Trump good. Assad bad.

I seem to be missing something?

It seems that Assad – allegedly – gassing 70 ‘women and children’ civilians in Idlib is a war crime and a crime against humanity. Trump-etting on about the ‘beautiful babies’ murdered by the wicked Assad – allegedly – requires an ‘appropriate and measured response’ from the USA by chucking 59 cruise missiles at an empty air base from which the ‘alleged’ chemical strike was ‘allegedly’ launched.

However, it does seem to be OK for the USAF to blow the living shit out of three times that number in Mosul using their nice eco-friendly non chemical bombs. The number of beautifully babies pulled out of the rubble there seems to be perfectly acceptable because we blew them up instead of gassing them.

So – Trump good, Assad bad. America good, Assad bad.

I condemn the USA for sticking it’s nose into Syria. Equally I condemn Russia for doing the same thing. It would be best for all if both countries pulled out and let the Syrians get on with their internal conflict without external interference. It is, after all, their affair and none of our business.

But no. Now America is banging on about regime change – because that worked so well in Iraq and Afghanistan didn’t it?


9 responses to “Trump good. Assad bad.

  1. You’ll get no argument from me mate. It makes little difference to them how they were killed, whether by sarin gas or tomahawk missile, the result is the same.

    Effing hypocrites, the lot of ’em

  2. What a disappointment. Chump has bought the propaganda and now basks in the accolades from around the Saudi coveted globe. As for Russia’s involvement, that was only after the Obummer led terrorists supported by the Saudi gangsters started terrorising the whole World. What a mess and one solely caused by the very same idiots who ruined Vietnam.

  3. “But no. Now America is banging on about regime change – because that worked so well in Iraq and Afghanistan didn’t it?”…………Not forgetting of course that little foray and intervention of Cameron into Libya which in turn opened the floodgates for hordes of uncivilised to have a go at crossing The Med to Europe.
    I’m still waiting for him and Sarkozy to make a return ‘victory’ visit to see how well it’s all going.

  4. My concern is; Who actually attacked who with the ‘poison gas’. It isn’t beyond the realms of possibility that an ISIS or someone acting on their behalf did it. ISIS and the other mad islamists will quite happily kill people on their side for propaganda purposes. Come to think of it many states probably have. Chemical weapons do not have to be deployed by aircraft.

    • You suspicious old git 🙂 I like your thinking though. i smell a rather large rat. I strongly suspect a “false flag” operation. Assad might be bad, but he’s not effing stupid.

  5. I love the smell of Trump in the morning.

  6. I agree with you, especially since the UN found that al-Nusra (Obama’s beloved rebels) conducted the two 2013 gas attacks and also certified that Assad no longer possessed chemical weapons last year when Obama was dropping over 10,000 bombs on Syria. The war in Syria would have been over a long time ago if not for the millions Obama gave to al-Nusra to prosecute his personal feud with President Assad.

  7. ‘Former British Ambassador to Syria Peter Ford believes that the chemical attack in the rebel-held town of Khan Sheikhoun may not have been committed by the Assad regime.’

  8. mikesplaceweb

    Mr Dioclese, doesn’t one of your mates run a blog that keeps a check on the twats at Jimmy Savile House? He might like this…