This is a developing breaking story.
After Syria apparently launched chemical attacks against its own innocent civilians, President has quickly taken action.
From Fox News:
President Trump’s announcement from Miralago:
Here are some immediate reactions and commentary:
While we all condemn the atrocities in Syria, the United States was not attacked.
— Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) April 7, 2017
This attack was meant to maximize the element of surprise, not forecast it beforehand to give the world a chance to complain and taint the swift action. From the New York Times:
The speed with which the Trump administration responded — and remarks earlier in the day by American officials who said that options were still being considered — appeared intended to maximize the element of surprise and sharply contrasted with the methodical scrutiny of the use of force by the Obama administration.
This was a targeted response to the horrific terrorist attack against the Syrian people. From the Weekly Standard:
“I ordered a targeted military strike on airfield in Syria from which the chemical attack was launched,” President Trump said in a statement to reporters Thursday night. “It is in this vital national security interest of the United States to prevent and deter the spread and use of deadly chemical weapons.”
The strike, launched from ships in the Mediterranean Sea, reportedly targeted al-Shayrat airfield—the same location that the administration believes the Assad regime used to carry out its chemical attacks.
Rex Tillerson has some strong words for Russia. From NBC News:
Despite previous agreements, Tillerson said, Syria has not surrendered its chemical weapons stockpile.
“Clearly Russia has failed in its responsibility to deliver on that commitment” to supervise the surrender of those weapons, the secretary of state said. “Either Russia has been complicit or simply incompetent in its ability to deliver.”
Russia gave an unhappy response to Trump’s action. From Yahoo News:
Russia’s deputy U.N. envoy, Vladimir Safronkov, warned on Thursday of “negative consequences” if the United States carries out military strikes on Syria over a deadly toxic gas attack.
“We have to think about negative consequences, negative consequences, and all the responsibility if military action occurred will be on shoulders of those who initiated such doubtful and tragic enterprise,” Safronkov told reporters when asked about possible U.S. strikes.
Clearly Donald Trump was touched deeply, seeing the loss of children to a brutal dictator. Now he has sent a powerful message to other nations like North Korea who dare to threaten America and its interests.
What do you think? Was this military response appropriate to Syria’s horrific actions? Was it worth the possible risk of escalation to the Syrian situation and relations with Russia? Let us know in the comments below.