Trump Dump: Foreign Policy (Thread I)

[The Romulan Republic]

This is a weird situation where I almost hope Trump is being manipulated/directed by Putin, because as much as Putin is a tyrant, and as much as he might engage in dangerous brinksmanship, he doesn't seem irrational or completely buffoonish about international politics the way Trump does, and I can't imagine that Putin would actually want a likely nuclear war to break out on the Korean peninsula. So if he is exerting influence on Trump's policy, as seems likely, then he would probably be trying to influence him away from any unilateral act of aggression their.

But it says something about how insane the state of affairs has become that the Russian despot exerting influence on the President of the United States might, in this case, actually be the lesser evil.

Of course, given how close the election really was, its entirely possible that we wouldn't be in this mess to begin with without Russian interference.

[Highlord Laan]

Regarding airstrikes. People forget that thi is not the Middle east. You think the collateral damage situation in Syria is bad? Noone _really_ cares about it, to be honest. The SK forces, on the other hand, WILL care if airstrikes are killing SK civillians.

By the time the US can bring the air power to bear, chances are that a good portion of that army is already inside Seoul. Dense city, and 10 million hostages, roads full of refugees, with the NORKS moving along with them...

Target rich environment? Sure.
"Good" target rich environment? Less so.

Correct. I wasn't being "RAH MURICA FUCK YEAH" in the slightest, simply point out how it would end for NK. But any open armed conflict on the Korean peninsula would quickly devolve into the kind of bloody clusterfuck people haven't seen since World War II.

[Tribble]

American military strikes is as much a national pastime as football and baseball, and most presidents have blown up places to help bolster their polls secure democracy somewhere at some point during their tenure. Bush got Afghanistan and Iraq, Obama got Syria and Libya, so it's only fair that Trump gets his pick. The real trick is for Trump to choose countries which seem threatening enough to the American public, but can't actually do all that much... and be places where no one really cares if they get blown up. North Korea and Iran are poor targets (despite being part of the "Axis of Evil") because they have the ability to cause some damage. Any suggestions?

[The Romulan Republic]

American military strikes is as much a national pastime as football and baseball, and most presidents have blown up places to help bolster their polls secure democracy somewhere at some point during their tenure. Bush got Afghanistan and Iraq, Obama got Syria and Libya, so it's only fair that Trump gets his pick. The real trick is to pick countries which seem threatening enough to the American public, but can't actually do all that much... and be places where no one really cares if they get blown up. Admittingly places like North Korea and Iran are poor targets (despite being part of the "Axis of Evil") because they have the ability to cause some damage. Any suggestions?

Nothing comes to mind that a) would be likely to be something the average American would give a damn about going to war over, b) doesn't already involve American troops, and c) wouldn't be a massive global cluster fuck.

If Trump wants a war, I suspect that he's going to either have to wait for circumstances to change, start one with very little reason (and have it be obvious that he's doing so), or risk a major global conflagration.

[Raj Ahten]

The list of nations the US routinely uses its military forces is already long enough to keep even the most committed warmonger busy. Yemen for instance. Why stop at one botched raid when you can have many? Somalia is always good for some "low risk" operations that aren't thought through while we are in the neighborhood. Afghanistan will continue forever so why not give the generals the troops they want to "break the stalemate." Just by giving the generals what they want more troops will be going to all these places and more. With everyone claiming allegiance to the Islamic State these days there is truly no end to number of places we can go in order to defeat ISIS like papa Trump says he wants to.

[Raj Ahten]

So Trump just struck Syria with a few dozen Tomahawks. It's so fucking stupid I could rant about it for pages. A few quick points. Less than a week ago Trump's team was mocking anyone for the idea of using force in Syria. His lack of any coherent strategy or policy in regards to anything has now hit home. If anything attacking Assad has become far worse of an option recently with Russian troops everywhere not to mention US troops now in Syria where they can be easily exposed to all kinds of retaliation. The risks for a clusterfuck are really high and Trump just doesn't give a shit.

[The Romulan Republic]

Trump does not come close to having the intelligence to navigate such a complex and volatile conflict without it almost certainly spiralling out of control.

Either he made some huge concession to Putin behind the scenes to throw Assad under the bus, or World War III and a nuclear exchange with Russia just became much more likely and imminent prospects.

I would hope that we can all agree that Assad is a monster and that gassing civilians is unacceptable, but I don't believe for an instant that Trump did it out of any humanitarian motives, because he has done nothing to convince me that he cares, or is capable of caring, about anyone but himself, much less dead Middle Eastern civilians. No, this is risking the future of human civilization for a fucking political distraction.

[The Vortex Empire]

If Assad is deposed, who exactly is going to replace him? Either we commit militarily to propping up a puppet government for 10+ years or we just topple Assad and let the rebel groups inevitably turn on each other and the whole country descends into anarchy and ethnic cleansing. Well, more so than it is now.

[The Romulan Republic]

I could be wrong, but I'm honestly not sure (short of the hypothetical worst case nuclear exchange/WWIII scenario) that Syria could get worse. It cannot "descend into anarchy and ethnic cleansing." Its already their, and has been for years. It is a ruined country, with hundreds of thousands dead and millions of refugees. And the horror their has repeatedly spilled over into other nations, with potentially disastrous consequences. Which isn't even addressing the repeated flouting of international law regarding the use of chemical weapons.

Honestly, if it weren't for Russia backing Assad and the risks of a regional or even global war, and the fact that I wouldn't trust Trump to run a beauty pageant, much less a war, I'd call deposing Assad manifestly and absolutely a just war.

But as it stands, the risks, I feel, outweigh the potential benefits, as heartless as that sounds.

Edit: And that's the damnedest thing. If Trump did this as a fucking PR move/distraction, its a highly effective one, one that a lot of people who normally despise him will be able to rally around, or at least reluctant to whole-heartedly condemn.

Unless it blows up in our faces, which with Trump at the helm, seems likely bordering on inevitable.

[Vympel]

The Trump-is-a-Putin-puppet paranoids have already constructed their apologia for how Trump's latest folly squares with their loony babble - Putin wanted Trump to do it to throw The Resistance off the trail!

This is a fucking shitshow, of course. And of course the establishment media and the Democratic leadership are practically creaming their pants at America's big, hard, long Tomahawks plunging into Syria. All of them love this strike. Trump is Presidential now!

Disgusting.

[Alyrium Denryle]

Trump is an idiot, but a broken clock can be right twice a day. The russians were informed of our strike beforehand and no russians as far as I know where harmed. Blowback from Russia might be some sabre rattling, but Putin is not an idiot. He is not going to escalate into a regional war with the US, let alone a nuclear exchange. Both would be a complete disaster for Russia. We might be completely shit at occupying a country in the middle east, but our entire military is built around completely crushing a conventional military. Russia does not want any part of that. We don't even need to put men on the ground to make the Russian Federation regret its life choices. They also have zero capacity to actually hit us without using nukes, which Putin is not stupid enough to deploy. Strike done, Russia goes back to business as usual, we go back to business as usual. Assad gets the message that there are certain things he might do that Russia will not shield him from. Hell, chances are, he is getting a stern talking to from a Russian diplomat right now about not making their lives difficult by committing acts that the Russians themselves are obligated by treaty to least condemn.

That said, this was the correct action to take. Using Sarin on civilians is a crime against humanity. Countries that use chemical weapons in war or to murder their own people need to be punished. Period. The missile strike was proportionate and precisely targeted to affect only the facility that directly launched said gas attack. It is not a move to depose Assad. It is retaliatory strike to punish a crime against humanity committed by a state actor.

This might well be the ONLY right thing that Trump will do in his entire (hopefully not even a single) term in office.

[His Divine Shadow]

Some people have been commenting Trump did this in order to show he's not Putin's handpuppet. Also to show his chinese guest that he is capable of swift action.

EDIT: A lot of people, in this thread even.

[Lonestar]

The Trump-is-a-Putin-puppet paranoids have already constructed their apologia for how Trump's latest folly squares with their loony babble - Putin wanted Trump to do it to throw The Resistance off the trail!

.

Lol

Trump gave the Russians warning ahead of schedule(which apparently also gave the Syrians warning to clear out). Shit, Putin recognized Jerusalem as Israel's capital yesterday.

It COULDN'T BE that Putin decided to drop-kick Asad after staking his reputation on disarming him of chemical weapons and then being made to look the fool, could it????

No, it must be that Trump is really anti-Russian.

[Broomstick]

I think a lot of the impetus behind Trump ordering an airstrike is the visceral reaction he had to seeing kids gasping for breath and dying horribly on videos. It prompted an emotional reaction, followed by an emotional outburst, albeit one with missiles and high explosives. It wasn't some deeply thought out strategic move.

Otherwise, what Alyrium Denryle said.

[Raj Ahten]

So why is killing a few people with chemicals suddenly the bridge which must never be crossed? Dead is dead and I fail to see how it matters how it happens. In fact I'd argue that Assad's chemical strikes are less horrific than his very well documented torture/starvation dungeons. There are thousands of photographs of victims tortured to death in these facilities including many children. Plus how exactly is choking to death from a chemical strike worse than bleeding out after being maimed by aerial bombing?

Since no one is willing to go in and do what it takes to stop the killing (for some good reasons in many cases) quibbling about the means is pointless. Tomorrow Assad could just shrug and go back to redouble his conventional bombing campaign and continue to operate the murder dungeons.

[Broomstick]

Your looking for purely rational reasoning behind emotional reactions. It's not logical, but it is very real with real consequences.

Rather like the medieval distinction between being hanged vs. having your head chopped off - either way you're dead, but the distinction mattered on an emotional level to the people of the time.

That said - bleeding out, in some cases, might well be less painful than slowly suffocating from a chemical attack. Even so, not everyone who dies in a conventional bombing or firefight dies quickly and it can be just as horrifying.

[Napoleon the Clown]

So why is killing a few people with chemicals suddenly the bridge which must never be crossed? Dead is dead and I fail to see how it matters how it happens. In fact I'd argue that Assad's chemical strikes are less horrific than his very well documented torture/starvation dungeons. There are thousands of photographs of victims tortured to death in these facilities including many children. Plus how exactly is choking to death from a chemical strike worse than bleeding out after being maimed by aerial bombing?

Since no one is willing to go in and do what it takes to stop the killing (for some good reasons in many cases) quibbling about the means is pointless. Tomorrow Assad could just shrug and go back to redouble his conventional bombing campaign and continue to operate the murder dungeons.

The absolute fastest a nerve agent can kill you is about one minute. Every muscle in your body is locked into contracting. It is literally torturing you to death. The majority of nerve agents are what is known as "area denial weapons" because they have a habit of lingering and harming emergency responders, including those who never even enter the area because nerve agents are often oil substances that stick to the victims and their clothing. Bombing the hell out of civilians is also a war crime, but doing it with nerve agents is done for the express purpose of making the suffering as intense and long-lasting as possible and to make it dangerous to try and find survivors. Nerve agents are more expensive to use than conventional explosives, especially on a per-kill basis.

I'm sure bleeding out is not pleasant, but there does come a point where you go unconscious before you go dead. Sarin does not offer this.

[The Vortex Empire]

So around when do we launch the missiles against Saudi Arabia for their war crimes against civilians and the humanitarian crisis they're causing in Yemen?

[Napoleon the Clown]

So around when do we launch the missiles against Saudi Arabia for their war crimes against civilians and the humanitarian crisis they're causing in Yemen?

About the time we want to repeat the oil crisis of the 70s, but quite possibly worse. Double standards are horseshit, but pissing off Saudi Arabia is far more likely to bite us in the ass than pissing off Syria. I'm not immediately aware of any recent use of nerve agents by Saudi Arabia, but I do admit to not having looked to see if they have or have not recently. Russia may stomp their feet over a missile strike on Assad's toys but they aren't going to retaliate in a military capacity. Russia isn't a meaningful trade partner at this point in time, either.

Best case scenario, the strike in Syria will accomplish pretty much nothing of substance. Worst (realistic) scenario is we end up getting into another quagmire. Most likely all we've done is spend a bunch of money temporarily inconveniencing a single airfield.

[Alyrium Denryle]

So why is killing a few people with chemicals suddenly the bridge which must never be crossed? Dead is dead and I fail to see how it matters how it happens. In fact I'd argue that Assad's chemical strikes are less horrific than his very well documented torture/starvation dungeons. There are thousands of photographs of victims tortured to death in these facilities including many children. Plus how exactly is choking to death from a chemical strike worse than bleeding out after being maimed by aerial bombing?

Since no one is willing to go in and do what it takes to stop the killing (for some good reasons in many cases) quibbling about the means is pointless. Tomorrow Assad could just shrug and go back to redouble his conventional bombing campaign and continue to operate the murder dungeons.

Deep breath AD... Deep breath.

Sarin is an acetylcholinesterase inhibitor. What that means is that it prevents that particular enzyme from breaking down acetylcholin, which is a neurotransmitter responsible for telling your muscles to contract. With Sarin in one's system, the muscles contract, and they don't stop. All of them. Ever have a cramped calf muscle? It is like that, only it is every skeletal muscle in the body. That alone is agonizing to the point that medieval pain technicians would be like "woah there, tone it down!". But it is not just that, it also locks the diaphragm in the contracted position, preventing inhalation, leading not just to asphyxia, but suffocation from CO2 buildup in the blood. The victims die in muscular agony and acute respiratory distress, helpless and trapped in their own bodies as their brain desperately sends signals for their diaphragm to relax and their muscles to unclench.

It does not just kill. It robs people of their dignity and agency as a person before they die. It is fucking monstrous.

There is respite from torture. When someone is starving, their mind adapts and they stop hurting after a while. And while starving and torturing is ALSO a war crime, it is a distributed one. One we cannot attack without having to invade the country. A gas attack is something we CAN stop/punish with a single attack on the facility used to launch it. It is like point-source vs non-point-source pollution. It is easy to deal with point source pollution like a coal slurry pit that is leaking because you can go in and clean up one place. It is harder with non-point-source because you have to stop agricultural runoff over a whole landscape.

Same thing here. Mass starvation and torture dungeons we cannot deal with without a full scale invasion. A sarin gas launch site we can blow up.

[MKSheppard]

Using Sarin on civilians is a crime against humanity.

If it was even Sarin, which I doubt. If it was actually Sarin, they wouldn't be doing Arab Hollywood Propaganda with dead bodies for the camera. They'd all be dead or suffering from nerve agent exposure.

Countries that use chemical weapons in war or to murder their own people need to be punished.

The place gassed (if it was) was basically Al Qaeda in Syria central. I thought we were against Al Quaeda.

[Alyrium Denryle]

Using Sarin on civilians is a crime against humanity.

If it was even Sarin, which I doubt. If it was actually Sarin, they wouldn't be doing Arab Hollywood Propaganda with dead bodies for the camera. They'd all be dead or suffering from nerve agent exposure.

Countries that use chemical weapons in war or to murder their own people need to be punished.

The place gassed (if it was) was basically Al Qaeda in Syria central. I thought we were against Al Quaeda.

Sources?

That said, even people in Al Quaeda don't deserve nerve gas. I know this won't even compute for you, but I don't consider my country's enemies to be non-persons.

[The Romulan Republic]

Plus, you know, just because Al Quaeda is strong in an area does not mean every person their, down to the last child, is part of Al Quaeda, and gas is a fairly non-discriminating weapon.

The Trump-is-a-Putin-puppet paranoids have already constructed their apologia for how Trump's latest folly squares with their loony babble - Putin wanted Trump to do it to throw The Resistance off the trail!

This is a fucking shitshow, of course. And of course the establishment media and the Democratic leadership are practically creaming their pants at America's big, hard, long Tomahawks plunging into Syria. All of them love this strike. Trump is Presidential now!

Disgusting.

I do think Trump probably did this, at least in part, to throw people off the Russia connection (knowing that the Useful Idiots like you would immediately take this as proof that he never colluded with Russia). At the very least, its an unfortunate side benefit for him- his administration appeared to be increasingly on the ropes, and now the focus will all be on him heroically taking on Assad in spite of their support from Russia.

I can only hope that the investigations continue steadily in the background, even if ignored, so that when the public's attention is no longer all on Syria, we can bring the hammer down.

But I am highly skeptical that Putin had any say in it. I kind of wish he did, strangely enough, because it would greatly lessen the odds of this turning into a conflict between American and Russia, but I think what's more likely is that Putin is now learning what many other self-deluded people who thought they could "work with Trump" learned: that Trump is a volatile man-child and loose canon, not someone they can have a stable working relationship with.

In short, Putin got played too, by his own hubris and the fact that Trump has one real talent: as a con man.

This is also a disturbing indication of what Trump is likely to do in the event of future domestic political crises (and he will have them): deflect attention and boost his approval with a foreign military action. I shudder to think what he's likely to do before the 2020 elections, or if an impeachment occurs.

[MKSheppard]

But basically, Assad not utilizing chemical warfare has made this war last for years on end and kill more people in the end.

What kills chemical warfare from being used more often isn't the actual cost of the munitions, but the time and material costs involved in decontamination and operating in slimed areas. Who do you think is going to be better in Verdun Mark II fought with Soman? A standing national army supported by Russia and having unlimited gas masks and MOPP suits plus decontamination fluids, versus a rag tag islamist army funded on the cheap by various princelings from across the Middle East?

[MKSheppard]

Sources?

Compare the response of the Toyko Police to an actual nerve gas event to the Propaganda shitshow in Syria.