Our weapon is piety and sanctimony. No, our two weapons are piety, sanctimony, and hypocrisy. Our three weapons are piety, sanctimony, hypocrisy, and a whole lot of bombs. Trump must have thought it was wonderful that he had an opportunity to wrap himself up in the flag and babble about god.
My fellow Americans, 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. No child of God should ever suffer such horror. Tonight I ordered a targeted military strike on the airfield in Syria from where the chemical attack was launched. It is in this vital national security interest of the United States to prevent and deter the spread and use of deadly chemical weapons. There can be no dispute that Syria used banned chemical weapons, violated its obligations under the chemical weapons convention, and ignored the urging of the UN Security Council. Years of previous attempts at changing Assad’s behaviour have all failed and failed very dramatically. As a result, the refugee crisis continues to deepen and the region continues to destabilise, threatening the United States and its allies. Tonight I call on all civilised nations to join us in seeking to end the slaughter and bloodshed in Syria, and also to end terrorism of all kinds and all types. We ask for God’s wisdom as we face the challenge of our very troubled world. We pray for the lives of the wounded and for the souls of those who have passed, and we hope that as long as America stands for justice, then peace and harmony will in the end prevail. Good night and God bless America and the entire world. Thank you.
Assad is a vile piece of shit, I agree. Killing civilians, or anyone for that matter, with nerve gas is a crime against humanity, and something should be done…I just don’t know what, except that wrecking a country with a hail of missiles doesn’t seem to be a very practical way to protect “beautiful babies”. It’s also not just Trump — Obama seems to have killed a lot of civilians with drone strikes, and clearly both parties are blithe about murdering foreigners.
And now I’m also confused by the Trumpian incoherence, which doesn’t help.
You know Syria is one of the countries under a travel ban — and Trump campaigned on opposing immigration and banning those “beautiful babies” from entering the US.
The United States’ record on allowing those “beautiful little babies” of Syria — and their battle-scarred parents — to come here as refugees from the war zone has been abysmal. Over one roughly equivalent stretch of time last year, our next-door neighbors in Canada took in 25,000 Syrian refugees while America took a paltry 841. Hillary Clinton pledged to increase that number — not dramatically — and she was savaged on the campaign trail by Trump and his supporters. Trump, of course, announced a ban on accepting refugees as part of his sweeping — and struck down — travel ban.
It’s also the case that only a few years (months?) ago, Trump was howling in opposition to any military intervention in the region.
AGAIN, TO OUR VERY FOOLISH LEADER, DO NOT ATTACK SYRIA – IF YOU DO MANY VERY BAD THINGS WILL HAPPEN & FROM THAT FIGHT THE U.S. GETS NOTHING!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 5, 2013
It also means that he has thrown away all the cards in his hand and seems to be asking for a new deal.
He was pals with Putin; throw that away, because Putin is an Assad ally and is now talking about beefing up Syria’s defenses.
One of the reasons Trump hadn’t leapt into action before was that the openly hated ISIS was also fighting against the Assad regime. We are now allied with ISIS, in this one thing!
This one is almost amusing: Pepe the Frog is most unhappy with Trump. Milo Yiannopoulos, Richard Spencer, Gavin McInnes, Mike Cernovich, Charles Johnson, and Stefan Molyneux — among the most horrible awful people on the planet — are united in condemning the FAKE, GAY
bombing. No word yet on Martin Shkreli’s opinion. I’m allied with these trolls, on this one thing? I’m feeling nauseated.
It’s total chaos!
And look at the flagrant embrace of god-talk in his last three sentences, the usual first resort of American politicians leaping into destruction. I don’t know what god he’s appealing to, but I’m beginning to suspect that it’s Arioch. Blood and souls! Blood and souls for Lord Arioch!
My heart sank when I heard about this first thing this morning (I’m in the UK). All the usual caveats about Trump, and warmongering apply, and also the fact that one can’t really believe anything one sees or reads, although this chemical attack does seem more credible that the WMD sham that triggered the Iraq war.
However, in response to PZ’s ” something should be done…I just don’t know what”, maybe, just maybe if these strikes have, as we were told, destroyed the airfield and systems from which the Chemical attacks were launched it might help.
The bombing is “fake” and “gay,” and yet the people that can hold those thoughts also think it’s a bad thing that nothing happened and the nothing has, inconceivably, a sexual preference?
I can see that, metaphorically, Tomahawk missiles can be said to be thrusting, phallic, violating… but unless the target was located in a cenote… no, not even then. You can’t ascribe a sexual alignment to a bombing attack.
Their very thoughts are departing the human realm. Or is it that they are losing the power of language?
Maybe the bombing was necessary, but if it were, it should have been done in consultation with congress and with our allies.
PZ – Agreed – we are told here that the Brits were consulted and concurred – I don’t know who else was or wasn’t. They’d never have got a UN resolution though given the Russian veto.
Until now, the West’s policies in the Middle East were driven by short-term, short-sighted selfishness.
Now it’s only short-term and short-sighted.
Not that much has changed.
Looks like the “all lives matter” activists have accomplished something!
Bombs don’t work. Bombs have never worked. The West has tried to solve problems in the Middle East with bombs for ages, and it only increased the suffering. What if we instead:
1. Stop acting like we own the fucking place
2. Stop installing and deposing dictators at our whim
3. Stop buying oil from dictators
4. Stop selling weapons to dictators
5. Stop giving or selling anything to dictators, including respect
6. Stop treating Israel like it is an ally and a civilized country
7. Respect the local people’s interests
8. Support local organizations who promote non-violence, democracy and human rights
Perhaps then there won’t be any problems that have to be solved with bombs in the first place
The Syrian air force’s attack on civilians using sarin gas was a blatant provocation against Assad’s previous deal to refrain from using chemical weapons that was made back in 2013 with the U.S., which Russia at the time concurred with. Attacking the air base that the strike was based from is a proportional and appropriate response. Trump’s incoherence about it is because he isn’t really driving policy himself but is reacting to what he’s told by his advisers, and it surely didn’t escape his attention that Hillary Clinton forcefully said right after the terrible attack that the U.S. should strike Syrian air fields in response.
If you really want to cringe yourself into a hernia, watch the video of Trump’s speech. He switches back and forth between the two teleprompters like a robot, flubs the breaks in his speechwriter’s simplistic sentences, and gasps like a landed fish. It’s not inspiring. It doesn’t even inspire laughter.
If Obama or Clinton do something dramatic it’s foolish and wrong. But if Trump does the same thing it is the right thing to do and approved of by God.
If we’re going to bomb Syria, it seems to me the presidential palace would have been a far better target. At least that way one of the obstacles to peace in the region would have been removed. Might also send a message to the other Assads in the region.
starfleetdude:
With Trump, if it happened more than about ten minutes ago, you can’t be sure of that at all. Either that, or he will categorically say that Clinton did not say any such thing at all, and any reports about her saying it, down to and including any actual recordings of it, are ‘fake news’.
I actually agree with targeted, limited strikes on the actual places used to launch chemical weapon attacks, and where the chemical weapons are stored, if that can be identified, for the very simple reason that much of the world has agreed that chemical weapons should not be used by anybody, and this ban is worthless unless it is enforced by force, if necessary, and the conduct of the Assad regime has shown that anything short of force doesn’t work with them. The only problem is that there is a possibility that this could lead to the US being drawn into the Syrian conflict in a much more direct way – as in, putting troops on the ground and invading the place, especially if someone as easy to goad as Trump stays President. If Russia are still backing Assad, this could become another Vietnam-like proxy war.
OT
FIUUUUUUUCK!
“Truck drives into crowds in central Stockholm killing three people” https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/07/truck-crashes-in-central-stockholm-sweden
And on top of this, Drumpf will no doubt take credit for predicting such attacks.
Because Sweden is multi-cultural. Therefore, terror.
I wonder if the kooks who stole the truck possibly got their inspiration from *both* London and from my least favourite president.
Interestingly when news of the Syrian attack was broadcast here (UK) experts said the Russian\Syrian story that the Syrians had accidentally hit a stockpile of rebel chemical weapons and released the gas couldn’t be true, because that wouldn’t result in precursors combining to produce the fatal gas.
Today an expert said the US airstrike couldn’t target and destroy the chemical weapons stockpile because that might result in the release of fatal gasses. The impact was only on the capbility to deliver the weapons, not the weapons thmeselves.
@14
Sarin gas is a binary agent that has to be combined carefully to form, which is why the Russian claim about it somehow being rebel held and set off by a strike by the Syrian air force not credible. On the other hand, the Syrian army does have other chemical agents in their stockpiles that could be released by a conventional air strike, which is why those stockpiles weren’t targeted by the U.S.
Cory Booker’s statement:
Bombing parts of the Syrian military is not the same as bombing ISIS. Syria is country with an elected leader, the evil Assad. We bombed a sovereign country with an elected leader. Trump didn’t have congressional approval to do so.
Illegalities abound: its unconstitutional (U.S. constitution requires congressional approval), and we did not get a U.N. resolution nor any other international agreement.
It may have been the correct and “proportional” response, but the way it was done is troubling.
Trump watched a TV show and impulsively changed his mind.
Did Trump really not know about six other chemical attacks in Syria? Did he not know that an earlier attack in 2013 killed many more children (1400 people, hundreds of children)? Did he not know that Obama sought congressional approval in 2013 and got crickets in reply? Does Trump not have a headache from promoting an immigration plan that bans all Syrians while simultaneously claiming that he in charge now of punishing Assad?
Russia’s response has been muted, (muted for Russia). They condemned the attack, and they temporarily suspended the deconfliction “hot line” arrangement with the U.S. Russia did not pull out of the deconfliction arrangement entirely and forever. Russian generals called the strike ineffective. Assad called the strike “naive.” And now I think we’re done with the blowhard responses.
@15. I suspected that might be the case – thanks. Just goes to show that the lack of rigour in how these reports are contructed gives massive scope for people to get hold of the wrong end of the stick.
In other news, Bill Kristol is consulting his doctor about an erection that’s lasted longer than four hours.
Trump’s proposed budget cuts foreign aid, and that includes aid that takes care of the 5 to 6 million refugees that have fled war zones.
Bombs? He’ll pay for those. Food, medical care, education and a more efficient immigration plan to bring refugees to the USA? No, he won’t pay for that. Think of all the beautiful babies in refugee camps in Jordan.
From House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi:
Cross posted from the Political Madness All the Time thread.
Is ordering an attack on another sovereign nation without the support of congress something your president is allowed to do? Or is it illegal and grounds for impeachment?
As I pointed out over at stderr [ https://proxy.freethought.online/stderr/2017/04/07/syria-of-course ] the US actually invaded Syria in November 2016, and has built an airbase in a convenient spot at the apex between Syria, Iraq, and Turkey.
My interpretation of the Russian reaction to the missiles is that: of course they know the air base is there, now the Syrians are no longer going to agree to US air operations, “accidents” may happen when we beef up Syrian air defenses.
I also predict that insurgents may find that its christmas, when they look in their stockings and find shiny new anti-tank guided missiles and portable surface to air missiles. Putin remembers what the US did to the USSR in Afghanistan and he’s like the Rembrandt of Paybacks.
Now that they’ve made the grand gesture the best thing the US could do is declare victory and get the fuck out of there as fast as possible. “Thank you, thank you, buh bye, enjoy the sovereignty, buh bye.” But they won’t ever do that.
cartomancer — I believe the short answer is no, but it’s been routinely ignored for two centuries particularly if American lives (or assets) are threatened. Obviously that doesn’t apply in this case. Members of congress from both sides of the aisle are being critical of Trump for not seeking Congressional approval first. It might be noted that Congressional approval has largely been a symbolic gestured. As far as I know, no Congress has ever denied a presidential military action like this.
Indecisive Western interventionism is the worst fucking thing.
First they do nothing except supply weapons to various rebel factions for, what, six years? Keeping the conflict going, but not enough for any of them to actually win. Then, once the country is in ruins and an entire generation of children is traumatised and malnourished, and it looks like the war might soon be over because the old government is winning…which is a pretty miserable outcome, but still better for regular people than another several years of war…then they intervene directly to weaken the government, but again not decisively enough to actually end the damn war swiftly, which might at least save some lives overall.
And now the wait for the report of collateral damage…in other words, the civilians killed by the attack. The Syrian’s are already claiming that 6 people were killed, but that could be military personnel at the base. There are disputed claims over the accuracy of the attack…the US Navy says only one of 59(!) missed it’s target, the Syrians and Russians say a lot more missed.
Interesting timing of this action right after getting Bannon off the NSC.
Lynna, OM — “Syria is country with an elected leader, the evil Assad.” I assume your use of “elected” here is in the most generous and general sense, and perhaps ironically. Sure they held an uncontested referendum vote. Someone winning by >90% suggests that the vote was perhaps not much more than a rubber stamp.
Oh, by the way…59 Tomahawk missiles cost about $100 million, not to mention other costs of the operation. Imagine what we could do with $100 million dollars to make the world a better place.
MAYBE the message from the administration here is “If you want to kill a whole bunch of your own citizens, be sure to use bombs and bullets to do it, because if you use sarin gas we’ll slap you down hard.”
And if that’s what this was all about, that might not even be a bad thing. The problem is that even getting across such a simple message in a unified voice seems to be beyond this administration. Some folks evidently just want a one-off, some want full-out regime change, and the prez just wants to look like a winner and can’t plan beyond his next golf game. So nobody has any idea of even a short-term plan, let alone the kind of strategic thinking that is needed before any sort of Middle East involvement.
Anyone else wondering if this was done as an excuse to draw attention away from domestic issues like the Trump-Russia investigation or Gorsuck’s nomination?
From Vox’s Dylan Matthews:
https://www.vox.com/2015/9/4/9258149/syria-refugee-humanitarian-intervention
robro, at 26, yes, you’re right. That’s a good point. It was an election in name only, but since the results were recognized around the world, the fact that the “election” was unfair doesn’t weigh much in the legal balance. Thanks for pointing out the ludicrous nature of that “election.”
Reaction from Saudi Arabia:
Jordan called Trump’s move “necessary and appropriate.”
Reaction from Israel:
Reaction from Canada:
Reaction from the United Kingdom:
Trump needed this diversion which makes everything we have been fed, suspicious. It feels good to retaliate so his poll numbers should spike.
Logic might say that we should have bombed the Sandy Hook shooter’s home. Or bombed the manufacturing plant the gun came from. THAT would have sent a message!
We summed up the carnage of WW2 by saying ‘never again’. It should have been; ‘you ain’t seen nothing yet’.
So the Donald has just committed a blatant act of war against Syria. A spectacular gesture that probably has accomplished nothing except pissing off the Syrians and Russians and Iranians even more than they already were.
The only coherent policy I have been able to attribute to the USA in this ongoing horror-show is the policy of turning the Arab-speaking Middle-East into a conglomeration of failed states, terrorist groups and petty warlords. It seems to be doing well so far.
The serious problem with getting rid of Assad is that there is no believable political alternative to him. Bingo, depose Assad and Syria becomes another Libya or Somalia or Afghanistan.
While I don’t think Assad is up there with Omar Al Bashir of the Sudan as a total monster, , we would be well rid of him except without some figure head to hold Syria together we just get a continuation of the ongoing wars amongst the various “rebel” groups, more deaths, more refugees and more budding terrorists.
This, to me, seems the reason Russia in in this débâcle. I doubt that Putin has a lot of affection for Assad but he does not want another failed state so close to his borders.
Trump’s handlers need to keep him away from Fox News.
Microraptor:
Yeah, me.
Within a week of being sworn in as president, Trump signed an executive order that included this:
Wonder if Putin wishes he let Hillary win. No doubt there will be more erratic behaviour to come from the hair piece in chief. Found out today that over 900,000 Americans were wounded in the Iraq war. If Drumpf thinks he can order boots on ground then he’ll probably lose the presidency.
Comments concerning the issue of legality:
Slate link
More detail from Joshua Keating’s article in Slate:
From the New York Times, September 8, 2013:
From Joshua Keating:
Russian government – fascist criminal liars murderers and hypocrites.
It is amusing how the Alt-Right clique is appalled at Trump’s actions, right in step-with Russia. All-in-all the Right Wing bloc seems quite fragmented: Alt-Right, Freedom Caucus, Tea Party, main stream Republicans, the Trump clan, the Wall Street cabal, and Religious Wackos, and on and on. Emphasis on the seems part, because I don’t trust appearances very much.
Microraptor @ #29
Of course, and a host of other flubs, like AHCA and the travel bans. At the same time, drive up gas prices, destabilize markets, and so on. I don’t put anything past these guys. Much like Assad, they really don’t give a shit who gets hurt as long as they gain and hold power, and the wealth that comes with it.
I realize this is drifting into irrational conspiracy theories, but a war between Putin and Trump over Syria might be right up the oligarchies ally. I’m reminded of 1984 almost every day.
Creepnovich said…
Hmmm…who could those “sources” be telling this guy confidential security information before the strikes began, much less before the story broke. According to the NYT report the first missiles struck around 8:30pm Eastern time. (Al Jazeera reported that the strikes started at 3:45 am Friday morning Syrian time, which is just a few minutes later.) Clearly he was pre-warned, which he admits when he says “planned for tonight.”
By the way, the Wikipedia article says that Trump was acting under the War Powers Act of 1973 and that the administration briefed “over 24 members of Congress…at the time.” Also, several foreign countries were notified including Canada, Australia, and Russia.
Meanwhile, Trump has sent a lot of troops into Syria and Iraq, increasing the chances of a direct conflict with Russia.
Where nothing could possibly go wrong. Go wrong. Go wrong…
Oh well, maybe I’ll be on shift with that cop that is one of the guards for my building, who was a Bernie supporter and voted for Trump, rather than for Hillary, just as the missiles begin detonating around Barksdale AFB.
“Still hoping that he’ll do better, he’s his better”.
The POSSLQ sent me the latest David Brooks editorial. Nothing to do with Syria, but very amusing. It’ll take your mind off the stress of war.
According to this piece from Agence France Press (at Raw Story), “Source: Syria was warned of impending attack ‘hours’ before US missile strike”.
And <a href="this report" (a Raw Story writer citing a Reuters report) claims "Warplanes from Syrian base hit by US just carried out airstrikes in Homs".
So far, it looks like the whole thing adds up to militarily meaningless political theater, plus the usual collateral damage and ominous implications. On the exact 100th anniversary of the US hurling itself into another already-ongoing gigantic overseas bloodbath…
Oops @ my # 43 – here’s the missing link from the 2nd ‘graf: http://www.rawstory.com/2017/04/warplanes-from-syrian-base-hit-by-us-just-carried-out-airstrikes-in-homs/
FTFY
Yes, in addition to Caine@34, robro@39, me. How successful it has been is evident even on this thread (ajbjasus@1, starfleetdude@8). $100,000,000 (the reported cost of the cruise missiles) could have saved a considerable number of “beautiful babies”.
But the USA has already been directly involved in Syria, with “special forces” boots on the ground and huge numbers of airstrikes. And the intervention in WWI was prompted by Germany resuming unrestricted submarine warfare – seriously interfering with American naval commerce – and encouraging Mexico to attack the USA (the Zimmerman telegram).
Trump is suddenly very popular among a highly unexpected demographic. Soros continues to invest in popcorn futures.
Interestingly, the base was evacuated of personnel and equipment before the missile strike, indicating that the Syrian government was warned.
So, who told the Russians? The Traitor in Chief or one of his traitorous comrades?