What would you do in Syria

[Dill]

(04-09-2017, 01:45 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I do not know how many times I have to answer the same question before you consider it answered: We have Troops on the ground in a country where its leader employed Chemical Weapons. Is it that I don't bold it?

Apparently, you, Syria, Russia, and Iran are those that "continue to reason with logic and evidence without drifting into reports of how they feel." There is no "imagined" consensus. The leaders of the western world are in unison with their support.

Bolding the point won't establish that the presence of US ground troops suddenly made it in the US interest to hammer an airbase near Homs without incapacitating it or destroying chemical stores. And repeating that "We have troops on the ground" speaks not all to the question of whether those troops might now be in more danger, after a weak attack.

Your claim that "wind" is a factor is also a non-factor. Sarin degrades and dissapates quickly. That is why doctors and paramedics can rush into affected areas and rescue people.  US troops are hundreds of miles away from the attack site in North East Syria.

And in your dialogue with Oncemore, you introduced an entirely different rationale for the attack on emotional/humanitarian grounds of the sort that Trump has heretofore sneered at. "I can look Syrian children in the face and tell them NO, you can't come here."

And you continue to fall back on the "consensus" line, now narrowed to the "western world," which means nothing coming from someone who has heretofore ignored international criticism of Trump.