Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: For those against the attack, what should have been done after the chemical attacks? [View all]tavernier
(14,383 posts)60. That was my thought.
Or are there others even crazier? That's always the argument. Hard to imagine.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
111 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
For those against the attack, what should have been done after the chemical attacks? [View all]
Rustyeye77
Apr 2017
OP
First, find out who was responsible with certainty. This is what trump recommended.
L. Coyote
Apr 2017
#62
Since his family doesn't live there, I was hoping they'd blow up his huge, tacky presidential palace
OregonBlue
Apr 2017
#107
Neither is creating a lot of potholes next to an airstrip in a Kabuki dance with Putin
Squinch
Apr 2017
#81
I agree. Although it needed a response, this bombing 'show' was not it. nt
WePurrsevere
Apr 2017
#64
In a perfect world with intelligent leaders this is the appropriate course of action
randr
Apr 2017
#65
EXACTLY. ANSWERED. Honestly, I don't know how anyone can fall for this attack -- no refugees
anneboleyn
Apr 2017
#28
I don't think you can make the case for these strikes being unconstitutional.
Act_of_Reparation
Apr 2017
#24
And fuck Trump's rejection of geothermal energy in federal facilities, while we're at it.
Orrex
Apr 2017
#98
The executive branch should have consulted with Congress, whether it was required by the
still_one
Apr 2017
#56
Something smart and patriotic? Warning the Russians and Syrians ahead of time wasn't that
uponit7771
Apr 2017
#13
Nothing. If he wasn't willing to let them in the country when they were alive...
WoonTars
Apr 2017
#17
While that would have been a much more effective message, the problem with that is...
stevenleser
Apr 2017
#91
Why shoot missiles at us and not allow any refugees into their country! Just like Trump!
anneboleyn
Apr 2017
#29
Something other than this Lone Ranger strike on one airfield. This was a show attack
delisen
Apr 2017
#31
Is there actually proof who and what and why about this chemical attack?
The_Casual_Observer
Apr 2017
#33
Well, I know attacking an empty airbase with Putin and Assad's prior knowledge....
Tommy_Carcetti
Apr 2017
#35
An attack that took out the air force and/or did lasting harm to their ability to use their
Demsrule86
Apr 2017
#45
If we were going to launch missiles, the base should have been left inoperable.
Blue_true
Apr 2017
#52
I'm with Her - take out their airforce and air fields. Although MUCH easier said than done
jmg257
Apr 2017
#59
the rebels had chemical weapons on the ground, which is possible since they were the ones
yurbud
Apr 2017
#92
stop our allies from funding beheading "rebels," and ask our politicians what it is
yurbud
Apr 2017
#108
