Hacker News Reader

Comment by PhilWright | Hacker News Reader

Just a slight overreaction on your part. Just about every President has launched punitive strikes against targets for bad behavior. None led to WW3.

View on HN

How many of them were under the protection of Russia?

[citation needed]

http://www.politico.eu/article/russia-says-support-for-syria...

(Dated today.)

They have a naval base in Syria.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_War

It's not cold when your actually killing people.

The cold war was full of hot wars where the US and USSR fought by proxy.

They're both directly involved in this one, there is no proxy.

To the contrary: neither is directly involved. Neither the US nor Russia have troops on the ground in Syria.

They've both been bombing various factions, that's direct involvement. The both also have troops on the ground, the US has them in the north with the Kurds and the Russians had personnel at the very airbase that was bombed.

All we need now is an arch duke in an open top car.

You think Russia wasn't propping up the North Vietnamese during the Vietnam War?

Just about every President has launched punitive strikes against targets for bad behavior.

But usually they think about the long-term strategic consequences of doing so, before acting. For like at least 5 minutes or so.

There are surely generals, including McMasters who are designed and approved this plan.

It seems his advisors don't so much approve, as rubberstamp.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com