much glue...

Who do you think did it then? Bear in mind that witnesses saw the Syrian warplanes, and that it has been admitted that Syrian warplanes were targeting rebel positions in the area.

RT have reported that the planes hit a rebel held warehouse that contained chemical weapons. Personally I don't trust RT, but there were reports from the UN back when chemcial weapons were 1st used that rebel forces has used chemical weapons.

Apparently sarin (although AFAIK it hasn't been confirmed that it actually was sarin in this case) is stored as precursor chemicals that are mixed shortly before use. A warehouse is very unlikely to store sarin itself. 
 
The other thing that seems to have been forgotten amid all the talk of chemical weapons and cruise missiles is the targeting of hospitals and clinics after the initial air strikes. Surely the Russians and Syrians can not shift the blame on this one.

Winny_Pooh

Do you know how much those missiles cost? $14,750,000 The tude' is simply sending money indirectly to his backers in the industrial military complex. 
The whole thing is theatre. 

VimFuego

HAL9000 said:

VimFuego said:

HAL9000 said:

Sambostar said:

You all believed the propaganda about Assad using gas, not only once but twice, the veil of lies is so thin now it's like a burr veneer with the truth shining through like too much glue...

Who do you think did it then? Bear in mind that witnesses saw the Syrian warplanes, and that it has been admitted that Syrian warplanes were targeting rebel positions in the area.

RT have reported that the planes hit a rebel held warehouse that contained chemical weapons. Personally I don't trust RT, but there were reports from the UN back when chemcial weapons were 1st used that rebel forces has used chemical weapons.

Apparently sarin (although AFAIK it hasn't been confirmed that it actually was sarin in this case) is stored as precursor chemicals that are mixed shortly before use. A warehouse is very unlikely to store sarin itself. 
 
The other thing that seems to have been forgotten amid all the talk of chemical weapons and cruise missiles is the targeting of hospitals and clinics after the initial air strikes. Surely the Russians and Syrians can not shift the blame on this one.

as I said (and this kinda goes to @jezwynd ) is that we actually know very little for certain, but I would make the argument that there are no good guys in this. We in the west seem to like to portray ourselves as the guys in the white hats, that we stand for decency and good things, and against the forces of evil in their black hats. But both sides are bad and we are getting dragged along by our "leaders" against our will.

Steffo

Assad is bombing hospitals, that's bad enough to me.

Jalapeno

VimFuego said:

RT have reported that the planes hit a rebel held warehouse that contained chemical weapons.

Most military commentators have said that explanation is hogwash, chemical weapons don't function if they're blown up from the outside.

Not going to be WW3, El Trumpanista got permission from Putin first

I think it's a hoot how Trumps Twitter history is being recalled to make him look like the posturing chump he actually is.

ICBM

VimFuego said:

as I said (and this kinda goes to @jezwynd ) is that we actually know very little for certain, but I would make the argument that there are no good guys in this. We in the west seem to like to portray ourselves as the guys in the white hats, that we stand for decency and good things, and against the forces of evil in their black hats. But both sides are bad and we are getting dragged along by our "leaders" against our will.

This, completely. The West likes to portray itself as promoting "freedom" and "democracy", but most of the time it's simply about oil and gas, other commercial interests, and expanding its sphere of influence at the expense of other powers.

Syria and Ukraine are just the latest in a very long line of this sort of behaviour - they're both the direct result of Western interference in countries which were allied with Russia - in both cases almost certainly driven by gas supply issues.

Russia is certainly not innocent either, but I'm not sure they're actually as bad - Putin is dangerous and aggressive, but he has reasons to be.

RandallFlagg

VimFuego said:

RandallFlagg said:

Has Trump started WW3? I would say no. If there is a WW3 then it's origins would be the cause of the unrest and shift of opinions that lead to Brexit and the election of Trump in the first place.

it's origins started long before that. In recent times, you had the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, the overthrow of Ghadaffi, the spread of wahabism from Saudi Arabia that has led to both ISIS and the Syrian Civil War, you've had EU and NATO encroachment and expansionism onto Russian borders. All these were long before trump or brexit, your worldview is too narrow and restrictive.

Well that's told me. If you want to get anal about it didn't it start with the warming of the earth and creation of life?

ThorpyFX

ICBM said:

VimFuego said:

as I said (and this kinda goes to @jezwynd ) is that we actually know very little for certain, but I would make the argument that there are no good guys in this. We in the west seem to like to portray ourselves as the guys in the white hats, that we stand for decency and good things, and against the forces of evil in their black hats. But both sides are bad and we are getting dragged along by our "leaders" against our will.

This, completely. The West likes to portray itself as promoting "freedom" and "democracy", but most of the time it's simply about oil and gas, other commercial interests, and expanding its sphere of influence at the expense of other powers.

Syria and Ukraine are just the latest in a very long line of this sort of behaviour - they're both the direct result of Western interference in countries which were allied with Russia - in both cases almost certainly driven by gas supply issues.

Russia is certainly not innocent either, but I'm not sure they're actually as bad - Putin is dangerous and aggressive, but he has reasons to be.

Come on, he assinates his political opposition with nuclear isotopes, how bad does he have to be?

Axe_meister

As usual where is the UN in this conflict. Convoys protecting aid in white tanks white hats.
Alas a pointless debating society.

VimFuego

RandallFlagg said:

VimFuego said:

RandallFlagg said:

Has Trump started WW3? I would say no. If there is a WW3 then it's origins would be the cause of the unrest and shift of opinions that lead to Brexit and the election of Trump in the first place.

it's origins started long before that. In recent times, you had the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, the overthrow of Ghadaffi, the spread of wahabism from Saudi Arabia that has led to both ISIS and the Syrian Civil War, you've had EU and NATO encroachment and expansionism onto Russian borders. All these were long before trump or brexit, your worldview is too narrow and restrictive.

Well that's told me. If you want to get anal about it didn't it start with the warming of the earth and creation of life?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum

thing is, you said this is all the fault of trump and brexit, I pointed out it has much deeper and more complex roots.

VimFuego

Steffo said:

Assad is bombing hospitals, that's bad enough to me.

as do americans. Is Assad a good guy? no, but that doesn't make us good guys either.

ICBM

ThorpyFX said:

ICBM said:

Russia is certainly not innocent either, but I'm not sure they're actually as bad - Putin is dangerous and aggressive, but he has reasons to be.

Come on, he assinates his political opposition with nuclear isotopes, how bad does he have to be?

Yes, he's a very bad man.

However, to date he hasn't nearly started a new European war by engineering a coup against a democratically-elected government, or started a civil war in another country by encouraging a rebellion and ending up causing a humanitarian disaster, or invaded and destabilised its neighbour on a false pretext and produced the most dangerous terrorist organisation in recent history.

Come to think of it, as far as we know he hasn't assassinated a government scientist who was about to blow the whistle on some of this and made it look like suicide either… allegedly.

Putin being a paranoid dictator does not excuse or justify the Western policy of global aggression in pursuit of resources and strategic gains.

JezWynd

VimFuego said:

HAL9000 said:

VimFuego said:

HAL9000 said:

Sambostar said:

You all believed the propaganda about Assad using gas, not only once but twice, the veil of lies is so thin now it's like a burr veneer with the truth shining through like too much glue...

Who do you think did it then? Bear in mind that witnesses saw the Syrian warplanes, and that it has been admitted that Syrian warplanes were targeting rebel positions in the area.

RT have reported that the planes hit a rebel held warehouse that contained chemical weapons. Personally I don't trust RT, but there were reports from the UN back when chemcial weapons were 1st used that rebel forces has used chemical weapons.

Apparently sarin (although AFAIK it hasn't been confirmed that it actually was sarin in this case) is stored as precursor chemicals that are mixed shortly before use. A warehouse is very unlikely to store sarin itself. 
 
The other thing that seems to have been forgotten amid all the talk of chemical weapons and cruise missiles is the targeting of hospitals and clinics after the initial air strikes. Surely the Russians and Syrians can not shift the blame on this one.

as I said (and this kinda goes to @jezwynd ) is that we actually know very little for certain, but I would make the argument that there are no good guys in this. We in the west seem to like to portray ourselves as the guys in the white hats, that we stand for decency and good things, and against the forces of evil in their black hats. But both sides are bad and we are getting dragged along by our "leaders" against our will.

I didn't mean to insinuate that 'we' are the good guys here - far from it, the British have meddled in middle eastern politics with disastrous consequences for nearly a century - but the tit for tat thinking that holds sway nowadays was always likely to result in some kind of retribution. Putin is the master of this stuff, he knows that revenge is a dish best served cold. Trump on the other hand immediately jumps in with both feet due to a few unverified pictures on Fox and Friends.

I'd feel less uncomfortable here if the 'exclusive report' didn't come via the Guardian, their loathing for Trump distorts their vision and makes them give credibility to anything that will put him in a bad light.

Stories about Belgian nuns sent thousands of men to their deaths in the first war, have we learnt nothing?