Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien
It's pretty worrying if that were the reason. Can't have military actions provoked because the President is upset. 
I think action needs to be taken but I think Russia are too entrenched in Syria now. On Sky News a guest pointed out that the Russians have Russian-manned anti-aircraft guns. Would the US attack those? Would they risk ignoring them and, if so, would Russia attack the US to stop them attacking Syria?
Maybe the die was cast back when Parliament voted not to go with the US in supporting anti-Assad air-strikes - Labour voted against - which undermined the US ability to go in.
Further economic isolation of Russia might be an answer. The Russian economy did take a bad hit after they invaded Ukraine and how long can Putin maintain strong control if he loses support of powerful, rich, Russians? |
I said earlier when he posted it was wrong what he said in the tweet. I am just trying to convey the reasoning behind the tweets today. I am not going to jump on the 'Never Trumpers' bandwagon like others have.
---------- Post added at 21:14 ---------- Previous post was at 20:14 ----------
Just in from Telegraph UK: PM May is said to move submarines within range of Syria.
Quote:
|
The Daily Telegraph has learnt that Mrs May has ordered British submarines to move within missile range of Syria in readiness for strikes against the Assad regime that could begin as early as Thursday night.
|
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...against-assad/