To the dismay of some I will be writing about the Syrian attack and the consequences……
Last week the US fired 59 missiles at a Syrian airbase as punishment for the gas attack that killed 70+ Syrian civilians.
Now that the US has chosen to take on all sides in the Syrian civil war…..what can we expect?
First that’s look at the legal experts views on the attack……
I asked several of the very top legal minds about their views concerning Thursday night’s airstrikes by the United States in response to the Syrian government’s reported use of chemical weapons. I have provided their verbatim responses below, and will be adding more.
Source: What Do Top Legal Experts Say About the Syria Strikes? | Just Security
Whatever the legal justification for the strikes is, a Bush lawyer said, it “exceeds all prior precedents under domestic and international law.”
It has become normal over the past 15 years for the morning news to report that the president has bombed an obscure terror group in a far-flung region of the world. These attacks take place without any public debate or a vote in Congress — despite the fact that the Constitution gives Congress alone the power “to declare war.”
Source: Legal Experts Question Whether Trump’s Syria Strike Was Constitutional
Have we committed the country and its resources to a new level in the Syrian situation?
“Years of previous attempts at changing [President Bashar al-] Assad’s behavior have all failed, and failed very dramatically,” Trump said April 6 at a news conference in Mar-a-Lago, Florida, announcing that he had ordered what he called a targeted military strike. “As a result, the refugee crisis continues to deepen and the region continues to destabilize, threatening the United States and its allies.”
Administration officials said the strikes showed Trump was willing to take decisive action, but they were limited to retaliation for using chemical weapons and did not signal a broader shift in US policy toward military intervention to overthrow the Assad regime.
The warmongers love this action…..and they seem to be eluding to more of the same in the future….
No one should underestimate the value of the cruise missile strikes the United States launched on April 7, 2017. Attacking a single air base will scarcely cripple the Syrian Air Force, nor will it limit Syria’s ability to use its remaining chemical weapons. The strikes have, however, sent a very important signal to both America’s friends, its critics, and its enemies.
One key message is that in the first real crisis of his Presidency, President Donald J. Trump listened to his expert advisors, proved to be flexible in changing his position, chose an option proportionate to the task, communicated effectively with Russia to avoid Russian losses, and acted quickly. He neither failed to act, nor did he overreact, and he sent a clear message that the United States would not only confront a localized threat—but would act in spite of Russian pressure.
Source: The U.S. Attacks on Syria: What Comes Next? | Center for Strategic and International Studies
To me this just illustrates that the Trump admin is willing to dig a deeper hole for the American troops that must deal with any consequence that this attack may produce.
The media has embraced this action…….
After President Trump’s strikes on Syria this week, praise from the usually antagonistic media “flowed like wedding champagne,” Margaret Sullivan writes for the Washington Post. It poured in from CNN, the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, and MSNBC. Trump “became president,” followed his “heart,” and did “the right thing.” Brian Williams seemingly couldn’t restrain himself from marveling at the “beautiful” attack. All of which led Sullivan to ask: “Are we really doing this again?”
The US media has a history of being easily distracted by shows of military power, forgetting things like skepticism and in-depth reporting, Sullivan writes. This was especially evident in the lead-up to the Iraq War in 2003. The editor in chief at Mother Jones tells Sullivan the media loves a war because “it’s good for TV.” They rally around the president while ignoring context or motivations for fear of being seen as partisan. A professor of international affairs at Harvard tells Sullivan the media has a responsibility to do better. In other words, don’t get distracted by the “beauty of our weapons,” as Leonard Cohen (and Brian Williams) would say. Read the full piece here.
Russia has responded to the attack by suspending air safety deal…….
Moscow condemned on Friday the US air strike on a Syrian airbase, announcing that has suspended the bilateral agreement to help avoid clashes in the skies over the war-torn country.
“President Putin considers American strikes on Syria aggression against a sovereign state in violation of international norms, and under an invented pretext,” said the statement by the Kremlin press service posted on the official website.
Russian President Vladimir Putin accused the US of breaking international law in wake of the strike, adding that they have seriously hurt US-Russia relations, added the Kremlin.
Source: Russia Suspends Air Safety Deal with US after Syria Strike | World Affairs Journal
This “deal” help keep Russian and US pilots out of each others way so that no unfortunate “accidents” would happen….now the skies become a bit more dangerous and chaotic.
With this attack has the region gained anything at all?
An op-ed tries to explain the situation……..
My days as apologist for Donald Trump’s backsliding on his electoral campaign promise of a new direction in foreign policy are over. From being the solution, he has become an integral part of the problem. And with his bigger than life ego, petulance and stubbornness, Commander-in-Chief Trump is potentially a greater threat to world peace than the weak-willed Barack Obama whom he replaced.
Trump has ignored Russian calls for an investigation into the alleged chemical gas attack in Idlib province before issuing conclusions on culpability, as happened within hours of the event. He has accepted a narrative that is very possibly a false flag produced by anti-government rebels in Syria, disseminated by the White Helmets and other phony NGO’s paid from Washington and London. He ordered the firing of 50 or more Tomahawk missiles against a Syrian Government air base in Homs province, thereby crossing all Russian “red lines” in Syria.
Source: Here We Go Again! US Air Strikes in Syria Cross Russian ‘Red lines’ and Risk Escalation to Nuclear War by — Antiwar.com
Using the death of children to justify an attack is just a “doing business in DC”…if you recalled Obama used the Yazidis to expand the US role in Iraq….the photo of dying children is powerful but there have been many photos of children hurt and dying before and yet they had NO effect….that is until they are needed. And it looks like they were needed.