Cruise Missles anyone?

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by icenine

At least Trump destroyed the runways so they cannot be used by Assad to launch more planes.

No point in going after runways as they can be patched very quickly.

[JCricket]

Originally Posted by icenine

At least Trump destroyed the runways so they cannot be used by Assad to launch more planes.

I saw a little piece on Anderson Cooper about the runways., They are very quickly repaired if you blow holes in them. They have special bombs just for runways. They pierce the concrete, then explode, lifting the concrete but not entirely out of the ground. The idea is it is much more time consuming to remove concrete and patch a hole rather than just patch holes.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Revisionism, pure and simple. There wasn't broad support for a Syria strike. [/I]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/01/wo...ast/syria.html

I didn't say there was "broad support". Go back and read what I posted. I said he likely would have had support for a broader response than just a missile strike on a Syrian airfield. The Resolution for Use of Force in Syria, if passed, would have given Obama Congressional support for up to 60 days of full military support. with an option for 30 days more. It had decent bipartisan support in the Senate, though the House might have taken a bit more arm twisting.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

I didn't say there was "broad support". Go back and read what I posted. I said he likely would have had support for a broader response than just a missile strike on a Syrian airfield. The Resolution for Use of Force in Syria, if passed, would have given Obama Congressional support for up to 60 days of full military support. with an option for 30 days more. It had decent bipartisan support in the Senate, though the House might have taken a bit more arm twisting.

A bit more? Please. More revisionism.

Newspaper The Hill released a whip list with information on which Senators and Representatives had announced their support or opposition for an American military intervention in Syria.[44] On September 9, the whip list stood at:

• Yes/Leaning Yes: 31 (21 Democrats, 10 Republicans)
• Undecided/Not Clear: 92 (71 Democrats, 21 Republicans)
• No/Leaning No: 144 (109 Republicans, 35 Democrats)

The Washington Post also created its own whip count of where the votes stand on Syria.[45] Their count on September 13th stood at:

• Yes: 25 (17 Democrats, 8 Republicans)
• Undecided: 145 (111 Democrats, 34 Republicans)
• Leaning No: 101 (38 Democrats, 63 Republicans)
• Against: 162 (34 Democrats, 91 Republicans)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Author...House_reaction

So, with 25 in favor and ~400 undecided or opposed, all that was needed was a little arm twisting?

[whell]

Yup. Certainly in the Senate, Reid would have delivered the votes. The House would not have been a slam dunk by any stretch. But the Resolution was not a requirement for the use of force either. Certainly Senate and House Dems would have given Obama political cover of he had ordered strikes - plural - without the Resolution.

[MrPots]

According to this evening's news the runways have been patched and bombing runs have resumed.....

A lot good that did...but then when you warn them in advance....

[Rajoo]

Originally Posted by MrPots

According to this evening's news the runways have been patched and bombing runs have resumed.....

A lot good that did...but then when you warn them in advance....

How do we know that the Syrians did not expect this if Russia was warned?
What if this missile strike was made with Russia's tacit approval to help spike Trump's approval ratings?

[donquixote99]

The runways would be fixable in days even if attacked with large bombs from aircraft. The things to go after at an airbase are aircraft. Much more expensive and hard to replace than runways. But the Syrians had warning, so the aircraft got out of there I'd expect.

[whell]

Originally Posted by Rajoo

How do we know that the Syrians did not expect this if Russia was warned?
What if this missile strike was made with Russia's tacit approval to help spike Trump's approval ratings?

You can bet the farm that Russia warned Assad. As far as your second question.....delusional.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

Yup. Certainly in the Senate, Reid would have delivered the votes. The House would not have been a slam dunk by any stretch. But the Resolution was not a requirement for the use of force either. Certainly Senate and House Dems would have given Obama political cover of he had ordered strikes - plural - without the Resolution.

Perhaps. And it would have accomplished exactly as much as the recent strike - nothing but rearranging some rubble. It somehow makes us feel proud of our humanity without accomplishing a thing.

Syria was then and is now a client state of Russia. We shouldn't kid ourselves that we're capable of imposing our will there. We tried that in Iraq and we're still there without a damn thing to show for it other than a lot of spent blood and treasure. In fact, it was our Iraq misadventure that birthed this whole mess.