anrec80 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Just shaking my head.
As pointed out, a number of sites were targeted where chemical weapons are produced or stored, not the site which is bombed by the Assad regime. So your highly likely, I am sure you have some proof of that? Or perhaps some reasoning why America, France and the UK would bomb this site? You can't right, so ignore this post, like you have done with a number of other because you can't answer it.

You were said “highly likely” - what kind of proof do you need? This is the latest trend in Western politics, supported by you. And since you supported it - you just need to get used to such responses. I do not support such arguments or disputes, and if you aren’t fond of them either - you should stop supporting them as well.

I don’t get one thing with these “sites” with “chemical weapons” - even if there were some there, why Assad’s “regime” wouldn’t do that deeply underground, where they can’t be reached by cruise missiles? Like Iran did it with their nuclear program - West had do sign a deal since they just couldn’t bomb the facilities obviously. Therefore it’s hard for me to believe and I think Trump just had to bomb something.