President Donald Trump

[Bernie Brewer]

Well, someone told the Syrians who then moved all the planes so none of them were affected and were in flight today bombing Homs.

They must've left 20 just for show as CNN is reporting 20 aircraft destroyed.

[nots]

$50M fireworks show.
The one nice thing about having a Republican in the WH, is that the Democrats now (mostly) aren't afraid to speak out against our ME escapades. Been too quiet on that front the last 8 years IMO.

[The Feral Slasher]

The more I think about this, the more I think this was a decision made by the military, not wanting to escalate the situation by killing a bunch of Russians. Probably not a bad call.

I knew you'd come around !

hughes-amh-sixteen-candles.jpg

[The Feral Slasher]

I agree with you but would add that Russia is most certainly not our friend.

Not directly in response to your post, but it's pretty clear that chemical weapons were used. I think it's clear what Hillary would have done were she President. Would this change the visceral response of some of the liberals? Because she was clear a day or two ago saying she'd "take out his airfields." So Trump's response is wrong?!?! Please reconcile that for me. What we've been told is US military claims to have near certain proof and near certain evidence of who used them, Bashar al-Assad. Just like when the line in the sand was drawn in 2013, should the US or the West have once again done nothing? How did that work out in the past? Not just 2013, but whenever the US stands by ideally watching as genocide or atoricites occur around the world. I'm not a hawk by any means but I don't think standing by gets us anything.

For those suggesting Trump forewarned the Russians, let's say just for argument that US military didn't use "deconfliction channels" to forewarn Russia and 59 Tomahawks blew the crap out of a bunch of their forces, would you really rather find out how that turns out?

I applaud the response. To suggest it was done to distract from something else is weak. Yes, I know he does that routinely but not with bombs in foreign countries. I guess as Chase would say "your mileage may vary". I think it was a good call and will hold final judgment until we see "what's next".

You really think we are in the business of trying to stop atrocities ? Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Libya ... are we really that concerned about innocents being killed. It's all politics. Not really sure what this response is going to accomplish, apparently it makes people feel good that we launch some bombs when we see somebody else killing people ?

[TranaGreg]

The only way that I can see an argument here is if you view this as sending a message, that if anyone out there is considering the use of wmds, the US won't stand by. But the administration has gone out of its way to state that this isn't part of a larger initiative, and don't think this is the start of a larger military effort... so to me the message sent is that if someone does use wmds, watch out, you might have to rebuild a runway.

[gcstomp]

There are a plethora of instances one could be outraged over concerning Trump. A top 100 list of WH lies, often transparent, alone should convince the sane we have a problem in office. The proposed budget where every critical department is slashed even inoperable to even basic function, at expense of vast military increase, and of 551 positions requiring confirmation, only 20 odd have even been proposed to be filled leaves Putin cackling. No war could have neutered our state department as well, which is the true global outreach of our country, not how many missiles we have at the ready as Trump experiment.

This "bold" military strike, where Trump gave the proper heads up to Russia so they could evacuate is standard. That Russia in turn warned their complicit partner Syria so they could move critical gear, aircraft, and Sarin is swell. Trump gets perked up support from hawks in congress, while effectively doing zero damage to Syrian capability. Syria has had its own holocaust where more than 500k civilians have been murdered, but those images of the last 70 were the twigs that broke the camels back.

Om a lighter note, Trump often eats at the steakhouse in his Manhattan fiefdom, and one of the regular waiters there reported "The President ordered a well-done steak. An aged New York strip. He ate it with catsup as he always does." which made me laugh. We are so deep in real issues, the admin nepotism, where Ivana, a lovely young woman, heads up "job" of adviser and son in law Jared has been handed effectively the job of entire state dept is not great. That Trump is playing with the media by releasing his little white rabbits (Rice, Hillary, look, squirrel) as obfuscation over the whole Russia got him his job and he cooperated scandal. So deep, but catsup on a well done $80 steak, Warhol smiles.

[cardboardbox]

More than three-fourths of U.S. senators, including more than two dozen Democrats, have said that they support President Trump’s decision to strike an air base in Syria in retaliation for the use of chemical weapons by the regime of Bashar al-Assad. Much of that support came with concern about what comes next, but this is one of the first times in Trump’s presidency that a major policy decision has received more than token support from Senate Democrats.

79 senators support the strike in Syria (49 Republicans and 30 Democrats).

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/a-clear-majority-of-senators-support-trumps-syria-airstrike/

[DMT]

More than three-fourths of U.S. senators, including more than two dozen Democrats, have said that they support President Trump’s decision to strike an air base in Syria in retaliation for the use of chemical weapons by the regime of Bashar al-Assad. Much of that support came with concern about what comes next, but this is one of the first times in Trump’s presidency that a major policy decision has received more than token support from Senate Democrats.

79 senators support the strike in Syria (49 Republicans and 30 Democrats).


https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...ria-airstrike/

Yet another example of how unrepresentative our government is.

[Hornsby]

The only way that I can see an argument here is if you view this as sending a message, that if anyone out there is considering the use of wmds, the US won't stand by. But the administration has gone out of its way to state that this isn't part of a larger initiative, and don't think this is the start of a larger military effort... so to me the message sent is that if someone does use wmds, watch out, you might have to rebuild a runway.

I think that you probably nailed the reason in one stroke. With China's leader in Florida meeting with the Trumpster at the time of the raids, there is speculation that it was a show that was actually aimed at North Korea. They've been firing off missiles into the Sea at an increased pace, and sooner or later, they'll actually develop an ICBM that works well enough to use. Tillerson has made somewhat vague, but threatening comments about the North Korea sabre rattling, and many think that this was just a "see what we can do?" to Kim Jong Un...also a note to China that this administration isn't afraid to use it's military in a unilateral fashion.

I think that they had to warn the Russians, if they hadn't it could have had cataclysmic effects, so I have no issue with that.

[The Feral Slasher]

Yet another example of how unrepresentative our government is.

I don't watch TV news, but saw a link to Brian Williams comments. Hopefully not all the mainstream media are cheerleaders like him.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/04/07/beautiful-brian-williams-says-of-syria-missile-strike-proceeds-to-quote-leonard-cohen/?utm_term=.3c27d9026efe

“We see these beautiful pictures at night from the decks of these two U.S. Navy vessels in the eastern Mediterranean,” Williams said. “I am tempted to quote the great Leonard Cohen: ‘I am guided by the beauty of our weapons.’”

“They are beautiful pictures of fearsome armaments making what is for them what is a brief flight over to this airfield

I've seen several articles regarding the evidence of chemical weapons, I wonder if this will end up being substantial or not.

https://consortiumnews.com/2017/04/07/trumps-wag-the-dog-moment/

There is also an internal dispute over the intelligence. On Thursday night, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said the U.S. intelligence community assessed with a “high degree of confidence” that the Syrian government had dropped a poison gas bomb on civilians in Idlib province.

But a number of intelligence sources have made contradictory assessments, saying the preponderance of evidence suggests that Al Qaeda-affiliated rebels were at fault, either by orchestrating an intentional release of a chemical agent as a provocation or by possessing containers of poison gas that ruptured during a conventional bombing raid.

One intelligence source told me that the most likely scenario was a staged event by the rebels intended to force Trump to reverse a policy, announced only days earlier, that the U.S. government would no longer seek “regime change” in Syria and would focus on attacking the common enemy, Islamic terror groups that represent the core of the rebel forces.

[The Feral Slasher]

I think that you probably nailed the reason in one stroke. With China's leader in Florida meeting with the Trumpster at the time of the raids, there is speculation that it was a show that was actually aimed at North Korea. They've been firing off missiles into the Sea at an increased pace, and sooner or later, they'll actually develop an ICBM that works well enough to use. Tillerson has made somewhat vague, but threatening comments about the North Korea sabre rattling, and many think that this was just a "see what we can do?" to Kim Jong Un...also a note to China that this administration isn't afraid to use it's military in a unilateral fashion.

I think that they had to warn the Russians, if they hadn't it could have had cataclysmic effects, so I have no issue with that.

Another consideration is that Trump understands launching missiles at "bad guys" will do nothing but help his flagging popularity.

[Hornsby]

Another consideration is that Trump understands launching missiles at "bad guys" will do nothing but help his flagging popularity.

Oh absolutely, it's certainly an element of his smoke and mirrors magic show. Look guys, take your eyes off the Russian hacking! Look, nothing to see here with the infighting within the White House! Look, nobody who ever worked for me had any sort of relationship with the Russians! Yeah, it's a lot of obfuscation as well as a poorly executed warning.

[gcstomp]

I have heard various cost estimates for the Tomahawks all over the place, I assume the lower end ones are the missile without payload. At a mill a pop, and 59 fired off at the airfield to reduce Syrian capability on some level, that qualifies as an expensive fireworks show. I say that because the airfield was being used next day with aircraft taking off and landing. I would think that each missile having a 1000 pound payload, even if we loaded the Tomahawks up with rusted lawnmower parts and broken pinball machines from the dumps should have caused enough damage to close airfields for a few days. That much tonnage should have ripped apart good sized craters, and left debris large and small that caused enough damage to, oh, maybe hinder Syrian flights a bit more than a rainy afternoon delay schedule at Kennedy airport.

I am off to use my abacus to count how many meals on wheels deliveries we could have made with the cost of the saber rattling Tomahawk display.

[revo]

Another consideration is that Trump understands launching missiles at "bad guys" will do nothing but help his flagging popularity.

He sure does!

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Now that Obama’s poll numbers are in tailspin – watch for him to launch a strike in Libya or Iran. He is desperate.</p>&mdash; Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/255784560904773633">October 9, 2012</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

[Pogues]

More than three-fourths of U.S. senators, including more than two dozen Democrats, have said that they support President Trump’s decision to strike an air base in Syria in retaliation for the use of chemical weapons by the regime of Bashar al-Assad. Much of that support came with concern about what comes next, but this is one of the first times in Trump’s presidency that a major policy decision has received more than token support from Senate Democrats.

79 senators support the strike in Syria (49 Republicans and 30 Democrats).


https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...ria-airstrike/

My choice for President did not. That makes me smile.