Trump: "Meeting On Syria Today, Decision Will Be Made Soon"

President Trump said Thursday that he will be holding another meeting on Syria today, and that he would have a decision "fairly soon."

Trump said Wednesday that he would have a decision last night following a meeting with Defense Secretary James Mattis and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff James Dunford.

As President Trump prepares for yet another meeting on Syria, we note that Mattis told the House Armed Services Committee that "we are not going to engage" in Syria's civil war, adding that "our role in Syria is the defeat of ISIS,” but "some things are simply inexcusable, beyond the pale" like a chemical weapons attack.

Mattis was responding to a question from Rep. Joe Courtney, D-Conn., who said "a gyration of comments coming out of the White House" is sending contradictory messages, and Mattis himself seemed to contradict the President as he "believed there was a chemical attack" in Syria, but the US is looking for evidence (clearly not proclaiming that Assad did it... or that it happened at all).

Mattis concluded that he would notify congressional leaders before any strike on Syria, adding that there's risk in any strike of it "escalating out of control."

The retired general said he would go to the White House after his hearing to help brief Trump on Syria.

Trump added that options outside of a military strike are being considered.

"We'll see what happens," Trump said, during a brief meeting with reporters. "It's too bad, the world puts us in a position like that." He added that a decision would come "fairly soon."

Early Thursday morning, Trump tweeted that the Syria attack "could take place very soon" or "not so soon at all". Meanwhile, Russia has said it has evidence that Syrian rebels are in possession of chemical weapons stockpiles.

 

The meeting is set to begin at 2:30 pm ET.

Meanwhile, Putin’s spokesman said that the Russian and U.S. militaries are maintaining contact via a telephone hotline. Russia is counting on cooler heads to prevail, said Frants Klintsevich, a Russian lawmaker and member of Putin's United Russia party.

Italy's president has said Italy won't join in the response, a sentiment echoed by German leader Angela Merkel, who said that while there's "very strong evidence" the Syrian regime used the weapons, she ruled out participating in military action, per Bloomberg.

Elsewhere in Europe, French President Emmanuel Macron said there's proof that Assad's regime again used chemical weapons on noncombatants.

And after threatening to authorize unilateral action without input from Parliament, UK Prime Minister Theresa May called an emergency cabinet meeting on Thursday to discuss how the UK might respond.

Comments

Scar Bro wildbad Thu, 04/12/2018 - 11:55 Permalink

After OJ has promised to rain bombs down on Syria he's gonna look an utter fool if he doesn't do something. Although he did something similar with NK.

Either way, his entertainment value is sky high. I mean if you ignore all the shit he promised before going in you HAVE to acknowledge the entertainment value is high.

Monday: Fucked a hooker

Tuesday:Threatened a nuclear superpower with "smart" missiles

Wednesday:Golf

Thursday: Pretended not to threaten nuclear power

Friday: Tanning salon

Sat/Sun: molested jew's asshole with own face

Even the Russians are tweeting hilarious shit back. "If your bombs were so smart why don't they hit the terrorists"

If you can ignore the fact that lives are being lost, this shit is fucking hilarious.

 

 

In reply to by wildbad

hedgeless_horseman Scar Bro Thu, 04/12/2018 - 11:57 Permalink

 

They don't obey the law.  Why should we?

 

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-28/selective-enforcement-federal…

The first part states the policy behind the law, namely to "insure that the collective judgment of both the Congress and the President will apply to the introduction of United States Armed Forces into hostilities," and that the President's powers as Commander in Chief are exercised only pursuant to a declaration of war, specific statutory authorization from Congress, or a national emergency created by an attack upon the United States (50 USC Sec. 1541).

In reply to by Scar Bro

Klassenfeind Big Creek Rising Thu, 04/12/2018 - 12:05 Permalink

"...that he would have a decision "fairly soon."

Get ready for another 'tail-between-legs' flip flop from the clueless Orange Tweeter in Chief! Hopefully the adults in the Oval Office were finally able to convince Dufus Trump that the Russians are no push overs.

Oh boy, I can't wait till Dufus Trump meets the fat kid from North Korea in May or June, and realises that geopolitics and top level diplomatic meetings (with the Chinese whispering advice and instructions into Kim Jong Un's ear) are a different thing than having a big mouth on a scripted (!) 'reality' show!

In reply to by Big Creek Rising

07564111 Klassenfeind Thu, 04/12/2018 - 12:09 Permalink

Mattis has been on the calls with the Russian MOD
-----
Mattis concluded that he would notify congressional leaders before any strike on Syria, adding that there's risk in any strike of it "escalating out of control."
-----
He now realizes that there is no bluff and that those who inflict pain will receive pain in return.

In reply to by Klassenfeind

Adolph.H. 07564111 Thu, 04/12/2018 - 12:23 Permalink

...And less pilots than planes available in America:

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-air-force/2018/04/11/the-milita…

They don't have the means to achieve their ambitions. 

The Russians have started to manufacture the S-500; just double the speed and increase the range and avionics and you'll get an idea. Anyway they're not for export. If needed they will use kalibr from the Caspian sea. That may still hurt a lot the grand American armada. 

----

It's okay not to be a Jew.

In reply to by 07564111

macholatte Adolph.H. Thu, 04/12/2018 - 12:37 Permalink

 

Trump:   OK.  We need to make a decision on Syria. If we attack, are there any other countries that will help?
Gen. "Buck" Turgidson: There ain’t nobody else we can count on for more than a couple band aids.
Trump: OK. Has anyone verified that there really was a chemical attack?
Group Captain Lionel Mandrake: There’s no time for that.  We need to move now.
Trump: OK. Has anybody figured out if there’s any benefit to America?
[silence]
Trump: Anybody?

 

In reply to by Adolph.H.

two hoots Sir Edge Thu, 04/12/2018 - 12:27 Permalink

Is Trump still in the decision making, go/wait/no go, mode yet without proof?   How many insults can he take before realizing his, cart before the horse, mistake?   Does he think he can do it then sell it to us?  Isn't he listening?

And

Macron has proof?  And who used it Macron?    Chorine of some type?   

It is this, this, that these self exalted assholes, fooling themselves into a false and higher realm of thinking, separate them from us.  The source of this the real enemy of mankind.  This should be the war.

  

In reply to by Sir Edge

Invalid Username two hoots Thu, 04/12/2018 - 15:41 Permalink

IF "some type of chlorine" had been used, there would be visible symptoms on the numerous "victims" we have seen all over the press and internet.

But somehow this "type of chlorine" has no symptoms. Not a single one. Chlorine leaves very visible symptoms on victims, as plenty of cases in WW1 showed, where it was used in combat on a large scale.

IF these supposed victims had been exposed, there would be visible symptoms.

Surely, not even Macron or the french intelligence community would fail to notice this?

So - if Macron has proof - does that mean that the showcased victims were not the real victims, and that noone thought to take pictures of the real victims? 

Something smells here, and its not the chlorine.

 

IF there is any kind of proof - I think the governments need to SHOW us all, before they ignite ww3.

In reply to by two hoots

hedgeless_horseman Erek Thu, 04/12/2018 - 12:10 Permalink

 

We have 24-7 television coverage of a big and very expensive investigation to see if Trump's lawyer broke the law by paying off a whore before Trump became POTUS.  

We will not hear a single peep on CNN or FOX about Trump breaking this law, The War Powers Act, as POTUS.

Makes me think Trump and the media are co-producers of these made for television dramas.

 

In reply to by Erek

DillyDilly two hoots Thu, 04/12/2018 - 14:40 Permalink

@two hoots

 

Trump has always been a nothingburger to me, and I can't EVER remember thinking this about any POTUS in my life...

 

But he might need to get IMPEACHED... I have zero knowledge of the law or what that entails, but it's time to take the nuclear football away from this twittering clown who can't differentiate arguing with Colin Kaeperniks girlfriend on social media from launching missile strikes in countries based on 'non existent' evidence which any intelligent person would construe has a 99.9% chance of being false...

 

 

In reply to by two hoots

PT hedgeless_horseman Thu, 04/12/2018 - 13:22 Permalink

Deep State can quite happily orchestrate the media without Trump's co-operation.  Just sayin'.

But Trump is apparently responsible for what he twits on Tweeter.  He has to wear that.

MIC wanted him to bomb "yesterday".  He coulda bombed 'em yesterday.  So why didn't he?  Suggests to me that perhaps one of those chambers is still empty.  Dancing around the swimming pool but he still hasn't jumped in.  Doesn't mean he won't jump in.  Doesn't mean he won't fall in.  Doesn't mean he won't be pushed...

Too optimistic of me?  Fair enough.  Yes, I'm slow.  Time will tell, won't take much to prove me wrong.

In reply to by hedgeless_horseman

Yukon Cornholius hedgeless_horseman Thu, 04/12/2018 - 12:18 Permalink

The Emergency Banking Act, March 9, 1933 is what the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA has been operating under since that date. Between that and the 14th amendment the constitution and BoR have no application or standing.

unless you know who you are.

 

It is an established fact that the United States Federal Government has been dissolved by the Emergency Banking Act, March 9, 1933 48 Stat. 1, Public Law 89-179; declared by President Roosevelt, being bankrupt and insolvent, HJR 192, 73 congress in session June 5, 1933. Joint Resolution to Dissolve the Gold Standard and Abbrogate the Gold Clause dissolved the Sovereign Authority of the United States and the official capacities of all  United States Governmental offices, officers and departments and is further evidence that the United States Federal Government exists in name only.” United States Congressional Record, March 17, 1993 vol. 33

In reply to by hedgeless_horseman

Caught_Fish hedgeless_horseman Thu, 04/12/2018 - 18:52 Permalink

All current law is based on force.

It is not called "Law Enforcement" for nothing.

International law is the threat of force or the use of force.

"You will submit or we will resort to the use of Force"

Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, etc.

"Russia will comply or we will use force, economic or terminal."

Bring it down to the lowest common denominator and you end up with force.

In reply to by hedgeless_horseman