(Click on Image to Enlarge)
ABC News: What's changed 1 year after US missile strikes in Syria
Exactly one year ago, on April 6, 2017, between 8:40 and 8:50 p.m. EDT, 59 U.S. Tomahawk missiles rained down on a Syrian airbase.
The missiles -- launched from U.S. Navy destroyers in the Mediterranean Sea -- were the Trump administration's direct response to a Syrian sarin gas attack the U.S. says was perpetrated by Syria's President Bashar al-Assad days earlier that killed more than 100 Syrian men, women, and children.
President Donald Trump said the strike was in the “vital national security interests” of the U.S. -- a massive response meant to send a message to Assad never to use chemical weapons on his own people ever again. Assad has always denied using them.
A year later, in its push to retake rebel-held areas in western Syria, the Assad regime has continued to bomb and unleash chemical weapons the U.S. says, but the Trump administration has not been nearly as vocal in its criticism as it was after the attack on Khan Sheikhoun.
Meanwhile, the Assad regime finds itself in a stronger position militarily in western Syria with help from Iranian and Russian forces. On the opposite side of the country, American-backed Kurdish and Arab forces are on the verge of defeating ISIS on the battlefield.
But what comes next after an ISIS defeat?
Read more ....
WNU Editor: There were many reasons why President Obama originally ordered U.S. forces to enter Syria and why President Trump made the decision to continue with the policy .... but the primary reason has always remained the same .... the defeat of the Islamic State. What has changed since that April 6, 2017 missile barrage .... a lot. The Islamic State has lost its caliphate, the Syrian rebels have been defeated with the exception of their stronghold in Idlib Province, and there are now many countries directly involved in the Syrian conflict .... the U.S. included. As for the upcoming year .... your guess is as good as mine on what will be the state of affairs in Syria in 2019.
Update: Now this is an understatement .... Mattis on Syria: 'We'll work all this out' (AFP).
7 comments:
So many biased articles still pushing false narratives especially knowing now that those chemical attacks were were staged by rebels again
evidence? NONE
We also entered specically to topple Assad...Trump wants to cut and run in compliance with Russian interests...our Pentagon tells him it is dead wrong to leave now for any reason since ISIS remains a threat...so
Trump confuses all with wavering
As He Promised, Trump Will Gift Syria to Putin
"There’s obviously an argument that can be made for taking our troops out of Syria, or out of the Middle East in general. But Trump isn’t making those arguments. I am not going to give him the benefit of the doubt on this. He’s not a peacenik. He’s not worried about the cost in dollars or lives of staying or going." - Rag Monthly
Never heard of the rag before, but then I do not belong to that church.
"He’s not worried about the cost in dollars or lives of staying or going."
You do not have to make that argument. It is all very simple. If the Dim-o-craps and the MSM are not for it, then they are against it. Not only will they be against it, but they will make your life Hell. They will work feverishly funded by big donors like Soros and others to take power based on it as an election issue.
It is a given. At this point is not something that has to be proven. It is an axiom.
So it does not have to be stated or proven. You don't waste your breath, but you do paint the Left.
Obama would not save even one small Kurdish town, Kobane, until the F_CKER was forced to by public opinion. IPSO FACT, he would not have stayed either.
"More Than a Battle, Kobani Is a Publicity War" - New York Slime
Obama let the hinterlands of Kobane, its support network, fall.
Then he took it back 4 months later, because the news reports justly made him look like an ___!
Maybe because we had a 'yuge' air force, spec ops and other assets we should not have let Kobane start toppling in the 1st place?
Just a thought, we had been in Syria for over a year at that point.
Maybe we rushed "The One" and should have given him another 2 years for some deep thinking.
"After keeping his promise to avoid American involvement in extended wars for nearly six years, President Obama on Monday began a military engagement ..." - Wa-Poo
So the Wa-Poo starts with an inoculazing sentence to allay the cognitive dissonance of the faithful.
1) How does R2P work well when you allow a conflict to get bad, to snowball. Do you save more lives or fewer lives?
2) Is R2P more effective, when you break the Pottery Barn Rule?
Seriously, is it better to break a country like Libya and move on (crap and fly off like a sea gull) than to be in an extended war?
Well there might be an extended war, but at least it is not "your" extended war.
So Obama, "The One", did not break his promise to get involved in extended wars, but there was an extended war that we got involved in.
This is an important distinction and the Wa-Poo wants us to know it.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/for-obama-a-swift-leap-from-no-strategy-to-a-full-battle-plan-for-islamic-state/2014/09/27/4e700f02-45be-11e4-b47c-f5889e061e5f_story.html?utm_term=.a666858b8f45
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pottery_Barn_rule
I get it now!
You can't walk away from 25 million people (Iraq), but you can walk away from 6 million people (Libya).
It is the liberal math of R2P.
"Secretary of State Colin Powell told this president [Bush] the Pottery Barn rule: If you break it, you fix it. Now, if you break it, you made a mistake. It's the wrong thing to do. But you own it. And then you've got to fix it and do something with it. Now that's what we have to do."
- "Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry cited the rule and attributed it to Powell"
John Kerry never lies and never engages in corruption by proxy.
""You are going to be the proud owner of 25 million people," he told the president."
- Bob Woodward
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pottery_Barn_rule
Post a Comment