"Syria and Russia don't want Trump as an ally, but ISIS and Al Qaeda love him and appreciate his support."

So we can expect Trump's approval number to rise?

Capitalizing on the U.S. missile strikes, the Islamic State stormed the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) checkpoints near the strategic town of Al-Furqalas.

Sounds like opportunism in a hot zone. Most commanders will try to take advantage of any disarray in the enemy ranks. It's still just an attack on Syrian checkpoints and it sounds like they repulsed the attack.

So it is too soon to say Trump has inadvertently helped ISIS.

So we can expect Trump's approval number to rise?

They have nowhere to go but up.

So we can expect Trump's approval number to rise?

Yes, Trump has lost a lot of his base, but the Muslim Brotherhood loves him. ISIS McCain, Lindsey Graham, Marco Rubio, John Kerry, and Barack Obama, are probably celebrating at the George W. Bush mosque in DC.

W. preaches Islam the Religion Of Peace at his Washington DC mosque.

Yes, Trump has lost a lot of his base, but the Muslim Brotherhood loves him. ISIS McCain, Lindsey Graham, Marco Rubio, John Kerry, and Barack Obama, are probably celebrating at the George W. Bush mosque in DC.

Why does the Muslim Brotherhood love Trump? In times like these, with the onset of escalation of war in Syria just now starting, it should come to no surprise when operative cells here in the US also begin to strike and that is where we put ourselves in danger. Should we start with air strikes in Syria, their brothers and sisters of the koran lie quietly and in the wait everywhere.

Why does the Muslim Brotherhood love Trump?

Because he's attacking those fighting ISIS, the secular Assad government of Syria and indirectly their ally Russia. If Trump attacks ISIS that will likely change,

Until then, they love Trump's help in establishing an Islamic State in Syria. The neocons are running the show. The bushbots are back!

Until then, they love Trump's help in establishing an Islamic State in Syria. The neocons are running the show. The bushbots are back!

Establishing an Islamic State? That was already established back in 2005. If the neocons are running the show it is because they are the backbone of ISIS. Or did you forget this story? www.sfgate.com/news/artic...ia-First-post-2651644.php

Syria and Russia don't want Trump as an ally, but ISIS and Al Qaeda love him and appreciate his support.

That sums up the situation. We might as well have elected Hillary as Trump.

Yes, Trump has lost a lot of his base,

I doubt it.

I'm still with him. I don't know anybody who voted for him who has turned on him.

I do know that the people who opposed them lied through their teeth in every poll and every article - right up until Election Day, when the voters demonstrated who was, in fact, the leader in the polls.

So, when people who didn't like Trump to begin with say Trump this, or Trump that, I automatically discount it, because I know that the anti-Trump people have all been lying through their teeth about everything since the beginning.

Trump has credibility. Anti-Trump people have none.

A lie. Anti-Trump people only have lies. Trump is not talking about invading Syria. Standing off and using US airpower - our decisive advantage - to make a measured reprisal, teaching the Syrian government that it is without our power to destroy them from the air if we want to - that's not invading Syria. Nobody in power is talking about invading Syria. We may FLATTEN Syria, but we're not going to be INVADING it.

I'm still with him. I don't know anybody who voted for him who has turned on him.

I voted for him.  But he needs to provide EVIDENCE the fatalities involved weren't caused by munitions supplied to ISIS by Hillary and the Regime Change Investment Club.

https://www.youtube.com/watch? v=rCTzFNrsKns&feature=youtu.be&t=13s

'Cuase it sure looks like Bidness as Usual for the Regime Change Investment Club.

If the Russians can use a chromatograph to discern origin, surely the super geniuses in America can to the same.

Trump is not talking about invading Syria.

Hillabama didn't need to invade Libya to effect regime change and loot the country.

A lie. Anti-Trump people only have lies.

You lie, Obama put US boots on the ground in Syria, and Trump has increased the number of invaders.

Obama's invasion is ramping up to overthrow the legitimate secular government of Syria, under the command of President Trump.

I stand in support of Trump. What I see happening here is that Trump has no choice but to invade Syria and clean up the mess left from the Obama administration as well as those CAIR supporters backed by Hillary, Huma Abudein, and John McCain. They are all sitting back watching this with glee while we put our troops and ambassadors abroad at riak. If anybody it is Trump being played right into the hands of Russia. Because as it stands right now Russia views the US strike on Syria as a flagrant violation of international law.

I stand in support of Trump. What I see happening here is that Trump has no choice but to invade Syria and clean up the mess left from the Obama administration as well as those CAIR supporters backed by Hillary, Huma Abudein, and John McCain. They are all sitting back watching this with glee while we put our troops and ambassadors abroad at riak. If anybody it is Trump being played right into the hands of Russia. Because as it stands right now Russia views the US strike on Syria as a flagrant violation of international law.

Invade Syria? Nope.

If Assad doesn't use Sarin gas on people again, the US will watch as Putin and Assad eventually wipe out ISIS, which is good for us. Let the Syrian Army do the dying and let the Russians pay for it - THEY are the ones that need the naval base.

If Assad does use Sarin gas again, Trump will order another massive reprisal that will further destroy Assad's military strength, making him more dependent on Russia.

We're not going to INVADE Syria. We're either going to let the Syrians and Russians mop up ISIS for us, or we're going to DEGRADE Syria with more airstrikes against their military infrastructure.

We will not put boots on the ground in any circumstances. There is no reason to. We can kill them from the air without risking losses.

The best outcome for us is for the Russians to kill ISIS and put a leash on Assad. Then the refugee crisis ends, order returns, and there's no more ISIS operating there.

Russia may view the airstrike as a flagrant violation of international law, but SO WHAT? The international community does not view it that way. A whole bunch of nations stood in support of the US for this limited airstrike made and for the reason we made it. Russia can complain about it, but they can't win in the UN. Syria is already a pariah in the UN.

The Russians can't do anything about what we did in Syria any more than we can do anything about what they did in the Crimea.

Now the Russians HAVE to play carefully between the lines, because the US COULD strike the Assad regime so hard that it topples, and then Russia would be at risk of losing their only naval base in the Mediterranean.

Or the Russians could make a deal with President Trump: they get to keep their base and their Syrian puppet, but they have to really MAKE Assad a puppet: no sanctuary for ISIS there, and no sanctuary for people who are going to strike Israel. No Sarin gas attacks on Syrians - the sort of leash we'd like to see the Chinese put on Kim in North Korea.

Essentially, the Russian position here is very, very weak, and they have to be careful. If they are, the US and Russia can come out this working very well together. But the US just placed down a marker that limits what the Syrian government will be allowed to do. Mass murder of civilians to win their war will not be permitted. We'll topple their regime with airstrikes instead. Change tactics and win it conventionally - we'll let them do THAT. But use poison gas terror? Nope.

The Syrians won't do it again. The Russians won't let them. And we won't be invading Syria: there's no need to. Eventually the Supreme Court will uphold Trump's Muslim travel ban too.

Or the Russians could make a deal with President Trump: they get to keep their base and their Syrian puppet, but they have to really MAKE Assad a puppet: no sanctuary for ISIS there, and no sanctuary for people who are going to strike Israel. No Sarin gas attacks on Syrians - the sort of leash we'd like to see the Chinese put on Kim in North Korea.

Essentially, the Russian position here is very, very weak, and they have to be careful. If they are, the US and Russia can come out this working very well together. But the US just placed down a marker that limits what the Syrian government will be allowed to do. Mass murder of civilians to win their war will not be permitted. We'll topple their regime with airstrikes instead. Change tactics and win it conventionally - we'll let them do THAT. But use poison gas terror? Nope.

Now why would the US want to make a deal with Russia? It seems to me we have been down a similar path like this back in the 90's and early 2000's when we had Russia telling us to reduce our military defense. And this was before Putin had regained his power again.

If anybody is the puppet it is our military being led to the slaughter because of the likes of those like McCain jeering and cheering while these airstrikes happen. Remember that Trump is picking up after this guys droppings too.

If we fight wars following our technological advantages, we are not leading our military to the slaughter. Our military is built to use air power and missiles to deliver death and destruction from long range, so that the enemy is slaughtered and our own forces are not even exposed. THAT is the proper way to use our military - NOT "boots on the ground". when we throw boots on the ground, we start racking up casualties. Stupid. All we need to do is bomb and bomb and bomb and bomb, use missile strikes, use drone strikes, and then the enemy can never have peace, never build anything, and gradually descends back into living in the stone age and suffers endlessly for years, until they finally come to terms with us. We can bomb people for years without risk, preventing them from getting on with their lives, or building anything, or having electricity and water.

We can make the price of refusing to deal with America be that the live in 1100 for as long as they defy us. Granted, wars like that can go on a long time if people are stubborn. But we have forever. We can just keep killing them from the sky forever, literally forever, like squashing roaches. Without ever losing an American. THAT is the way that we should fight wars.

It's good for the economy too, because when you expend munitions, you have to replace them, and means money and jobs to the defense industry.

Why have peace with Russia? Simple: because Russia is the ONE country that we cannot really defeat. They can destroy us and we can destroy them. So, in the case of Russia (and only Russia) we have to maintain large conventional forces on the ground in Europe. And that is hugely expensive, a permanent drain on us.

Make a deal with Russia, and we can cut off that drain and save a ton of money. That's particularly important given China's rising aggressiveness. We really need to redeploy forces to contain China, but we can't do that without a deal with Russia regarding Europe. Russia is not a natural enemy. The Russians don't actually have any intention of trying to invade Europe. So we both benefit from open, warm and friendly relations. It is better for the economy of the USA, of Europe and of Russia to NOT spend fortunes to defend against a possible attack that will never really come.

Remember, the USSR bankrupted itself and ceased to exist because they engaged in an arms race with the USA. We "won", but we have not emerged unscathed either. Our economy has problems, and our debt spiral upward will eventually do to us what the USSR's did to the USSR.

Bottom line: we need peace with Russia so that we don't go broke and fall apart as a nation. But when it comes to piss ant countries doing piss ant things, we will not break the bank bombing them into submission.