| Submit your comments on this article |
| Syria-Lebanon-Iran |
| 'We are losing sight' |
| 2017-04-11 |
| h/t Gates of Vienna The former Ukip leader suggested Western leaders were "losing sight" by targeting the Syrian government instead of "Islamic terror" which poses a greater danger to the UK. President Assad was slammed after he allegedly launched a chemical weapons attack on civilians, killing at least 72 people in northern Syria. US President Donald Trump launched his own attack in retaliation, destroying a government airbase, which is said to be involved in the alleged attack, with 59 Tomahawk missiles. However, speaking on Fox News, Mr Farage warned against targeting Assad and said the real danger to the West is terrorism. He said: "Are we not losing sight of something else ‐ often in history, it is the case that my enemy’s enemy is my friend? "However bad a man Assad is, he is actually fighting ISIS every single day. "I believe that the biggest threat we face in the West is from Islamic terrorism ‐ and we really must not lose sight of that." |
| Posted by:g(r)omgoru |
| #7 You guys are crazy. This was not a fake sarin attack. This was the real deal, done by the Syrian Air Force. The Islamic state is a temporary thing well designed to concentrate, discredit, and kill Islamo-fascists. Like Illinois-Nazis everyone hates them. And they will go away soon enough. The Syrian government on the other hand will be around for almost ever. So, taking a moment to school them on not using chemical weapons is always a good opportunity. |
| Posted by: rammer 2017-04-11 20:05 |
| #6 ISIS made a strategic error in targeting the West, and as a result will be replaced by whoever, sans the anti-western activities. Think Hamas. Because the conditions that led to ISIS will still exist and that includes Assad. Assad has done far worse than ISIS, but doesn't target the West or post it on Facebook. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2017-04-11 18:37 |
| #5 I agree that ISIS should be the target. If Russia can get the chemicals away from Assad we should leave the guy alone and concentrate on ISIS. Then when they are smashed we should fall back to bases in the Kurdish area and let the region fight as they alway do, as they always will. |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2017-04-11 18:00 |
| #4 even if it was fake, there are some benefits Yeah. Like the world thinks Trump is as nuts as Kim Jong Nom, except Trump has enough nukes to take the world out ten times over. |
| Posted by: gorb 2017-04-11 17:21 |
| #3 there isn't anyone to replace Assad that won't be worse or trigger a bigger massacre/civil war Dude, isn't that the point, induce havoc in the region and allow the collapse? Is Syria really anything more than Turkey's southern border, a banker for Saddam's chem and bullion or a provider for the Lebs? |
| Posted by: Skidmark 2017-04-11 15:21 |
| #2 I'm still voting fake, too. Weird thing about it, as Scott Adams has pointed out, even if it was fake, there are some benefits (real and perceived) to whacking the airbase: 1) Trump is no longer Putin's bitch 2) Unlike Obama's red lines, Trump actually does stuff 3) It gets Pudgy's attention in NKor 4) It makes the Chinese interested in dealing with NKor in order to get a trade deal Lottsa wins, but it still doesn't mean going into Syria is a good idea. We don't want to fight the Russians and there isn't anyone to replace Assad that won't be worse or trigger a bigger massacre/civil war. As the article says, terrorism is the problem. |
| Posted by: SteveS 2017-04-11 14:45 |
| #1 p.s. Anybody has info on "Swedish Doctors For Human Rights"? Sound ultra left, but they agree with me that the chemical weapons strike was pure Pallywood. |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2017-04-11 12:21 |