With Trump's call for missile strikes in Syria and Russian warning of retaliation, could this be the beginning of a full scale war with Russia. Could it actually be the start of World War 3?Most people look at history from a condensed point of view. history books make us believe that war was declared overnight. In reality it is a long drawn out process of slow escalation.For all we know people will look back to today and say this is where it all began.Make sure to subscribe for more travel, news, opinion, and documentary with Tim Pool everyday.Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
I want to start today by asking you a simple question.
Do you think we are facing full-scale war with Russia?
And you can comment, let me know what you think.
Before the election, before Donald Trump got elected, there was a lot of fear over a potential war with Russia because of what is happening in Syria.
A lot of people said they were going to vote for Donald Trump because Trump was the one who was saying we need peace with Russia and Hillary Clinton appeared much more hawkish going so far as to say we need a no-fly zone over Syria.
Even though there have been warnings, that would be a, essentially, a declaration of war on Russia.
Trump fired many missiles at Syria not too long ago, and now we are seeing tweets from him that more strikes are on their way.
In response to this, we have seen posturing on both sides, leading many people to believe
that we might actually be facing, dare I say it, World War 3.
Before we get started, let me give a shout out to today's sponsor who is helping make all of this possible.
Natural Hemp Oil produces their products from sustainable hemp that is non-GMO and cultivated without pesticides, herbicides, or chemical fertilizers.
They currently have a vast array of products such as flavor drops, beauty products, health and wellness products, anti-aging edibles, vaping products, and pet products.
CBD will not get you high or make you incoherent.
These are for health-related purposes only.
If you want to learn more, make sure you check out naturalhempoil.com.
You can visit naturalhempoil.com and use the promo code TIMPOOL to get 10% off your purchase.
The first story from Time.
Trump warns missiles will be coming in Syria.
It's not clear what that will achieve.
President Donald Trump has warned Russia to get ready for missiles to be fired into Syria in response to an alleged chemical attack over the weekend.
In a tweet Wednesday morning, he told the Kremlin it should not partner with Syrian President Bashar Assad, a gas-killing animal who kills his people and enjoys it.
The U.S.
believes Assad is behind a suspected attack in the city of Doma on April 7th that left at least 40 people dead, according to activists and rescuers.
On Monday, Trump condemned the heinous attack on innocent Syrians, warning he would hold the responsible parties accountable.
You don't see things like that.
You just don't see those images, he said.
This is about humanity.
The tweet from Donald Trump read, Russia vows to shoot down any and all missiles fired at
Syria.
Get ready, Russia, because they will be coming, nice and new and smart.
You shouldn't be partners with a gas-killing animal who kills his people and enjoys it.
Our relationship with Russia is worse now than it has ever been, and that includes the Cold War.
There is no reason for this.
Russia needs us to help with their economy, something that would be very easy to do, and we need all nations to work together.
Stop the arms race?
Much of the bad blood with Russia is caused by the fake and corrupt Russia investigation.
Headed up by the all-Democrat loyalists or people that worked for Obama.
Mueller is most conflicted of all, except Rosenstein who signed FISA and Comey letter.
No collusion, so they go crazy.
Following this, The Independent reported, Russia will shoot down U.S.
missiles fired at Syria and retaliate against launch sites, says Ambassador.
Russia's ambassador to Lebanon has said any U.S.
missiles fired at Syria would be shot down and the launch sites targeted, a step which could trigger a major escalation in the Syrian war.
Alexander Zizipkin, in comments broadcast on Tuesday evening, said he was referring to a statement by Russian President Vladimir Putin and the Russian chief of staff.
If there is an airstrike by the Americans, then the missiles will be downed, and even the sources from which the missiles were fired, he told Hezbollah's Al Minar TV.
Yesterday, Paul Antonopoulos tweeted, Russian ambassador to the UNSC has said,
the strike that you are planning against Syria will lead to a catastrophic results.
We hope that the OPCW will arrive to Syria as soon as possible.
Naturally, people are alarmed.
Could this actually mean there will be war between the US and
and Russia?
Things have been escalating in Syria.
And what's happening now is very similar to what happened last year when another chemical attack happened and we saw a similar escalation.
On April 6, 2017, from CNBC, Trump launched attack on Syria with 59 Tomahawk missiles.
The missiles targeted the Shirat Air Base near Homs and were in response to a Tuesday chemical weapons attack.
Officially announcing the strike, President Donald Trump said the targeted airfield had launched the chemical attack on a rebel-held area, and he called on other nations to oppose Syria's embattled leader.
On Tuesday, Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad launched a horrible chemical weapons attack on innocent civilians.
Using a deadly nerve agent, Assad choked out the lives of helpless men, women, and children.
It was a slow and brutal death for so many.
Even beautiful babies were cruelly murdered in this very barbaric attack, Trump said Thursday night.
59 Tomahawk missiles were fired at Syria.
So when we're looking at what's happening today, I think it is fair to say there is a good probability we will see something similar.
But where will that lead us?
Because Russia has vowed to shoot down these missiles and retaliate against their launch sites.
That would mean Russia would be attacking U.S.
interests directly.
Right now, Trump is threatening to fire rockets at Syria.
This is kind of a proxy war.
Syria is an ally of Russia, but if Russia retaliates directly against the U.S., where will that leave us?
Could we potentially enter into a full-scale war with Russia?
Now there are some tweets that are getting a decent amount of shares from an account called AtBreakingNLive.
This account is not verified, I am not familiar with this account, and I'm not sure exactly how credible this is.
So keep that in mind, but I do want to talk about what they're saying simply because many people are sharing this.
They tweeted breaking news.
Russian journalist says on Twitter that he just asked a source close to the Kremlin, how real are the chances of war between the U.S.
and Russia right now?
They replied, 8 out of 10.
And this is followed up by breaking news.
The world stands millimeters from a great war.
And they're citing Russian armed forces TV.
This statement was sourced to Brian MacDonald, who strangely deleted the initial tweet.
Someone asked him, why did you delete your tweet about 8 out of 10?
Was it inaccurate?
Just wondering.
Brian MacDonald is a verified journalist and he responded, it was accurate.
I deleted it because of the type of people who latched onto it and how they were using it.
On reflection, I realized it could contribute to hysteria and I didn't feel comfortable with that.
i24newsenglish reported breaking report says syrian military personnel moving to russian bases amid concern over imminent u.s strike and then from at breaking news u.s defense secretary mattis says u.s is still assessing evidence from purported chemical attack in syria and the u.s military is ready to provide military options if they are appropriate as the president determines In response to Donald Trump's tweet, I had a few questions.
What constitutes a declaration of war?
If Trump announces that he's going to be missile striking Syria, are we declaring war on Syria and Assad?
I mean, we've already opposed Assad for a long time.
There's been more than one chemical gas attack the U.S.
has claimed came from Assad, though many people Disagree, and there is this sort of debate amongst people as to whether or not Assad actually did this.
People who are arguing, not necessarily in favor of Assad, but in opposition to intervention, are saying why would Assad gas his own people if he's winning?
The Assad regime is reclaiming large portions of Syria, so why would he then attack civilians with chemical agents because that would only result in US intervention?
Especially when we saw the exact same thing last year.
Stories from Russian media are implying that the chemical gas attack may have actually been a false flag.
This from Sputnik.
White Helmets treat alleged chemical attack victims without protective gear.
The Syrian Civil Defense, also known as the White Helmets, has published several clips and pictures showing the alleged aftermath of the chemical attack in the city of Doma in eastern Ghouta.
The volunteers have reported a widespread suffocation in the area, which led to 42 deaths.
The footage posted on Twitter shows the alleged victims, including babies in diapers, breathing through oxygen masks.
However, the rescuers appeared to be so focused on accusing President Bashar al-Assad of dropping a chemical bomb on Doma that they forgot to put on gas masks or protective suits themselves.
Meanwhile, the Russian Reconciliation Center has spoken with doctors in Doma who reported that they had not received any patients with sign of chemical poisoning.
Neither did the Syrian Red Crescent Society.
The center also said that no traces of chemical agents were found in the area And this is the divide.
Russian sources are saying it's probably not true.
They're pushing out stories that would claim the chemical attack was false.
Why weren't the White Helmets wearing protective gear, for instance?
And U.S.
interests are saying who else could it have been?
It was an attack on the rebels and this had to be Assad.
It really comes down to who do you trust?
Who are you going to support?
Many people in the U.S.
support the war machine.
But I think most people just don't agree with intervention at all.
Strangely though, there are many people in mainstream media who are just in favor of military intervention in foreign countries.
Glenn Greenwald tweeted out this quip.
Today, inside DNC and MSNBC headquarters, quote, We've spent 18 months mocking Trump for refusing to confront Putin and Assad.
Today, he directly threatened Russia that missiles were headed towards Syria and mocked them for thinking they could stop him.
What do we say now?
Question mark.
I hope you realize he's making a joke, but the point is, people have been very hard on Trump, accusing him of colluding with Putin, of being a puppet of Putin.
We have seen protest after protest where people have accused Trump of being a puppet of Putin, alleging that Vladimir Putin and Russia interfered in our election to get Trump elected so they would have an asset in this country.
Some people going so far as to claim that many people are Russian agents.
Believe it or not, someone has actually accused me of being a Russian propagandist.
That's just crazy.
But that was the question I posed on Twitter.
If Trump is actually threatening Syria, an ally of Russia, and Russia is threatening to retaliate, if you believe that Trump really is a puppet of Putin, you would have to also assume that everything Trump is doing is in the interest of Russia, that Russia wants Trump to fire missiles at Syria.
After last year's attack, many people said that it was still part of the Russia conspiracy, that the only reason Trump actually fired missiles at Syria was so that people would think they weren't working together.
People actually believe this.
For instance, Seth Abramson tweeted, bonus, Trump and Putin can now look like they're at odds.
Helpful for Russiagate when in fact Trump's ineffective strike didn't harm Putin.
This tweet has nearly 3,000 retweets and is from just about one year ago.
This isn't the only person alleging that Trump fired 59 Tomahawk missiles at Syria to downplay his connection to Putin.
Other people are claiming that all of this posturing is simply to divert attention away from the Mueller investigation.
Natasha Bertrand tweeted, the master of changing the news cycle, in response to Donald Trump's tweet about firing missiles at Syria.
And you can actually search for changing the news cycle on Twitter and see many other people feel the same way.
he's doing here is signaling boss Putin in advance of what's coming like a good watchdog.
And you can actually search for changing the news cycle on Twitter and see many other people
feel the same way.
Trump's Syria decision will be guided completely on changing the news cycle from the Cohen
raid look over there.
He's changing the news cycle.
It really feels like we're never going to see that kind of grand scale war again.
That, in my opinion, most war happens over the internet and it's a war for your mind and influence more so a territorial dispute.
The world is becoming smaller and we're more connected than ever and more dependent upon each other than ever.
So influence really is one of the most powerful tools someone can have.
And you don't win influence by shooting people.
You don't win influence by staging a chemical attack on innocent civilians.
And this is why a lot of people are questioning the attack in Syria.
But it's also conspiratorial.
Now, just because we think it's a conspiracy doesn't mean that it's not true.
Conspiracies absolutely happen.
It is entirely possible that Trump is trying to signal to Putin what he's about to do, and that he's actually working with him, and this is all in a big attempt to change the news cycle, or the simple solution, in my opinion, is that Trump is surrounded by war hawks, people who like the wartime economy, who want to build more weapons to make more money.
And attacking Syria serves many purposes.
It gets really complicated when you start to look into history like the Qatar-Turkey pipeline and natural gas and resources in Europe, but that's a whole other story that I'm not going to get into.
In my opinion, based on my understanding of global politics, I lean more towards, yeah, Trump is probably just going to fire missiles at Syria because we're at odds with that part of the world.
We're at odds with Russia.
So it really just comes down to trust.
It's gonna be damn near impossible to know exactly what happens.
And you're gonna have to pick which side you think works.
Most people are going to choose which side works for them and their values and their personal politics.
In which case, a lot of people in the United States are going to support the U.S.
no matter what.
And a lot of people who are anti-establishment are going to denounce the intervention no matter what.
And it's hard to know exactly what this will lead to.
Can we actually see a full-scale war with Russia?
Or is the conspiracy theory about Russian interference and collusion true?
And...
Trump is actually just working with Putin.
Here's what's really scary in my opinion.
If the Russia-gate conspiracy is true, then we're not going to face war.
In which case, I think a lot of people should probably be crossing their fingers hoping that Putin and Trump are actually working together, because the last thing we want on this planet is full-scale war.
Most people are not prepared for that.
Most people would not survive that.
I think most people who would prefer it if the Russiagate conspiracy was not true are better equipped to survive an actual full-scale world war.
It's an interesting political situation that we find ourselves in.
And I guess we can only wait to see what happens.
But let me know what you think in the comments below.
Are we actually facing a real potential for war here?
Or is it just more posturing?
More of an attempt to gain influence from one side or the other?
To influence other countries in favor of trade?
Or are we actually looking to depose Assad and strike Syria, even if it means full-scale war?
