Widgetized Section

Go to Admin » Appearance » Widgets » and move Gabfire Widget: Social into that MastheadOverlay zone

US attack on Syria In Retaliation to Syrian Use of Chemical Weapons


I am skeptical.  Here’s why:  Remember the non-existent Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq that led to the war in Iraq?  And before that it was the non-existent attack by N. Viet Nam on a US war ship that led to the war in Viet Nam.  So, we have a history of the US gov’t lying to the people of the US and to the world.

Let’s exam the Assad side of this story:  He claims that Syrian planes attacked an ISIS stronghold and that the chemical weapons had been part of their arsenal in a weapons storage facility that had been destroyed.  Also, it appears that Assad is winning his war so why would he take a chance on turning world opinion against him even more than it already is? (This is of course if he even cares about that).  So, on the surface, this appears to be a lose lose for Assad.  So why would he do it?

Now let’s look at the US side:  Trump claims they unleashed almost 60 Tomahawk Missiles on the base that the alleged chemical weapons were flown from. They claim they have radar trails that show they came from that base.  Remember the WMD’s that didn’t exist in Iraq.  If the chemical weapons came from that base, how did they know there weren’t more and that their attack wouldn’t unleash more chemical weapons?  Where are the pictures, or even reports, on the damage done to the base?  How many planes were destroyed?  How many hangers?  How many weapons caches?  How many buildings?  How much damage to the runway?  Apparently, the base was back in operations within hours.  So, what was gained?

The Russians were notified so they wouldn’t be in the area attacked.  They would have alerted their allies, the Syrians, so wouldn’t the Syrians have scrambled their planes to protect them?

Everyone already knew that Trump was a wild card, so this alleged attack didn’t change anything on that front.  In 2013, Trump is on record as having said the US should stay out of the conflict in Syria.  So why the change?  Children die daily in Syria due to the conventional war there so again, what had really changed?

So, what was accomplished?  Even though both the Democrats and Republicans in Congress have both condemned Trump for not going through Congress, Trump’s supporters are behind him even more.  Trump has strengthened his hold on his backers.  Other than that, if the attack even occurred, nothing has changed.  More fake news?

Eugene Eklund

Whitecourt, AB

You must be logged in to post a comment Login