Tag: Military Action

Child Soldiers Reloaded

It is no secret that I have been a verbal critic of private armies…..those for profit war mongers like Blackwater or Xe or whatever this pack of barbarians want to call themselves this week.

The sad part of any war is when the children are turned into soldiers…it is big in Africa….but in case you are ignorant on what entails a child soldier…I can help…..

  1. Child soldiers are any children under the age of 18 who are recruited by a state or non-state armed group and used as fighters, cooks, suicide bombers, human shields, messengers, spies, or for sexual purposes.
  2. In the last 15 years, the use of child soldiers has spread to almost every region of the world and every armed conflict. Though an exact number is impossible to define, thousands of child soldiers are illegally serving in armed conflict around the world.
  3. Some children are under the age of 10 when they are forced to serve.
  4. Two-thirds of states confirm that enrollment of soldiers under the age of 18 should be banned to prohibit forced child soldiers, as well as 16- and 17-year-old armed force volunteers.
  5. Children who are poor, displaced from their families, have limited access to education, or live in a combat zone are more likely to be forcibly recruited.

Children who are not forced to be soldiers volunteer themselves because they feel societal pressure and are under the impression that volunteering will provide a form of income, food, or security, and willingly join the group.

In the last 2 years, 20 states have been reported to have child soldiers in government, government-affiliated, and non-state armed groups. Additionally, 40 states still have minimum age recruitment requirements under 18 years.

Girls make up an estimated 10 to 30 percent of child soldiers used for fighting and other purposes. They are especially vulnerable when it comes to sexual violence.

A few of the countries who have reported use of child soldiers since 2011 are Afghanistan, Colombia, India, Iraq, Libya, Mali, Pakistan, Thailand, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen.

Despite a government agreement in the District of Chad to demobilize the recruitment of child soldiers, there were between 7,000 and 10,000 children under 18 serving in combat and fulfilling other purposes in 2007.

I revisit this subject because these private armies are recruiting former child soldiers to fight in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria….

How private companies recruit former child soldiers for military operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere.

From opportunistic guns for hire on the fringe of domestic conflicts to a global force operating within a multibillion-dollar industry – the private military sector seems to be flourishing.

As armies and war increasingly become ‘outsourced’, private military companies have taken on a wider increasing range of responsibilities, from security and intelligence analysis to training and combat roles.

“The private military industry is a part of how the countries fight wars today … The US government doesn’t track the number of contractors used in places like Iraq or Afghanistan. We know it’s a lot, we don’t know exactly how many,” says Sean McFate, a professor at Georgetown University who used to work for a private military company.

Source: Child Soldiers Reloaded: The Privatisation of War | Sierra Leone | Al Jazeera

When Obama announced that the US would be pulling its troops out of Iraq…something had to be done to keep the fight going…..

…..when the US decided to end its military mission in Iraq, budgets decreased and the private military industry had to start offering different types of deals. As a result, they started to hire cheaper soldiers, many of them from the developing world.

Once again these former child soldiers were exploited when they were young and now they are being so again….this time by the for profit war machine.

The Mental Limits of War

I wish I could adequate explain to my readers the mental aspects of war….it takes a toll….but that is something that only a person that has experienced combat can know what I mean.  Anyone that says they feel the vets pain and was not part of the situation is LYING!

Some ghosts of the past are always there and waiting to invade the mind at any time.

That aside the American public has a different view of war and military action…..to most it is a video game for high score…..the public is woefully uninformed…..

A Morning Consult poll winks at me from my inbox: 57 percent of Americans support more airstrikes in Syria.

My eyeballs roll. Hopelessness permeates me, especially because I’m hardly surprised, but still . . . come on. This is nuts. The poll could be about the next move in a Call of Duty video game: 57 percent of Americans say destroy the zombies.

This is American exceptionalism in action. We have the right to be perpetual spectators. We have the right to “have an opinion” about whom the military should bomb next. It means nothing, except to those on the far end of the Great American Video Game, where the results are real.

read more……..

Source: The Mental Limits of War | By Robert C. Koehler | Common Dreams

I post about every American soldier death as I find them and seldom get much response….and I write about every troop deployment over the “official” total and again not much response……speaking of troop deployments……

President Donald Trump has given the military the authority to reset a confusing system of troop limits in Iraq and Syria that critics said allowed the White House to micro-manage battlefield decisions and ultimately obscured the real number of U.S. forces.

The Pentagon, which confirmed the move on Wednesday, said no change has yet been made to U.S. troop limits. It also stressed the U.S. strategy in Iraq and Syria still was focused on backing local forces to fight Islamic State – a tactic that has averted the need for a major U.S. ground force.

Source: Trump gives Pentagon power to reset Iraq, Syria troop limits – Iraqi News

Open end deployments of troops and still NO authorization from Congress…..something called for in the Constitution…..I am sure you have heard of this document (try reading it for a change)……

The American public needs to be more engaged than they are now……this laziness will be disastrous for our troops.

Remember Operation Eagle Claw

Closing Thought–25Apr17

I apologize but this post was a draft that was suppose to be published yesterday and I somehow missed it.

Yep you got it….another history lesson……

This is an operation that cost American lives and it should not be forgotten…..

On 4 November 1979, after a popular revolution swept the Shah of Iran, a close American ally, out of power, Iranian students backing the new revolutionary Islamic government stormed the US embassy in Teheran and took the staff and USMC security contigent hostage. In all, 52 Americans were captured and it was unclear whether they were being tortured or readied for execution. After six months of failed negotiation, the US broke diplomatic relations with Iran on 8 April 1980 and the newly certified US Army Special Forces Operational Detachment-Delta (Airborne) was put on full alert and plans were being drawn up for a rescue.

The Americans faced a daunting task. Teheran is well inside Iran and away from friendly countries. The hostages were not held at an airport as in Israel’s four years earlier Entebbe raid. Good intelligence was hard to come by about forces inside the embassy and in Teheran. And of course, all the planning and training had to be carried out in complete secrecy.

Source: Operation Eagle Claw

The sacrifice that these people made should not be forgotten….and I will see that they are not.

According To Law…..Was It Legal?

Since the attack there has been international outcry saying that the attack was a violation of international law…I am writing about that issue here today….

The first “Press” is from the site of a regular visitor to IST….Green Road Journal…….

According to the Syrian News Agency SANA, the US led Coalition has carried out targeted airstrikes against a chemical weapons depot in Hatla, east of Deir Ezzor. The depot is held by ISIS-Daesh terrorists:
The General Command of the Army and Armed Forces said that the aircrafts of the so-called “US-led International Alliance” on Wednesday between the hour 17:30 and 17:50 carried out an airstrike against a position of ISIS terrorists that includes a large number of foreign mercenaries in the village of Hatla to the east of Deir Ezzor, causing a white cloud that became yellow as a result of the explosion of a huge store that includes a large amount of toxic materials.

Source: Trump’s Missile Attack On Syria; Mass Media Ignores Truth, Morality, Legality And Verifiable Facts, Most Had Orgasmic Reaction To Shooting Off Hard Upright Missiles In Tubes; War Drums Beating, Military Industrial Complex Celebrating | A Green Road Journal

Next is from a major site…Politico….they defend the attack as a legal response….

“No child of God should ever suffer such horror,” argued President Donald Trump during his statement justifying last Thursday’s U.S. missile strikes against Syrian President Bashar Assad’s military. Since then, his decision has faced withering scrutiny, particularly on legal grounds. Critics, from Russia to some members of Congress, have argued the military action was an illegal violation of Syria’s sovereignty. “Whatever it is,” tweeted Harvard Law School Professor Jack Goldsmith in response to a question about what the legal justification for the strike was, “it exceeds all prior precedents under domestic and international law.” Use of chem weapons is horrific,” tweeted ACLU national security lawyer Hina Shamsi, “but Trump’s military action violates Constitution & U.N. charter. No legit domestic or international law basis.”

Source: Why Trump’s Attack on Syria Is Legal – POLITICO Magazine

I have given as many posts as possible on this action….I want my reader to be as well informed as anyone……they will decide the validity of this attack.

I still am wondering why NO one and I mean NO ONE is asking the question about the number of missiles fired and the damage done to the airfield….this “attack” does not pass the smell test…..neither the action or the reaction can pass the test.

A Drive-By Tomahawking

I has been a week since the US attacked the Syrian airfield….and the analysis is still going on……personally, I want answers and I believe that most of my readers do also (but I could be mistaken for some want to believe).

Since the attack by the US on the Syrian airfield I have been trying to give all sides of the debate…..this is a piece I found on the Libertarian Institute website.

On Friday, the fact-checking organization weighed in on the legal debate over President Trump’s April 6 bombing of a Syrian airfield, with two essays concluding it was A-OK, constitutionally. “In some cases, people saying Trump needed congressional approval have gone too far” Politifact’s Lauren Carroll pronounces. For instance, Rep. Marc Pocan’s (D-WI) claim that there’s “no legal basis” for the strikes rates a full-on, needle-in-the-red “FALSE” on P-fact’s patented “Truth-o-Meter.” Tom Kertscher of Politifact Wisconsin asserts that: “For limited military activities like the missile strike, presidents can send in forces without approval from Congress.” You see, while the president may not have the legal authority to unilaterally launch a full-scale war, he can—if he thinks it’s a good idea, and assures himself it won’t bog us down—order up acts of war that don’t rise to the level of war: a light dusting of cruise missiles—a micro-aggression, constitutionally speaking.

Source: Weak Legal Pretext for Trump’s Drive-By Tomahawking – The Libertarian Institute

But with all the info available was this strike necessary?

Knowing that the evidence refuted the claim that the Syrian Air Force was responsible for the April 4, 2017 chemical nerve agent attack, the National Security Council (NSC) manufactured a false claim that intelligence actually supported [President Donald J. Trump’s] decision to attack Syria, and…to accuse Russia of being either complicit or a participant in an alleged atrocity,” according to Theodore A. Postol, an MIT Professor of Science , Technology and National Security, who has previously served as a scientific adviser to the Chief of Naval Operations.

Postol’s conclusions were set forth in three successive reports. In the first, the renowned scientist concluded that the photographic evidence of a bomb crater relied upon by the White House does not support the conclusion “the crater was created by a munition designed to disperse sarin after it was dropped from a plane.” To the contrary, the evidence “clearly indicates that the munition was almost certainly placed on the ground with an explosive on top of it that crushed the container so as to disperse the alleged load of sarin.

Source: MIT Scientist: “White House Lied, Manufactured Evidence to Justify Tomahawk Missile Strike.” – LA Progressive

I believe the only way that we can have a overview of the situation is to check out all sides of the debate….

The missiles used were Tomahawk missiles….and according to most reports all 59 did not hit their target, there is a bit of confusion on just how many……but this then leads us to ask….if the missiles were not that accurate or were somehow intercepted then just how effective can they be?

While researching (something everyone should do before they voice an ignorant opinion) I found a Defense site that questions the Tomahawks existence….

As the U.S. military prepares to do combat in an increasingly threatening and competitive global arena, the Navy’s Tomahawk cruise missile may not be “the weapons system solution for the future,” the vice chairman of the joint chiefs of staff said April 13.

“I think we have to decide what’s next after Tomahawk,” said Air Force Gen. Paul Selva at an Air Force Association breakfast in Arlington, Virginia. “My gut tells me, as I look at the requirements a decade or more out, that a subsonic, non-stealthy, low-maneuvering, unitary warhead may not be the answer.”

Source: Senior Pentagon Official Casts Doubt on Tomahawk Missiles Future

I will admit that I do hold some of the same beliefs on foreign policy as the Libertarians…..I do have a problem with their domestic stuff so they are out as far as support during elections…..some politicos need to embrace their issues on foreign policy but as it is today we have NO opposition to continuous war….the voices that are there are sidelined by accusations and innuendo perpetrated by the MSM.

Please let me know what you think about this situation.

MOAB…….Not In Utah!

The US has past another milestone in war…..it has dropped the largest non-nuclear bomb ever…..why now?

I waited before posting because I wanted to see the reaction to this “new” concept in war…….

US forces in Afghanistan dropped the military’s biggest non-nuclear bomb on an Islamic State target in Afghanistan, reports the AP. Pentagon spokesman Adam Stump says it was the first-ever combat use of the bomb, formally called the GBU-43/Massive Ordnance Air Blast bomb. Based on the acronym, it has been nicknamed the “Mother of All Bombs,” with the equivalent of 11 tons of TNT. Stump says it was dropped on a cave complex used by ISIS fighters in the Achin district of Nangarhar province, close to the border with Pakistan.

  • The bomb weighs 21,000 pounds and was first detonated in a 2003 test, reports Fox News. When dropped, it detonates before reaching the ground, resulting in a huge blast radius.
  • See a History Channel video about the bomb and the 2003 test here.
  • It is not the nation’s biggest conventional weapon, notes the Guardian. That would be the Massive Ordnance Penetrator GBU-57, a “bunker buster.”
  • Back in 2007, the Guardian reported that Russia had detonated the “Father of All Bombs,” said to be four times more powerful than the US weapon. The test took place at a military base. It’s a “thermobaric bomb” with a yield of 44 tons of TNT, adds Business Insider.
  • Gen. Joseph Votel, commander of US Central Command, gave the green light for use of the bomb in Afghanistan, reports CNN. White House spokesman Sean Spicer did not answer questions about whether President Trump personally approved the mission. “I’m not going to get into the details right now,” he said, deferring to the Pentagon.

NPR hits some of the logistics: “At more than 30 feet long, it’s too big to fit inside the weapons bay of a standard Air Force bomber. Instead, troops load it into the cargo compartment of a specialized transport, the MC-130 Combat Talon, which releases it over the target by opening its ramp in the same way it might for paratroopers or air-dropped supplies.”

We have been at war for almost 16 years and if this is some sort of “cure all” why has it not been used before?

When it first introduced the bomb, the Pentagon said it was designed to terrify America’s enemy into submission.

…..campaign promise to “bomb the shit” out of ISIS, the Pentagon dropped the “mother of all bombs” — one of its largest non-nuclear munitions — for the first time on Thursday, in Afghanistan. The 21,600 pound weapon was developed over a decade ago, but was never used due to concerns of possible massive civilian casualties.

The Pentagon said it used the weapon on an ISIS-affiliated group hiding in a tunnel complex in the Nangarhar province. The group, according to the Pentagon, is made up of former members of the Taliban.

The Massive Ordnance Air Blast Bomb (MOAB), nicknamed the “mother of all bombs,” has a mile-long blast radius.

Source: “Mother of All Bombs” Never Used Before Due to Civilian Casualty Concerns

There is so much more about the bomb and space is limited here so if you want to know more then there is furthering reading below……

Source: U.S Drops Largest Non-Nuclear Bomb In Nangarhar | TOLOnews

Source: Commander-in-Chief Trump Drops ‘Mother of All Bombs’ on Afghanistan | Common Dreams

Syria: Thus Spake “MSM”

My regulars know that I do not like nor trust the Mainstream Media (MSM) with the news of the day.  And the incident with the missiles and the Syrian airfield are no different.

The MSM has been a cheerleader for the warmongers for decades…..and this most recent missile strike is no different……even the great Brian Williams sounded giddy when the attack occurred…..it was just sick…..

Amazing how fast Trump went from “dud” to “dude” and all it took was a couple of missiles.

Below is a list of the top news sources that have done nothing but cheer lead the attack……

Five major US newspapers—the New York Times, Washington Post, USA Today, Wall Street Journal and New York Daily News—offered no opinion space to anyone opposed to Donald Trump’s Thursday night airstrikes. By contrast, the five papers ran a total of 18 op-eds, columns or “news analysis” articles (dressed-up opinion pieces) that either praised the strikes or criticized them for not being harsh enough:

Source: Five Top Papers Run 18 Opinion Pieces Praising Syria Strikes–Zero Are Critical | FAIR

NO negative PR from the leaders in news….go figure.

Plus the same media is leading the calls for escalation in Syria……

The mainstream U.S. media now reports as “flat-fact” the Syrian government’s guilt in the April 4 chemical weapons incident, but the real facts are less clear and some point in the opposite direction.

Historian and journalist Stephen Kinzer has said, “Coverage of the Syrian war will be remembered as one of the most shameful episodes in the history of the American press.” This past week’s coverage of the April 4 chemical-weapons incident in the northern Syrian town of Khan Sheikhoun will only add to that dubious legacy.

Across the mainstream U.S. news media, there was almost no skepticism shown and virtually no differences of opinion allowed. Within hours, the rush to judgment that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad was guilty had solidified into a full-scale groupthink.

Source: How Media Bias Fuels Syrian Escalation – Consortiumnews

Please do not rely on the MSM for your opinions….especially when it may involve the use of American troops…..read for yourselves….research for yourselves…..educate yourselves.

War is too important to allow others to form your opinions for you…..

Syriasly?

A clever title….wish I had thought of it……

Yes the US has attacked a Syrian airfield in retaliation for the alleged use of CWs by Assad in his own country against Syrian civilians.

Our president was outraged at the barbaric attack by a sitting government against his people.  Apparently he does not watch much international news for this, while despicable, was a minor use of CWs compared to some of the other stuff he has been accused of doing.

So why now?

One explanation is that he is a creature of television and learning about atrocities and injustice via the boob tube had a profound effect upon his thinking, and I use that term advisedly.

The scenes of human carnage should sicken us all, regardless of whether they are in Syria, Rwanda, Vietnam or Chicago. Man’s inhumanity to man is not acceptable under any condition and it is our collective responsibility to exhaust any and all remedies to alleviate human suffering. No one with a conscience, a soul, or even the hint of compassion and empathy is not reviled by the atrocity that occurred at the hands of the murderous Syrian dictator either this time or the last time or the times before that he unleashed chemical weapons upon his people.

Source: Syriasly? – LA Progressive

I mean this humanitarian gesture is NOTHING new….each president has had a moment of outrage to justify some sort of action.

But this action by Trump was more a message to the world than some noble cause to right a wrong…..plus it will help change the dialog in the news…..

Another Jolly Little War

Thanx to the MSM I can now write about the same subjects as before the only difference is people are listening now.

Yes Irene we have bombed yet another Middle East country….well it is not the first time….Syria has been bombed into the stone age….all in the name of getting “the bad guy”.

So without further ado…..here we go again!

Since the missile attack last week I have been trying to give as many different sides of the action as I can.  Please keep in mind that I may not agree with their takes on the situation but I think my readers need as many opinions as I can give them so that they can make a rational decision on this.

Below is a Libertarian way of looking at this latest military action.

It seems that every new US president has to prove his machismo…or make his bones, as wiseguys say…by bombing the usual Arabs. By now, it’s almost a rite of passage. The American public loves it.

So we just saw the US launch 59 or 60 $1.5million apiece cruise missiles at a western Syrian airfield to express President Trump’s outrage caused by seeing injured children allegedly caused by a Syrian government toxic gas attack.

But what, Mr. President, about all those Iraqi, Syrian and Afghan babies killed by US B-52 and B-1 heavy bombers? Or the destruction of the defiant Iraqi city of Fallujah where the US used forbidden white phosphorus that burns right to the bone?

Source: Another Jolly Little War – The Unz Review

What will occur now that the big step has been taken?

Will the country become entangled in this mess as we did with Afghanistan and Iraq?

Is there more to come?  Or was this attack is a statement and nothing more?

Whether one believes they were the long-overdue response to the Syrian regime’s brutality, a one-off event that will not affect the conflict’s trajectory, a risky step that could prompt military escalation or all of the above, the 7 April U.S. missile strikes on Syria’s Shayrat air base in response to the regime’s alleged use of chemical weapons should be seized upon as an opportunity to jumpstart diplomatic efforts. The strikes have heightened tension between Moscow and Washington. Yet, this added volatility and the risks attached to it could and should prompt more serious pursuit by the two countries of their purportedly common interest: de-escalating violence sufficiently to establish a meaningful political track. This can be best achieved by deepening rather than breaking off U.S.-Russian cooperation.

Source: Syria after the U.S. Strike: What Should Come Next | Crisis Group

In my opinion further escalation would be a unwise decision…..intel vets see it as I do…..

Two dozen ex-U.S. intelligence officials urge President Trump to rethink his claims blaming the Syrian government for the chemical deaths in Idlib and to pull back from his dangerous escalation of tensions with Russia.

MEMORANDUM FOR: The President

FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)*

SUBJECT: Syria: Was It Really “A Chemical Weapons Attack”?

Source: Trump Should Rethink Syria Escalation | By Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity | Common Dreams

Thoughts?

Airstrike Fall-Out

I know not everybody has the resources or the inclination to look for all the opinions on the US airstrike on the Syrian airfield….I thought I would give my readers the sources to check if they were interested….most of these are from the MSM…..there will be others.  Sorry some are for subscription sites but if you follow them you can read the opinions……

A lot to take in but worth the effort……more to come……

Officials in the Trump administration on Sunday demanded that Russia stop supporting the Syrian government or face a further deterioration in its relations with the United States. – Washington Post

The Trump administration said its focus in Syria is the defeat of Islamic State, not pushing President Bashar al-Assad from power. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and national security adviser H.R. McMaster, in separate interviews on Sunday, said the administration’s decision last week to strike an Assad regime airfield wasn’t a sign that the U.S. is now focused on toppling the Syrian leader. – Wall Street Journal (subscription required)

More than 80 civilians were killed in what Western analysts called a sarin attack by Syrian forces — a chilling demonstration that the agreement did not succeed. In recent days, former aides have lamented what they considered one of the worst moments of the Obama presidency and privately conceded that his legacy would suffer. – New York Times

With President Xi Jinping safely out of the United States and no longer President Trump’s guest, China’s state-run media on Saturday was free to denounce the missile strike on Syria, which the American president told Mr. Xi about while they were finishing dinner. – New York Times

For Syrians who have withstood years of unbridled assault and deprivation by the forces of President Bashar al-Assad, the American missile strike on a military airfield served as a short-term adrenaline shot of vengeful satisfaction, tinged with cynicism and fear. – New York Times

In the wake of President Trump’s strike on a Syrian airfield in retaliation for deadly chemical weapons attacks, U.S. lawmakers want the commander-in-chief to spell out his broader strategy in Syria, and soon. – Defense News

Senior Trump administration officials did not disclose to lawmakers any long-term plans for dealing with Syrian strongman Bashar Assad or the years-old conflict in his country, further complicating President Donald Trump’s relationship with Congress. – Roll Call

Sen. Marco Rubio stepped up his criticisms of U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson on Sunday, saying that the nation’s top diplomat is espousing a Syria policy that might be doomed to failure. – Politico

A former Obama official acknowledged Sunday that the U.S. “always knew” an agreement with Syrian President Bashar Assad did not clear all chemical weapons out of Syria, despite the fact that the administration touted the deal as an unequivocal success at the time – Washington Examiner

Joint Russia-Iranian forces operating in Syria warned the Trump administration over the weekend that further American strikes on the war-torn country will unleash a “lethal response,” according to official statements aimed at ratcheting up tension with the United States following a string of fresh airstrikes on Syrian strongholds. – Washington Free Beacon

Josh Rogin reports: President Trump’s decision to take limited military strikes against a Syrian military base Thursday is a potential game-changer for Syria, but only if the Trump administration follows through with a strategy to increase the pressure on Bashar al-Assad’s regime and its partners, according to the lead negotiator for the Syrian opposition. – Washington Post

Interview: US missile strikes on a Syrian air base from where a deadly chemical weapons attack is believed to have been launched send a clear message that the United States is now “directly engaged” in addressing the mass homicide perpetrated by Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s regime, said Frederic C. Hof, director of the Atlantic Council’s Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East. – Atlantic Council

Editorial: The administration should, meanwhile, make another effort to draw Russia and Syria’s neighbors into a negotiation on the country’s future, using the new leverage provided by Mr. Trump’s demonstrated willingness to use force. It should seek bipartisan congressional support, including the authorization of military force in the event of further atrocities — even if the White House has, as we believe, the constitutional leeway to act without it. Mr. Trump has created an opportunity for the United States, and for his presidency, in Syria. Its ultimate value will depend on how well he follows up. – Washington Post

Editorial: When the Bush Administration failed to find the weapons of mass destruction that Saddam Hussein was thought to have, opponents used the intelligence failure to discredit the war in Iraq and call George W. Bush a liar. Will there be any even remotely similar accounting after the Obama Administration’s intelligence failure in Syria, where Bashar Assad has used chemical weapons we were told he didn’t have? – Wall Street Journal (subscription required)

Editorial: The larger point for Mr. Trump to recognize is that he is being tested. The world—friend and foe—is watching to see how he responds to Mr. Assad’s war crime. His quick air strike on the evening he was having dinner with Chinese President Xi Jinping makes clear that the Obama era is over. If he now follows with action to protect Syrian civilians and construct an anti-Assad coalition, he may find that new strategic possibilities open up to enhance U.S. interests and make the Middle East more stable. – Wall Street Journal (subscription required)

FPI Board Member Robert Kagan writes: Let’s hope that the Trump administration is prepared for the next move. If it is, then there is a real chance of reversing the course of global retreat that Obama began. A strong U.S. response in Syria would make it clear to the likes of Putin, Xi Jinping, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and Kim Jong Un that the days of American passivity are over. – Washington Post

FPI Executive Director Christopher J. Griffin writes: By overturning entrenched assumptions about the war, Trump’s airstrikes have opened the way toward a complete rethinking of the policy he inherited from his predecessor – one which until yesterday, he openly embraced. The great unknown is whether President Trump has either clear outcomes in mind for Syria or a strategy to achieve them. If the president is considering a sustained set of airstrikes, it would be preferable from him to request from Congress a formal authorization for the use of military force. – Foreign Policy Initiative

Frederick Kagan writes: Stopping Assad’s barbarity is as central to defeating ISIS as any direct military action against the group. The U.S. must work to dampen the flames of sectarian war in Syria by pressing extremists on both sides — ISIS and Al Qaeda among the Sunni; Assad and his Iranian allies among the Alawites. Only when the extremists are marginalized and moderates re-empowered can we hope to end the serious threat to America’s security now emanating from Syria. Trump’s actions offer some hope of accomplishing that aim. – New York Daily News

James Rubin writes: While the limited missile strike was a commendable and overdue response to the use of chemical weapons and to countless other war crimes perpetrated by the regime in Damascus, the public performance of President Trump and his team throughout this tragic episode hardly inspires confidence. On the contrary, the administration demonstrated a dangerous degree of incoherence and inconsistency. – New York Times

Peter Feaver writes: Candidate Trump repeatedly promised that he would not simply conduct American foreign policy in the way Obama did. By punishing Assad for his brazen violation of international law and basic human decency, Trump took a significant step forward in fulfilling that campaign promise. But Trump also promised that his approach would produce more lasting success than Obama’s. Whether he fulfills that promise will depend on what comes next, not on what happened Thursday. – Foreign Policy’s Elephants in the Room

Danielle Pletka writes: Let us hope that in the days to come, the new President and his national security team will make clear that the Trump administration has a strategy to defeat our enemies and to renew the American people’s support for decisive US leadership that will keep us safe, begin to end terror’s scourge, start the resolution of the refugee problem and turn around the weakness of the last eight years. Let us hope. – CNN

Thomas Donnelly writes: Whatever the president’s motivation, there’s a good case to be made that, at least in regard to the Middle East, a coherent approach is emerging from the administration. This represents both a reversal from the Iran-first gambit of the Obama years and a reaffirmation of the traditional U.S. strategy that held sway from Jimmy Carter in 1979 through George W. Bush in 2009. – The Weekly Standard

Walter Russell Mead writes: Mr. Trump has passed his first test, but more difficult ones are yet to come. If he is to succeed—and every American and friend of world peace must pray that he does—he will need a team in the White House that commands his full confidence. The extraordinary talents now in charge at the State Department, the Defense Department and the National Security Council need to staff up and surround themselves with the best the country can offer. There is no job in the world more difficult than the U.S. presidency. President Trump will need all the help he can get. – Wall Street Journal (subscription required)

Eli Lake writes: If Trump can hasten the collapse of Assad’s foul dictatorship, or at least end his ability to gas his own people, this White House may end up earning strange new respect of the liberal internationalists so disappointed by Obama’s careful inaction. You know who I mean — people like Samantha Power. – Bloomberg View

Jennifer Cafarella and Genevieve Cassagrande write: The U.S strike against an Assad regime base in northern Syria on April 6, 2017 opened the door to a reorientation of American strategy in the Middle East. President Trump’s action could reset the terms of America’s confrontation of other hostile states, such as North Korea. President Trump may be shifting away from a narrow focus on the Islamic State of Iraq and al Sham (ISIS) as the strategic priority in Syria and toward a new approach. – Institute for the Study of War

Brian Katulis writes: [N]ow that the United States has taken action, it should take robust steps to ensure that these strikes, which come at a time of operational and tactical military escalations in Iraq and Yemen, are nested in a wider regional strategy that places a high premium on working closely with our partners in the region to prevent a wider escalation. This requires an investment in diplomatic tools — which Trump has proposed undercutting in his budget — and it requires an integrated strategy to make sure that America is not just adding fuel to a fire that has led to the collapse of states across the region. – Foreign Policy’s Shadow Government

Ilan Goldenberg and Nicholas Heras writes: If the United States is to turn the limited tactical strikes in Syria into a real strategic gain, the Trump team will have to change its approach, and focus not only on winning the war but also on winning the peace. – Washington Post

Colin Kahl writes: As the afterglow and applause of the missile strikes fade, finding a way to advance American interests in Syria while avoiding a war with Russia is the urgent task at hand. After all, sinking into a Syrian quagmire would be bad enough. World War III would be far worse. – Washington Post

AS you can see there is a wealth of opinions….everybody has one…..hopefully this will help my readers educate themselves and form a learned opinion…..and then join in the conversation.

This escalation is too important to ignore.