Trump administration open to additional strikes on Syria - White House

[webfact]

Trump administration open to additional strikes on Syria - White House

REUTERS

 

FILE PHOTO: U.S. Navy guided-missile destroyer USS Porter (DDG 78) conducts strike operations while in the Mediterranean Sea which U.S. Defense Department said was a part of cruise missile strike against Syria on April 7, 2017. Ford Williams/Courtesy U.S. Navy/Handout via REUTERS/File Photo

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump is open to authorizing additional strikes on Syria if its government uses chemical weapons again or deploys barrel bombs in the country, the White House said on Monday.

 

"The sight of people being gassed and blown away by barrel bombs ensures that if we see this kind of action again, we hold open the possibility of future action," White House spokesman Sean Spicer told reporters.

 

"If you gas a baby, if you put a barrel bomb in to innocent people ... you will see a response from this president."

 

Barrel bombs are oil drums or cylinders packed with explosives and shrapnel.

 

Trump ordered a cruise missile strike on Syria's Shayrat air base last week in response to what his administration and U.S. allies say was a poison gas attack by Syria's military in which scores of civilians, including many children, died.

 

Spicer said later his mention of barrel bombs as a potential trigger for further action by the United States did not reflect a change in position.

 

"Nothing has changed in our posture," he said by email.

 

"The president retains the option to act in Syria against the Assad regime whenever it is in the national interest, as was determined following that government's use of chemical weapons against its own citizens. And as the president has repeatedly made clear, he will not be telegraphing his military responses."

 

(Reporting by Jeff Mason; writing by Ayesha Rascoe; Editing by Jonathan Oatis and James Dalgleish)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-04-11

[darksidedog]

Its about time. Assad has had it all his way since the Russians joined the fray. About time Assad found out he can't just recklessly murder his own countrymen without there being a price.

[iReason]

Trump floats five Syria policies in 10 days

 

‘Barrel bombs’

"Press secretary Sean Spicer said people were “blown away by barrel bombs” in Syria and “if we see this kind of action again, we hold open the possibility of future action.”

 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2017/apr/10/donald-trump-syria-policies-white-house

 

Barrel bombs?

Edited April 11, 2017 by iReason

[Ramen087]

Just love that final paragraph.  The ability and willingness to use military force appropriately is the only way to help Assad understand he may fooled the USA's leader once regarding chemical weapons, but he won't do it twice. 

[malibukid]

crazy is something Putin can understand. keep them guessing.

[boomerangutang]

2 hours ago, darksidedog said:

Its about time. Assad has had it all his way since the Russians joined the fray. About time Assad found out he can't just recklessly murder his own countrymen without there being a price.

                      One of my ex-wives used to have a way of disciplining our baby boy.  When the boy bit her, the mom would bite him back.  The boy cried.  It worked.  However, I think a better way to discipline the kid was to caution him sternly with words.

 

              Trump and Tillerson are acting the same as the mom in that comparison.  However, looking at history (VN, Iraq II, Guatemala, Chile, Nicaragua, Cuba, to name a few) ......knee jerk responsive force doesn't get the required result.    More often than not, it sucks the US into a tit for tat quagmire that can last for decades, and results in filled body-bags being shipped back to the homeland.   It also results in regime-change ....within the US.

[boomerangutang]

7 minutes ago, malibukid said:

crazy is something Putin can understand. keep them guessing.

It sounds like you're encouraging Fat Boy Kim.

[iReason]

Just now, Ramen087 said:

Just love that final paragraph.  The ability and willingness to use military force appropriately is the only way to help Assad understand he may fooled the USA's leader once regarding chemical weapons, but he won't do it twice. 

18 Times Donald Trump Said the U.S. Shouldn't Bomb Syria

 

http://time.com/4730219/syria-missile-attack-donald-trump-tweets/

Edited April 11, 2017 by iReason

[ezzra]

Mr. Trump please do the fat little runt of N. Korea next, and install

the fear of god in this dictator before he dose something so bad

that no one will be able to fix.... 

[ilostmypassword]

4 minutes ago, ezzra said:

Mr. Trump please do the fat little runt of N. Korea next, and install

the fear of god in this dictator before he dose something so bad

that no one will be able to fix.... 

You mean do what he did to Assad? Wow, that is some threat!

[Roadman]

1 hour ago, boomerangutang said:

                      One of my ex-wives used to have a way of disciplining our baby boy.  When the boy bit her, the mom would bite him back.  The boy cried.  It worked.  However, I think a better way to discipline the kid was to caution him sternly with words.

 

              Trump and Tillerson are acting the same as the mom in that comparison.  However, looking at history (VN, Iraq II, Guatemala, Chile, Nicaragua, Cuba, to name a few) ......knee jerk responsive force doesn't get the required result.    More often than not, it sucks the US into a tit for tat quagmire that can last for decades, and results in filled body-bags being shipped back to the homeland.   It also results in regime-change ....within the US.

Obama used the ''stern words'' and that did not work. Possibly relying on the pathetic UN to remove all of Assads chemical weapons was not fair on Obama in that instance. 

I do not see where the body bags are going to come from. Trump is carrying out the same policy as Obama with the use of certain weapons not being tolerated and if so then a US response fore coming. It is obvious as it will be with the fat little Korean boy that it will be via missiles and not feet on the ground. It would be fair to say that the US has learnt that Americans dont want body bags and the western world as a whole are sick of supporting a vengeance seeking  US in invading countries, especially where it is going to cause more chaos than a current hard line regime is applying. And precision GPS guided missiles will achieve their objectives as much as is required as much as the Russians and Chinese want to jump up and down and threaten the US. At the end of the day the reality is the US has the best toys and everyone including Putin know that.

[boomerangutang]

                 The US is not the only country which can launch missiles over national borders.  It has the largest arsenal, but might doesn't always = victory.  Look at the VN or Iraq II wars for precedence.

 

                    There are any number of unforeseen consequences of launching military strikes against another country.   Similar to how the USN Pueblo was taken by the N.Koreans.   There are a number of retaliatory things Assad can do to US personnel and equipment, if he so chooses.   He could easily hire an armed faction to kill Americans in Syria, for example.  When the smoke clears, Assad could say, "Oh, American soldiers were killed?  What a pity.  Who did it?"

 

              If Trump wants to send a stern message to Assad, he can try convening with UN members or with Congress and hammer out a policy.  Right now, Trumpsters have no policy.  It's just reactionary shoot-from-the-hip.   Diplomacy and sanctions may not be very effective, but probably accomplish more than spending $100 million to damage a few out-dated planes - which Russia will replace with better models.     

 

 

 

[ncc1701d]

If the strikes are as ineffective as the last ones, the Syrians have nothing to worry about.

[IMA_FARANG]

Had the U.K. joined the U.S. back in 2013 in strikes on Assad at the time one can not say what the state of play would have been in Syria today.

Who can say?

 

 

Edited April 11, 2017 by IMA_FARANG
Added a coment

[boomerangutang]

41 minutes ago, M71 said:

How many here actually believe the Assad murdered his own people?

It was an obvious False Flag attack used as an excuse to invade Syria no different to Iraq and Libya - is anyone really stupid enough to believe the official story.

I can believe Assad murdered Syrians.  It's known Assad is cruel thug, but that doesn't also make him a very stupid man.  

 

Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews are among several other prominent newscasters who believe the recent events in Syria are a ploy hatched by Trumpsters & possibly also Putin.  Both have things to gain.

 

Trump (and to a lesser degree, Putin) gain by further diverting attention from the Russia-Trump investigation.

Putin gets to sell more armaments to Syria

Trump gains stature by appearing to be a tough guy, not shy about using force.  

 

Generally, leaders look good when they're embarking on a war.  For example, when W Bush went head first into Iraq II, most Americans including Trump were in favor of it.  It's only later, when grim facts become clear, that war-making can become problematic for the head man's image.

[sujoop]

4 hours ago, iReason said:

4 hours ago, Ramen087 said:

Just love that final paragraph.  The ability and willingness to use military force appropriately is the only way to help Assad understand he may fooled the USA's leader once regarding chemical weapons, but he won't do it twice. 

18 Times Donald Trump Said the U.S. Shouldn't Bomb Syria

 

http://time.com/4730219/syria-missile-attack-donald-trump-tweets/

Edited 4 hours ago by iReason

Of course that was before Trump became President with the worst ever term approval ratings historically (and plummeting, see chart below) thus badly needing to find a way to boost his abysmal #s and also badly needing a change of perception about being in bed with Putin. How-to 'quick fix' all that? Hmmm....

Trump Job Approval ratings chart:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trump_job_approval-6179.html#polls

 

 

 

 

Edited April 11, 2017 by sujoop

[sujoop]

QUOTE: "And as the president has repeatedly made clear, he will not be telegraphing his military responses "

(well, perhaps only to Russia, in advance, like this time - although no doubt Putin was already WELL aware)

 

 

Edited April 11, 2017 by sujoop

[Ijustcashier]

This has been good for trump. If anything it has diverted attention away from a very rocky start

[Thaidream]

Of course it's good for Trump. It has diverted the media and the Congress away from the investigation into Russia's connection to get Trump elected President. However, the question lingers- what did Trump know and when did he know and did Russia indeed influence the American election to get Trump elected and if so, why?  These questions need answers

If Trump indeed ordered the bombing of Syria to cause a diversion from these investigations- he is indeed  clearly immoral and unethical. 

 

The right wing news media thumping their chests with the refrain 'America is back' shows how completely ridiculous the narrative has become. Donald Trump could have gone to the United Nations with absolute proof that Syria launched a chemical attack and with Russian complicity and garnered Worldwide support by laying out the evidence for everyone to see. Instead he wanted the bombs to fall - so he could thump his own chest.

 

His diversion tactics will eventually fail because the American media will eventually find the proof of a Russian-Trump conspiracy and Trump will be impeached. Someone will talk- they always do...

[sujoop]

It’s Desperation Time: Trump Wags The Dog:
'move has the added value of making Trump look like he is getting tough with Russia'

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/is-trump-wagging-the-dog_us_58e7040de4b0acd784ca56ee

 

BLOOMBERG  called it early:
'Wag the Dog' for the Age of Trump

Suggestion Three: Invade something! (Trump) was the "bomb the hell out of them" candidate. How can he do this without involving a lot of innocent people or harming the interests of the U.S.? Solution: Find someplace out of the way... (and one might add, with complicit parties;)

(tweet origin noted in Bloomberg link)

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-12-13/-wag-the-dog-for-the-age-of-trump

 

Larger concern is this diversion only offers a temporary fix, diversion & bump for Trump. Thus, a much BIGGER and far more dangerous diversion will be required after the vacuous red-meat euphoria radiating from his base gives way to renewed investigations of Trump's Whitehouse & Russian complicity.

Edited April 11, 2017 by sujoop

[elgordo38]

I wonder who blinks first??

[boomerangutang]

                        Trump already knew that dropping bombs would gain him popularity.  Now it's clear as day.  When will he drop some bombs on Pyongyang or an Iranian military installation?  ......perhaps when his popularity numbers tank to the teens(?), ......or when he's about to be subpoenaed to answer questions in front of an investigative committee?   

 

[ilostmypassword]

8 hours ago, IMA_FARANG said:

Had the U.K. joined the U.S. back in 2013 in strikes on Assad at the time one can not say what the state of play would have been in Syria today.

Who can say?

 

 

ARE TRUMP AND TILLERSON LETTING SYRIA’S ASSAD OFF THE HOOK?

Who can say what Assad would or wouldn't have done had Tillerson and Haley not said the following?

"Syria-watchers, including members of the United States Senate, reacted critically to statements by Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley about the Trump administration’s position on the status of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

In Ankara on March 30, Tillerson commented that Assad’s long-term status “will be decided by the Syrian people.” On the same day, in New York, Haley stated “our priority is no longer to sit there and focus on getting Assad out.”

http://www.newsweek.com/are-trump-and-tillerson-letting-syrias-assad-hook-578571

[Scott]

A troll post has been removed.  

 

[M71]

16 hours ago, boomerangutang said:

I can believe Assad murdered Syrians.  It's known Assad is cruel thug, but that doesn't also make him a very stupid man.  

 

Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews are among several other prominent newscasters who believe the recent events in Syria are a ploy hatched by Trumpsters & possibly also Putin.  Both have things to gain.

 

Trump (and to a lesser degree, Putin) gain by further diverting attention from the Russia-Trump investigation.

Putin gets to sell more armaments to Syria

Trump gains stature by appearing to be a tough guy, not shy about using force.  

 

Generally, leaders look good when they're embarking on a war.  For example, when W Bush went head first into Iraq II, most Americans including Trump were in favor of it.  It's only later, when grim facts become clear, that war-making can become problematic for the head man's image.

 

What you are say regarding Trump and Putin is correct yes war is about money and power - certainly not about saving lives. Bombing people to save their lives is an obvious oxymoron. This ex US Marine speaking about Syria with a Washington official sums it up eloquently. 2 minutes ::

 

 

 

 

[jerojero]

So what happened to the love-fest Trump had for Putin a mere month or two ago? Trump, king of flip-flops.

[Ramen087]

On ‎4‎/‎11‎/‎2017 at 1:29 PM, sujoop said:

Of course that was before Trump became President with the worst ever term approval ratings historically (and plummeting, see chart below) thus badly needing to find a way to boost his abysmal #s and also badly needing a change of perception about being in bed with Putin. How-to 'quick fix' all that? Hmmm....

Trump Job Approval ratings chart:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trump_job_approval-6179.html#polls

Polls were proved unreliable at best and can be more accurately described as worthless given the outcome of the presidential election, which had Ms. Clinton winning convincingly. Public approval polls have zero influence on the effectiveness of a president within the political structure or on the successful implementation of policy. Trump is the president and it takes time to see if policies bear fruit. Your post about job approval from the public means nothing;  even midterm elections are not an issue at this point. This includes the policy as listed in the thread headline, which could mean more military action against Assad and his regime.

Edited April 13, 2017 by Ramen087

[Ramen087]

On ‎4‎/‎12‎/‎2017 at 6:26 AM, jerojero said:

So what happened to the love-fest Trump had for Putin a mere month or two ago? Trump, king of flip-flops.

There never was a lovefest or a bromance... there was campaign rhetoric.  President Trump is a good negotiator and knows how to play opossum very well.  Flip flops are worn on your feet; it doesn't apply in this case.  The strike showed Assad and Put in that Trump needs to be taken seriously and the trust previously placed in Assad by claiming all chemical weapons are gone won't be tolerated any more  Situationally, the strike made sure both leaders know Trump is a serious man.

Edited April 13, 2017 by Ramen087

[iReason]