What would you do in Syria

[Dill]

(04-08-2017, 06:11 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Oh. OK. They could (you most likely meant "why did they not" or that could just be my alternate impression) follow the UN route, they could also strike without their permission as we have Troops on the ground there and The Leader of that country has shown he has no problem employing chemical weapons. 

We choose option B as being in the best interest of our National Security and most of the civilized world has applauded the choice. 

No one doubts the US has the capacity to strike without UN permission. It is not a matter of "can" but of "ought". Does the US want to signal the world that the most powerful military on earth does what it wants when it wants, or does it want to signal that it respects rule of law, including international law, and premises military action on precedent, diplomacy and consensus rather than the impulse of this or that president? 

Let's say you are correct and that Trump and his NSC determined "option B" as in the interest of our national security.

Do you see a pathway or chain of events leading from a gas attack on Syrian civilians all the way to damage of US interests--lives, property, business, profits, either at home or abroad? Even a potential one?

I am guessing that "civilized" means US allies here. Though it is still not clear that most of the civilized world is applauding, I am pretty sure most would applaud action through the UN as well. France and Germany say the attacks were "understandable." Let's check that international response again in two/three weeks. 

Also if you take international approval/disapproval as a standard for evaluating Trump's foreign policy, I hope that you will use that standard consistently. Trumpsters say it doesn't matter what "they" think when it comes to US foreign policy. (Though you have been a consistent defender of Trump, I don't consider you a Trumpster (a true believer who voted for the guy) .)

Perhaps we share some common ground, here, as I do think international approval is one standard for evaluating US foreign policy.