BeadleDeedle said: "Uncle Charlie, how did this action have any impact on stopping humanitarian atrocities? A practically empty airfield was bombed and according to reports it was used again within days. I don't understand supporting this action other than liking that something was bombed.
If nothing else is done, if there is no sustained strategy on how to handle Assad, if it is simply a stand alone action, then I don't disagree in and of itself, it will have little lasting impact. The point and I'm sure you don't need me to tell you, was to say to Assad, this time, it's your airfield. if you use chemical weapons again, we'll be back and the next time, it will be much worse. It was also to say to the Russians, we're not going to just sit idly by and let you be an accomplice to this. And lastly, it was also to say to the people there, someone cares, you're not alone. I truly wish Trump wasn't an incompetent buffoon and I had confidence he would be able to actually think through a strategy rather than just think this solves everything. I also wish I didn't think part of Trump's motivation was to change the story and to try to make himself popular. Hopefully he gets some good advice on what to do going forward. We'll see. In any event, I believe letting Assad's use of chemical weapons go unchallenged is not the answer. It only emboldens him and also perhaps more importantly, emboldens Putin who probably already feels too emboldened and that no one has the stones to stand up to him no matter what he chooses to annex next, least of all his best buddy Don.
I attended a photographic exhibit last year in Los Angeles on refugees. It portrayed a number of people who were forced to flee their countries in terror and followed them on their journey as they try to get resettled in Europe, the U.S. and elsewhere. The one message from the oral interviews that were shown will be seared in my brain forever "No one wants to be a refugee". Accepting them into the U.S. as they leave all their possessions, friends and family behind is a no-brainer in terms of what we and other countries can do. Helping to ensure they don't have to flee their country in the first place is a better solution if it can be achieved. I don't believe we should impose our standards on other countries and most should be left to govern themselves. But when international law is violated, action is required. If peaceful negotiations and reasoning don't work, then sometimes force is called for. It's not optimal but any student of history would tell you, sometimes it can't be avoided.
It's actually disgusting of him to call the gassed children "beautiful" while denying their parents the opportunity to save their children from being gassed BEFORE they are gassed.
Trump is actually saying that healthy Syrian children are not worth caring about but dying Syrian children somehow are. It's only their victim status that makes them beautiful to him.
And then the bombing does nothing to protect any more of them in the future.