Hell the US probably sold them the anti missle equipment then lobbed missles and let them blow them out of the sky, double the profit.
I haven't looked into the recent bombing in Syria too much, but I wanted to note that it was very strange to me who were for it, against it, or in a grey area. Here's a few examples, The Jimmy Dore Show, which is a left leaning YouTube channel, seemingly agrees with Tucker Carlson on this issue. Leftist YouTube pundit, Kyle Kulinski, agrees with Tomi Lahren for seemingly the first time. Kyle also criticizes the media on the left for not speaking up about it. The very far left Vox writes an article that approves the bombings. Trump threatens a "big price" after reports of deadly chemical attack in Syria Then here's Alex Jones crying on camera because he says Trump betrayed him lol. It's all very strange to me who's taking sides on this. Very, very strange.
I just wanted to throw that out there, because I found it strange, but I don't know enough about the issue itself right now. I've just never seen particular pundits taking sides like this.
Ron Paul on the attack on Syria. "Whatever the truth about this alleged chemical attack, the notion of false flag events being used to prompt military action should not be met with such skepticism. The US has a long history of using lies (or "fake news" you might call it) as a pretext for war. It is important to look at recent events in Syria within that context." False Flags are Real – US Has a Long History of Lying to Start Wars
Does it seem like the US as no coherent strategy in Syria? Bullseye. Washington (CNN)Lawmakers emerged from a classified administration briefing expressing concern about administration policy on Syria and the legal justification for last week's military strikes against the regime of Bashar al-Assad. "I am very unnerved by what I'm hearing and seeing," said Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican, who said the briefing on the strikes made him more worried, not less. The administration is "going down a dangerous path" with regards to Syria, he said, without offering details. But on April 13, when he announced the strikes, Trump said the US would be undertaking a sustained diplomatic, military and economic response to stop the use of chemical weapons, and officials said the US would remain focused on defeating ISIS. Senators leaving Tuesday's briefing seemed to indicate that Trump's isolationist impulses are going to win out, regardless of the consequences for US global influence, American national security interests or the fate of the region, where Iran is vying for larger influence and Russia has established itself as a power broker, edging out the US. Democratic Sen. Chris Coons of Delaware left the meeting and told reporters, "The only thing worse than a bad plan on Syria is no plan on Syria, and the President and his administration have failed to deliver a coherent plan on the path forward." "I think it's important for us to remain engaged in Syria and to pursue a diplomatic resolution," Coons said. "If we completely withdraw, our leverage in any diplomatic resolution or reconstruction or any hope for a post-Assad Syria goes away." Sen. Bob Corker, the Tennessee Republican who has sparred with Trump over foreign policy issues, exited the briefing and told reporters, "I think the administration's plans are to complete the efforts against ISIS and (then) not be involved." Corker went on to say that, "Syria is Russia and Iran's now. They will be determining the future. We may be at the table, but when you're just talking and have nothing to do with shaping what's happening on the ground, you're just talking." Asked if he felt the administration should do more militarily to shape events on the ground, Corker said, "They're not going to. I understand it's not going to happen. It's just not going to happen. To do so would take a significant effort by our military and I just don't think that's where the American people are right now." Senators concerned about Trump policy on Syria - CNNPolitics
I totally agree with you the people that are completely dismissing the idea that the chemical attack was a false flag event or didn’t happen at all really need to look at the bigger picture. Days after us says there gonna pull out of Syria this happens. the main evidence of the attack where videos from the white hats which are part of the terrorist propaganda machine. We attack before investigators even make it on the scene to confirm it happened.The attack comes right after us meeting about the pipeline goin through Syria.Assad had no reason to use chemicals he’s winning he’s takin back almost all of the regions taken by the rebels. The us is the one with the motive to make this happen it’s tragic to see such Blatant corruption and terror coming from our government Sent from my iPhone using Grasscity Forum
No surprises here. I think everybody already knows we're supplying weapons to syrian rebel groups with ties to extremists.
I think the obama white house was pretty open to the fact they were arming syrian rebel groups to fight isis and assad..
Show me the name of the CIA operation that conducted those chemical attacks in syria and now we suddenly have something to talk about.
So just a thought how is it ok for us police to use pepper spray and tear gas( these are technically chemical weapons )on crowds but wanna start a war over other country’s using them Sent from my iPhone using Grasscity Forum
I can think of a few deserving subjects but gassing the likes of ISIS is too lenient. That napalm that the US used in Vietnam would be just the medicine for those lads.