Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Friday, April 13, 2018

President Donald Trump announced on Friday he ordered strikes on the Syrian regime in response to a chemical weapons attack last weekend. "I ordered the United States armed forces to launch precision strikes on targets associated with the chemical weapon capabilities of Syrian dictator of Bashar al-Assad," Trump said from the White House Diplomatic Room. US aircraft and ships were used in the attack, according to multiple US defense officials. Trump said the strikes were in coordination with France and the United Kingdom, adding that the purpose of the campaign is to "establish a strong deterrent against the production, spread and use of chemical weapons." "The combined American, British and French response to these atrocities will integrate all instruments of our national power: military, economic and diplomatic," Trump said.

Advertisement

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Is this cover for firing Rosenstein?

#1 | Posted by Zed at 2018-04-13 09:19 PM | Reply

we need a new president, this one is broken.

#2 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2018-04-13 09:25 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 5

Break out the beautiful chocolate cake!

#3 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-04-13 09:29 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

I'm sure he's strutting down at his vacation home. This must be the 700th day of vacation by now.

#4 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2018-04-13 11:11 PM | Reply

If Hildabeast and the Chocolate Jesus did this, you freaks would be in rapture.

TFF

#5 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-04-13 11:58 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

F you and your violencegasms. trump doing what he said he wouldn't do is all fine and dandy for Trumptilians like yourself.

Hope this doesn't lead to WW3, but I'm sure Donnie "Spank me harder" Trump will lead us to victory.

#6 | Posted by truthhurts at 2018-04-14 12:17 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Sorry that struck a nerve Troofy...go into your safe space and rock yourself to sleep.

#7 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-04-14 12:22 AM | Reply

#5 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER
"If Hildabeast and the Chocolate Jesus did this, you freaks would be in rapture."

Equally important: What would you be doing?

#8 | Posted by TheTom at 2018-04-14 12:26 AM | Reply

Equally important: What would you be doing?

I would still support it, since it is a necessary response to a gas attack.

How about you?

#9 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-04-14 12:32 AM | Reply

Blah blah blah go suck your orange savior off if you can find it.

#10 | Posted by truthhurts at 2018-04-14 12:33 AM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

#10

Translation: I got nothing.

#11 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-04-14 12:37 AM | Reply

As opposed to bringing a Clinton/Obama deflection into a Trump warmongering thread?

#12 | Posted by truthhurts at 2018-04-14 12:38 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

In all seriousness, Troofy, what would you do instead of bombing the chemical weapons labs and storehouses?

#13 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-04-14 12:38 AM | Reply

It's not a deflection, its reality. We have both been here long enough to know that I am right.

#14 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-04-14 12:39 AM | Reply

Stay the ---- out of the middle east.

Should have stayed of out Libya

Should have stayed out of Iraq

Should have stayed out of Afghanistan

Should have stayed out of Somalia and Yemen

Nothing good comes from our meddling.

Farking funny thing is these supposed chemicals probably had a US origin-well unless they came from Russia

#15 | Posted by truthhurts at 2018-04-14 12:44 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Oh and I predict that this attack will be as impotent and useless as the last missile strike. That seemed to have scared Assad sooooo much.

Well Raytheon made a few billion so there is that.

#16 | Posted by truthhurts at 2018-04-14 12:47 AM | Reply

Stay the ---- out of the middle east.

Having spent time in the ME during Desert Shield, I couldn't agree more. Ever been there?

Should have stayed of out Libya

Agreed, but Hildabeast and Chocolate Jesus disagree with us.

Should have stayed out of Iraq

Sooner or later we would have been back, but W's misadventure was just that.

Should have stayed out of Afghanistan

Pretty much everyone in DC disagrees with you, as do I.

Should have stayed out of Somalia and Yemen

That is an Obama legacy, but one that I agree that he had to do. That area is a geopolitical powderkeg that most countries are terrified of.

Nothing good comes from our meddling.

Sadly, worse things happen from isolationism.

Farking funny thing is these supposed chemicals probably had a US origin-well unless they came from Russia
#15 | POSTED BY TRUTHHURTS AT 2018-04-14 12:44 AM

Pretty sure that they came from the former Eastern Bloc, which is why the Russians are not worked up about it.

#17 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-04-14 12:54 AM | Reply

If the past is any predictor, we prolly told Putin who told Assad where we were striking so he could clear his people out.

The gassing deserved a response, though, no matter how we got to where we are now.

#18 | Posted by Corky at 2018-04-14 12:58 AM | Reply

The gassing deserved a response, though, no matter how we got to where we are now.

Bears repeating.

#19 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-04-14 01:00 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"On Friday morning, Fox & Friends host Ainsley Earhardt suggested that military strikes in Syria could be useful to divert attention from the unflattering portrayal of President Trump contained in former FBI Director James Comey's book.

"If the president, and France, and the U.K decide to strike Syria, don't you think that story would be a bigger story than Comey's book that's released on Tuesday?" she said."

thinkprogress.org

Of course, you know who was watching from the WH golden toilet.

#20 | Posted by Corky at 2018-04-14 01:09 AM | Reply

Attacking Syria is something hillary wanted to do and trump was against it, supposedly

TPP was something hillary was for at one time and trump was supposedly against it, now he is talking about joining it

Now we got trumpsters jumping for joy about attacking Syria and clintonites against it and I suppose if trump does back TPP the Nazi Trumpsters will love it too.

It is all a FHKing bloody deadly joke

#21 | Posted by PunchyPossum at 2018-04-14 01:27 AM | Reply

What is the legal justification for Trump attacking Syria? Was Syria responsible for 9/11 or did Assad provide material support?

#22 | Posted by dibblda at 2018-04-14 01:33 AM | Reply

What is the legal justification for Trump attacking Syria? Was Syria responsible for 9/11 or did Assad provide material support?

POSTED BY DIBBLDA AT 2018-04-14 01:33 AM | REPLY

There is none. There's not even an Article 42 condemning it nor an Article 43 Sanctioning it. Lawful wars are sadly a thing of the past with this country.

PS Trivia time. All three started the Illegal no fly zones over Iraq. France bowing out after they discovered its illegality.

#23 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-04-14 02:42 AM | Reply

Before the attack the dotard notified the enemy by tweet.

The reason the US was so certain Saddam had chemical weapons is we conspired with Germany to provide them to him for use against Iran. In that case it was AOK, since it prevented Iran from overrunning Iraq in another war we fomented and lost, until the chemicals brought Iran to a halt. Saddam was our buddy until he dared to act independently.

All our military interventions around the world have failed to deliver the promise of freedom and democracy, by which we really mean libertarian (aka neo-liberal) economic policy. Unless chaos and destruction of the targeted nation and huge profits for defense contractors is the purpose of our interventions they have all been abysmal failures.

Never the less corky is right this time and I was wrong. There is substantial evidence Assad has used chemical weapons.

#24 | Posted by bayviking at 2018-04-14 06:43 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

since we launched 100 billion dollars worth of missles can we only give Isreal 200 billion this year instead of the usual 300?

it is their war, calling the shots and all.

#25 | Posted by mutant at 2018-04-14 08:32 AM | Reply

many tomahawks got intercepted before landing on the scalps is the current scuttlebut....appeasement attack unless a few boats get sunk in the med....then wot?

#26 | Posted by mutant at 2018-04-14 09:45 AM | Reply

I would still support it, since it is a necessary response to a gas attack.
How about you?

#9 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER

Because I believe nothing out of this administration without independent confirmation I would ask to see your evidence. Stopping the use of chemical weapons is an international obligation and requires a strong response.

While I do appreciate seeing seeing the allies work together again we should have learned by now that in War the Truth is the first casualty. And if we got this wrong it could literally mean WWIII so it's pretty important we get it right. Luckily, so far Russia is only waving its arms and protesting in the U.N. One sunk American Warship would change things dramatically.

Apparently there has been numerous gas attacks and numerous violations of human rights in Syria (and in many places in the world) so the obvious questions are, Why there? Why now?

#27 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-04-14 11:50 AM | Reply

In all seriousness, Troofy, what would you do instead of bombing the chemical weapons labs and storehouses?

#13 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER

As if they're stored in a convenient building next to the airstrips clearly labeled "gas stored here".

#28 | Posted by jpw at 2018-04-14 12:21 PM | Reply

since we launched 100 billion dollars worth of missles can we only give Isreal 200 billion this year instead of the usual 300?

LOL now now now. You know that that $100 billion comes out of the pockets of NPR, PBS NOAA, NEA ect ect ect. Nickel and dime the things that benefit the average citizen, that's how you pay for it.

Israel will probably get an extra $50 billion for the trouble.

#29 | Posted by jpw at 2018-04-14 12:26 PM | Reply

Imagine a CW depot as the Tomahawk missile target and not having collateral CW exposure casualties and damage afterwords....pure magiKK.

Explain how this can work. Does the gas just disappear? Is it nuetralized with CO2 or DihydrogenMonoxide?

#30 | Posted by mutant at 2018-04-14 10:16 PM | Reply

Does the gas just disappear?

Pretty much, given that no one is going to admit it was there in the first place.

#31 | Posted by REDIAL at 2018-04-14 10:37 PM | Reply

I would assume they'd be able to tailor the charge and have it incinerate the gas /agent. Perhaps the normal charge is sufficient.
I'd also assume soil samples could be taken afterwards to determine if suspicions were true.

Either way it depends on who you trust, if anyone.
Even things that could be proven are lied about. No missile shot down, 13 missiles shot down, 71 missiles shot down...who is lying?

#32 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2018-04-14 11:25 PM | Reply

The BDA pics show flattened chemical plants.

#33 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2018-04-15 09:32 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2018 World Readable

Drudge Retort