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.
Update:
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, PoliticsBREAKING: 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
@jlock … see their statement and link at comment #86 …
Moderator Note:
Personal attack. Please stick to the merits of the argument.You know you can always go back home if you do not care for how we conduct our business.If that’s the case there are another couple dozen countries we need to lob cruise missiles at.
The answer to the refugee crisis is to prevent refugees from being created.
I am home.
Put another way: As long as it is America spending her (possible) blood and fortune in some far away land, I’m happy!
Why not target Assad himself? He doesn’t give a rat’s rear end about his cannon fodder. But if all of his palaces were reduced to deep holes in the ground, that would have an affect. Particularly if I was in one of them.
Assad has been doing this for years with no consequences, and the world community did little. Also, Russia needs to decide who it wants to side with, the thugs of the world or the civilized international community – it can’t be both. I think this attack is also a request for them to decide.
Regime change hasn’t worked well for us in the past but it would be nice in his case. Syrians have no country, no leader. They just want their country back and to return to their homes and heritage. They have suffered for a long time.
A couple dozen countries have used chemical weapons on their own people, including children?
Yeah I saw that. I meant the people not Bibi.
They matter very much to me. Which is why I’m 100 percent in favor — in this case — of blowing stuff up. If Trump’s heart was changed by the appalling, nauseating sight of children who’ve been gassed to death, who knows — maybe it can be changed about refugees, too.
And if his heart had nothing to do with it — if this was an entirely cynical exercise in wagging the dog — I’m still thrilled that there’s one less airbase from which Syrian civilians can be tortured and killed.
Well done, President Trump. MAGA.
I’ll hand it to Trump — he criticized Obama on something we all agree was a **** up, and followed through on a threat. We all wait with baited breath, hoping to see it has a positive outcome that doesn’t result in boots-on-the-ground.
That is the only horror we must not allow children of God to suffer?
And from the looks of the comments here and on my FB feed filled with a spectrum of liberals — I will say the upside to any of this is that its still very good to know that the loud overture of war, whether it happens or not, still is the place where Liberals and Conservatives come together for America and her ideals.
Let’s pray we made the right move, for all those who suffer Assad’s demented wrath — and if we did hope it stymies at least a tenth of this partisan-BS political culture we have now.
I think a smarter move would have been to determine where Assad sleeps and drop 50 cruise missiles on him. Sort of make the point a little more personal.
I’m not seeing it Claire.
‘You can kill as many civilians as you want using barrel bombs and starvation, but not with sarin gas because that frightens the horses’ seems lacking in the hearts and minds department (ie the moral dimension of US foreign policy) – and is pretty (unflatteringly) revealing, without actually changing who controls what on the ground in Syria.
If Assad has plenty of other bases to fly barrel bomb missions from (he does) what’s the positive outcome?
Zafar here just perfectly summarized the anxious barking in the negative part of my head.
If you really want to make America great again, part of that is reclaiming our leadership role in the world, arguably the single worst thing Obama did while in office.
Is there any reason to think it would result in something better than in Iraq?
I have work to do so turning off all this news for a bit — and knowing that I can do that — I’ll pray for all those innocent in Syria and our siblings and children who lace their boots for America.
God Bless.
I’m not endorsing the theory here, but don’t forget that the rebels here include ISIS. I wouldn’t be surprised if they could pull it off.
On the other hand, they’d be just as likely to take credit for it…
I agree. Part of that is getting authorization for war as outlined in The Constitution.
Umm, which of President Bush’s strikes killed “hundreds of thousands” of civilians? I have no memory of this occurring under either President Bush, or in either Gulf War.
Last thing, this stuck in my head — in Military History — of all the conflicts and strategy I learned about (from a Marine who went into Academia) the most celebrated and detailed are the tough calls made by those willing to make them despite the huge unpopularity it caused. And sometimes the positive outcome wasn’t seen for months, years, and even centuries.
Arguing about this is where earnest prayer is necessary.
Re non existent WMD. Correct me if I mis-recall this …. But my recollection is that there was some pretty good -if under reported – evidence that Saddam ‘warehoused’ his chemical stockpiles with Assad. That that’s where Assad’s chemical weapons came from in the first place … Saddam never showed back up with his ‘hock’ ticket and they became Assad’s by default.
No?
If this strike was worth doing, and I think it was, then it was worth doing according to The Constitution.
I know that’s a popular view in some quarters, but if Saddam had the weapons he’d have used them in extremis (when he was being invaded and overthrown and forced to hide in some underground bunker) – not stored them with a deadly untrusted rival ‘ just in case’.
If he didn’t use them, it’s fairly convincing that he didn’t have them.
It’s a start.
I spent an endless day today with the Bureaucracy (getting my French Green-Card equivalent up-to-date — the amount of paperwork involved is beyond belief)* so I’m absolutely exhausted and probably shouldn’t try to make a cogent argument right now. But after I get a bit of sleep, I’ll vigorously defend what Trump just did. Which will be a new thing for me. I’m looking forward to it.
*Among other things, today I signed an affidavit, on my honor, that I will not practice polygamy on French soil. Seriously.
I’d rather be the world’s policeman who acted more like domestic police rather than “police” who commit manslaughter on a regular basis by raining bombs down on complexes and shrugging our shoulders at the civilian casualties since apparently the rules of morality change when governments fight each other.