Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Breaking: US Navy Fires More Than 50 Tomahawk Missiles into Syria
NBC News: US military has launched more than 50 missile strikes on al-Shayrat military airfield near Homs, Syria
— Jesse Rodriguez (@JesseRodriguez) April 7, 2017
NBC News: Only tomahawks missiles fired, no fixed wing aircraft involved
— Jesse Rodriguez (@JesseRodriguez) April 7, 2017
Full story from the Washington Post:
The U.S. military launched approximately 50 cruise missiles at a Syrian military airfield late on Thursday, in the first direct American assault on the government of President Bashar al-Assad since that country’s civil war began six years ago.
The operation, which the Trump administration authorized in retaliation for a chemical attack killing scores of civilians this week, dramatically expands U.S. military involvement in Syria and exposes the United States to heightened risk of direct confrontation with Russia and Iran, both backing Assad in his attempt to crush his opposition.
The attack may put hundreds of American troops now stationed in Syria in greater danger. They are advising local forces in advance of a major assault on the Syrian city of Raqqa, the Islamic State’s de facto capital.
The decision to strike follows 48 hours of intense deliberations by U.S. officials, and represents a significant break with the previous administration’s reluctance to wade militarily into the Syrian civil war and shift any focus from the campaign against the Islamic State.
Senior White House officials met on the issue of Syria Wednesday evening in a session that lasted into early Thursday, and Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Army Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster, the national security adviser, have communicated repeatedly since Tuesday’s chemical attack, the officials said.
President Donald Trump is scheduled to make a statement tonight.
PALM BEACH, Fla. (AP) _ President Donald Trump says strike on Syria in the `vital national security interest' of the United States.
— Ken Thomas (@KThomasDC) April 7, 2017
Published in Foreign Policy, Military, Politics
BREAKING: Trump calls on 'civilized nations' to join U.S. in 'seeking to end the slaughter and bloodshed in Syria.'
— The Associated Press (@AP) April 7, 2017
Donald Trump just screwed up, Big League. And this is from a Trump supporter.
Any idea where they landed, Jon? That’s kind of the important part. I hope we didn’t just hit some Russians. That could be a problem.
Well, I hope the intel agencies were accurate in blaming this on Assad, and those chemical weapons stores are really there.
Found this on NBC:
Two U.S. warships in the Mediterranean Sea fired at least 50 Tomahawk missiles intended for a single target — Ash Sha’irat in Homs province in western Syria, the officials said. That’s the airfield from which the United States believes the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad fired the banned weapons.
There was no immediate word on casualties. U.S. officials told NBC News that people were not targeted and that aircraft and infrastructure at the site, including the runway, were hit.
the story was written “by Courtney Kube, Alex Johnson and Hallie Jackson”. I’ll need to look them up. Never heard of them.
This is shot across the bow, not a declaration of war. This tells Assad that if he slips up again, there will be dire consequences. The President said this attack crossed the line, and unlike Obama, Trump meant it.
DoD is reporting that the target is Shayrat Airfield, which is the base from which the chemical weapons strike came.
All the articles that came out today made this the first and the most plausible response from the administration.
Is this a pinprick that won’t upset Assad supporting Russia?
Is this legitimate damage to Assad’s side in the Civil War, that is almost certain not to please Russia?
This is justified. You’re not allowed to use chemical weapons in war, especially against civilians. Also, does anyone really think ceding the Middle East to Iran and Russia is a good idea? We have vital interests in the Middle East. President Trump represents more than just the isolationists in his core base of support. I would like to know what the objectives are though.
If you’re going to do it, that’s how it should be done. Syria and the rest of the world (and I don’t give a hoot about any of them) can’t make any reasonable claim that the US was merely being opportunistic. Maybe pilots at the next Syrian airbase will hesitate the next time they are ordered to take part in such a mission.
“Democrats immediately rushed to the nearest microphone they could find and demanded to know if this was related to the Russian Interference in last November’s election. John McCain called for a Special Investigator to see if Trump was a jerk or not. Rand Paul began pounding on doors in the Capital building, demanding to see the plans for this missile strike and any future missile strikes. Charles Schumer declared that this was the most Conservative missile strike in US history.”
This isn’t a pinprick. 50 Tomahawks at one of Assad’s biggest air bases is going to cause some hurt. It is even possible the attack cracked open some of the armories containing sarin. (If so, I would not cry over the damage caused.) I doubt there will be much operational there tomorrow.
Will it please Russia? Probably not. Russia, especially under Putin, plays the philosophy of push in the bayonet. If you strike something soft, push further. If you hit steel, withdraw. Most of what Putin has gained was due to bluff and the perception the US would roll over and play dead. I don’t think Putin will be happy, but I don’t think he will be putting any chips on his shoulder and daring Trump to knock it off.
Similarly, I think the message Assad will take (if he is smart) is don’t pull the big dog’s tail again. The next rounds could be aimed at his palace.
After 8 years of empty threats, now … Strength.
And . . . Russia’s reaction.
So long as this isn’t the first move in the neoconservative “Syria is my Stratego set” dream articulated by Bret Stephens on the flagship, what’s the objection.
Dictators behave abominably: break their stuff. I’m fine with Reagan-on-Gaddafi action as well.
So he went from “weird, pro-Russia isolationist” to “quasi-Neocon who made the Russians blink” in about 70 days.
Who would have predicted that?
Two maps, American troops are on the outskirts of Raqqa, approximately 200 miles from the airstrikes.
Gaddafi’s terrorists killed US soldiers, targeting them in a Berlin disco. What did Syria do to us?
50+ Tomahawks, about 50K pounds of explosives.
Wonder how little Kim the Nork is feeling tonight?
Yeah, that airbase is FUBAR.
Oh yeah, happy 100 th anniversary of US entering WW1…
Chem weapons cross a line.
Bring back shock and awe.
It’s possible not everyone shares your view as to the scope of the term “us.”
Now, matters are worse.
Top comment on NYT by user “Bejay”:
Anyways, I don’t know how I feel about this yet. I’ll feel a lot better (hopefully) after hearing Mattis speak and what some foreign reactions are.
It seems reasonable to me.
I wonder about consistency. A “war crime” is really just whatever the most powerful country/alliance currently policing the world won’t tolerate. But hasn’t Russia already committed a few in the region, carpet bombing civilian areas with impunity? Will we police Russia or only Assad?
I think we all agree on that. I would prefer to see some proof that this wasn’t a False Flag before we start getting killed in that hellhole.
If you mean that I don’t consider Syrians… of any age… “us”, then you’d be right.
Ok, just to play devils advocate, why is that, so much worse then this