Syria Response - Appropriate and Deliberate?

The atrocities that occurred in the Syrian chemical weapon attack were horrific and cannot be allowed to go unpunished.  Were the military strikes the right response?  I’m not a military man and don’t pretend to know all of the details of the situation, but it does look like the site targeted was likely the best possible option for such an operation and it did deliver a message.  However, if your opinion of the president has somehow become more positive after this predictable response, then that is the real surprise.  Even if this was the best response, when you scrutinize the questions why, when, how, and what next you should be a little skeptical.  Take a step back from the sensational coverage and take a critical look at the facts.

·         First, in his typical childish fashion, one of the president’s first statements after the attack was to blame President Obama and past administrations for what happened.  Really?  If you want to make America great again, start by recognizing the efforts of those leaders that came before you, even if you disagree, and know your history.

o   Speaking of President Obama, remember that he wanted to strike against Syria and Trump was one of the most vocal against him doing so, especially without congressional approval.  So, you can’t now fault the guy for listening to you, trying to get said approval, and then trying for a more diplomatic solution when he wasn’t going to get that approval.

o   Secondly on this point, whereas the president blamed Obama, the rest of the leaders involved are now placing the blame on Russia and Assad, where it should be, with their failure to uphold their end of the bargain.

THE WHY and WHEN

·         Are you really gullible enough to believe that the pictures from this attack changed the president’s view?

o   In 2013 he HAD to have witnessed similar, and possibly worse, horrific scenes when he very publicly and vociferously told Obama that it would be a mistake to strike Syria

§  "What I am saying is stay out of Syria," he tweeted Sept. 3, 2013.

§  And, then on Sept. 5, 2013, he wrote, "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!"

o   So, if that’s the case, then why would his response now be a 180 degree shift?  He spoke the words people wanted to hear, saying that he was moved by the pictures now and it’s changed his attitude.  But, that drastic a shift just doesn’t make sense to me when you look at the whole picture.  He knew it would play well with the majority and he gets to play tough guy.

·         There are multiple factors that made this response predictable:

o   First, knowing his temperament and psychology, as soon as the first reporter asked the question, “What are you going to do about it?” I immediately said that there were going to be bombs dropped.  Many, many people said that he would use his bombs at the first chance he got and he proved them correct.

o    Then, there’s this beauty that demonstrates clearly how he thinks,  “Now that Obama’s poll numbers are in tailspin – watch for him to launch a strike in Libya or Iran.  He is desperate.” 10/09/12

o   In addition, he has to find a way to justify the large increase in defense spending that he has been proposing and these conflicts just so happen to give him leverage for justification.

o   With the talk about Russia being complicit in the chemical attack and their denouncement of the US's strike, the coverage of Russian interference in the election suddenly has taken a back seat.  A smart man once told me that there’s no such thing as coincidences.  I don’t believe that, but this is a pretty big one.

The HOW

·         No man is an island Entire of itself

o   “What will we get for bombing Syria besides more debt and a possible long term conflict? Obama needs Congressional approval.” Aug 29, 2013

o   Good idea, right?  The idea is that a single person should not be allowed to drag the country into conflict.  Then, why does this president think he gets a pass for doing that exact thing?

·         The best laid plans

o   As I said, I’m not a military man, but it seems to me that the president should be sure to have a solid follow-up plan, both short and long-term, for something this serious that his administration can clearly communicate.  Instead, it has been confusing and unconvincing leading many to wonder what the plan is.

WHAT NEXT

·         At first it looked like the president didn’t think things through in regards to Russia’s response, how the rebel groups would be affected, Assad’s likely response, what would come next, etc.  But, then you again look at his tweets in 2013 and you realize that he absolutely knows the potential consequences.

o   “We should stay the hell out of Syria, the "rebels" are just as bad as the current regime. WHAT WILL WE GET FOR OUR LIVES AND $ BILLIONS?ZERO” June 13, 2013

·         Sure, people are claiming victory saying that the strike sent a strong message.  Maybe it did.  If it stops the use of chemical weapons, that’s great.  On the other hand, that airfield was back in use less than 48 hours later and bombs were dropped on the same area that the chemical weapons were used on days later.  So, now Assad and the Russians know that they can kill people as long as they don’t use chemical weapons.  Wow.

·         The question that has been asked about Syrian refugees is a legitimate one.  How can you be so moved as to make such a strong statement for the Syrian people as to drop bombs within their borders, but not be willing to take in those trying to flee from those same atrocities?

·         Now there’s talk that Assad must go.  Yes, maybe he does.  But, the shift in how it is being talked about the last couple of days is scary and familiar.  We’ve learned that lesson in a very difficult way, let’s not repeat it.  Most familiar with the situation say that there would be a bloodbath if he were to be forced from power right now with worse parties likely to take over.  It's a very delicate and precarious situation that needs more than just guns and bombs.

·         The president has now made a public move to place ships off the coast of Korea and says he’s ready to act alone.  Once again, he’s trying to show his might with a lot of risk of provoking their unstable leader and putting many lives on the line.

Some are praising the moves.  Some are asking why he has taken a sudden turn from his America First policy that he touted.  But, those that look with unbiased eyes saw this coming.  This is a man who doesn’t believe in (or understand) science or regulations against corruption, but in the all mighty dollar and power by show of force.  Remember, he wanted a military parade at his inauguration!  It really isn’t an about face, but one that is in tune with his personality and feeding his power-hungry ego.  Let’s hope there are enough checks and balances to send successful messages without starting another war.

And, don't forget, this is the same president who stood up for a man accused of sexual harassment the week after declaring April sexual harassment awareness month.  Character and integrity mean a lot to me, as I hope it does for you.  What I ask is that if you agree with the response to Syria, don't be fooled about the reasons or let this one instance make you forget about everything else that has happened.