Illustrated wrote

Yin wrote I do know the ACLU is calling it illegal, so it makes me question it. I also like how we are now concerned about the well being of the Syrian people when we seemingly didn't give a damn about them before this attack.

This is just my opinion, but the way I see it is that taking care of the refugees is not our concern. We have no obligation to let them in, and I don't believe that we should have. I don't see this situation as 'we didn't care but now we do'. I see this incident as a response to Assad's war crimes. Cause and effect. Not it being a change of heart about helping the people of Syria. BUT, taking in refugees is a short term solution anyway. Long term, if we go into Syria and just take out the Assad regime, the Syrians can go back home and you don;t even have to worry about the refugee problem. There was a video circulating FB of a CNN clip with a Syrian civilian who was thanking Trump for the missile strike, but even he said 'we don't want to go to America, we want our home back'.

And honestly, the ACLU is a pathetic joke that takes ridiculous stances on almost every subject.

It's sad too see that you don't actually know what is happening in Syria. Turkish troops are currently in northern Syria to push the YPG from the 'border' turky/syria. Syria/Russia Govt troops are trying to fight against ISIS/rebels. And you have the U.S. supplying Al nusra.''take out the Assad regime, the Syrians can go back home and you don't even have to worry about the refugee problem'' I hope you're kidding, ISIS and the rebels are going to kill them. This is why you don't watch CNN corrupt media.

Illustrated wrote

Yin wrote I do know the ACLU is calling it illegal, so it makes me question it. I also like how we are now concerned about the well being of the Syrian people when we seemingly didn't give a damn about them before this attack.

This is just my opinion, but the way I see it is that taking care of the refugees is not our concern. We have no obligation to let them in, and I don't believe that we should have. I don't see this situation as 'we didn't care but now we do'. I see this incident as a response to Assad's war crimes. Cause and effect. Not it being a change of heart about helping the people of Syria. BUT, taking in refugees is a short term solution anyway. Long term, if we go into Syria and just take out the Assad regime, the Syrians can go back home and you don;t even have to worry about the refugee problem. There was a video circulating FB of a CNN clip with a Syrian civilian who was thanking Trump for the missile strike, but even he said 'we don't want to go to America, we want our home back'.

And honestly, the ACLU is a pathetic joke that takes ridiculous stances on almost every subject.

Refugees aren't our problem, but you want to take out the government who is fighting ISIS, who create refugees, and then leave? Just like Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya? Which will create more refugees. That makes sense.

OT: $90 million fireworks show that didn't do anything besides make the price of oil surge. If anything we helped the Russian economy. How do you fire 59 cruise missiles and still leave the airfield operational?

Miss wrote

Illustrated wrote

Yin wrote I do know the ACLU is calling it illegal, so it makes me question it. I also like how we are now concerned about the well being of the Syrian people when we seemingly didn't give a damn about them before this attack.

This is just my opinion, but the way I see it is that taking care of the refugees is not our concern. We have no obligation to let them in, and I don't believe that we should have. I don't see this situation as 'we didn't care but now we do'. I see this incident as a response to Assad's war crimes. Cause and effect. Not it being a change of heart about helping the people of Syria. BUT, taking in refugees is a short term solution anyway. Long term, if we go into Syria and just take out the Assad regime, the Syrians can go back home and you don;t even have to worry about the refugee problem. There was a video circulating FB of a CNN clip with a Syrian civilian who was thanking Trump for the missile strike, but even he said 'we don't want to go to America, we want our home back'.

And honestly, the ACLU is a pathetic joke that takes ridiculous stances on almost every subject.

Refugees aren't our problem, but you want to take out the government who is fighting ISIS, who create refugees, and then leave? Just like Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya? Which will create more refugees. That makes sense.

OT: $90 million fireworks show that didn't do anything besides make the price of oil surge. If anything we helped the Russian economy. How do you fire 59 cruise missiles and still leave the airfield operational?

ONLY 23 OUT OF 59 TOMAHAWK MISSILES REACHED THEIR TARGET IN SYRIA. So they wasted around 57 millions. This is what they dont want you to know

[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]

Illustrated wrote

Yin wrote I do know the ACLU is calling it illegal, so it makes me question it. I also like how we are now concerned about the well being of the Syrian people when we seemingly didn't give a damn about them before this attack.

This is just my opinion, but the way I see it is that taking care of the refugees is not our concern. We have no obligation to let them in, and I don't believe that we should have. I don't see this situation as 'we didn't care but now we do'. I see this incident as a response to Assad's war crimes. Cause and effect. Not it being a change of heart about helping the people of Syria. BUT, taking in refugees is a short term solution anyway. Long term, if we go into Syria and just take out the Assad regime, the Syrians can go back home and you don;t even have to worry about the refugee problem. There was a video circulating FB of a CNN clip with a Syrian civilian who was thanking Trump for the missile strike, but even he said 'we don't want to go to America, we want our home back'.

And honestly, the ACLU is a pathetic joke that takes ridiculous stances on almost every subject.

Do we not have a legal obligation under the Geneva Conventions? I think we at least have a moral one. Just take out Assad and there won't be refugees? Are the civilians not between ISIS and Assad? Will ISIS disappear when Assad is gone? Also, doesn't really matter if the civilian liked Trump's strike if Trump struck illegally. Again, does the president not need approval to legally strike another country anymore? Has the law changed? I believe that they don't want to leave. They want their home. I know that. They don't have an obligation to stay in their country considering what is happening though. I disagree about the ACLU. There has only been one issue that I know of that popped up somewhat recently that I have disagreed with them on. Letting the mentally ill have firearms, but that is off topic.

Protector wrote

Illustrated wrote

Yin wrote I do know the ACLU is calling it illegal, so it makes me question it. I also like how we are now concerned about the well being of the Syrian people when we seemingly didn't give a damn about them before this attack.

This is just my opinion, but the way I see it is that taking care of the refugees is not our concern. We have no obligation to let them in, and I don't believe that we should have. I don't see this situation as 'we didn't care but now we do'. I see this incident as a response to Assad's war crimes. Cause and effect. Not it being a change of heart about helping the people of Syria. BUT, taking in refugees is a short term solution anyway. Long term, if we go into Syria and just take out the Assad regime, the Syrians can go back home and you don;t even have to worry about the refugee problem. There was a video circulating FB of a CNN clip with a Syrian civilian who was thanking Trump for the missile strike, but even he said 'we don't want to go to America, we want our home back'.

And honestly, the ACLU is a pathetic joke that takes ridiculous stances on almost every subject.

It's sad too see that you don't actually know what is happening in Syria. Turkish troops are currently in northern Syria to push the YPG from the 'border' turky/syria. Syria/Russia Govt troops are trying to fight against ISIS/rebels. And you have the U.S. supplying Al nusra.''take out the Assad regime, the Syrians can go back home and you don't even have to worry about the refugee problem'' I hope you're kidding, ISIS and the rebels are going to kill them. This is why you don't watch CNN corrupt media.

lol, I don't watch CNN. As I said, it was a clip circulating FB that doesn't even coincide with CNN's bias.

It's sad you assume I don't know what's going on, I'd like to say I'm decently informed on the subject. Assad and the Russians aren't fighting ISIS. Russia says it's there to fight ISIS but only attacks the rebels. The US' main concern is dealing ISIS and not mainly about attacking Syria. But you clearly don't seem to understand how an invasion works. If the US goes into Syria and removes Assad from power, they stay there and help enforce until a new system is set up. Now with the US fully in Syria, they can take on ISIS there, now that they've been mostly defeating in Iraq and Afghanistan and hopefully eradicate them completely.

---

Miss wrote you want to take out the government who is fighting ISIS, who create refugees, and then leave?

Assad and the Russians care more about the actual rebels than ISIS. Assad is the one bombing cities and gassing civilians and making these people homeless. Fix that, then you can deal with the remainder of ISIS.

---

Yin wrote Do we not have a legal obligation under the Geneva Conventions? I think we at least have a moral one. Just take out Assad and there won't be refugees? Are the civilians not between ISIS and Assad? Will ISIS disappear when Assad is gone? Also, doesn't really matter if the civilian liked Trump's strike if Trump struck illegally. Again, does the president not need approval to legally strike another country anymore? Has the law changed? I believe that they don't want to leave. They want their home. I know that. They don't have an obligation to stay in their country considering what is happening though. I disagree about the ACLU. There has only been one issue that I know of that popped up somewhat recently that I have disagreed with them on. Letting the mentally ill have firearms, but that is off topic.

Yes, our moral obligation was to strike Syria for using chemical weapons.

But let me get this straight, when Trump shoots missiles into Syria it's illegal and sparks outrage form the people who just wanted us to help Syria (wut???). But when Obama shoots missiles into Syria no one cares. If it's illegal to use military action without approval, why has Obama had special forces in the region for years?

I don't know if you follow the whole Police/BLM thing going on in the US, but I mostly hear about the ACLU in reference to the police. Their stances and opinions are generally complete garbage.

Not sure if you're kidding or not...

Do you know why the US is not supose to be in syria anymore ? Cause they have 'accidentally' done an airstrike on Syrian gouv troops back in 2016 good job. Anyway there is probably some special forces with the YPG in the north of syria...

[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]

So glad my country is not run by such people.

here's 2 videos from people who are running your country and not 'supporting ISIS/Rebels' enjoy.

Protector wrote Not sure if you're kidding or not...

Do you know why the US is not supose to be in syria anymore ? Cause they have 'accidentally' done an airstrike on Syrian gouv troops back in 2016 good job.

[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]

So glad my country is not run by such people.

here's 2 videos from people who are running your country and not 'supporting ISIS/Rebels' enjoy.

Click to View Content

[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]

Okay, the US struck Syrian Govt. in 2016, well good for them. You realize that's the side I'm taking, right?

And that's a video of Hillary Clinton lmao I wouldn't believe a word that comes out of her mouth. I have no doubt she, and the democrats were supporting ISIS. They essentially founded them by arming the Syrian rebels.
You say that as if I'm backing that? I don't think you even understand what your debating against me about.

Sorry guys, discussion is over! Seems to be turning into a debate between two members.

---

For future reference, please do not say, "I can't tell if you are kidding or not" when replying to someones opinion/statement. This starts heated arguments. The user just wanted opinions on what is happening.

Thanks!