The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewRon Paul Archive
Trump’s Disastrous Syria Attack
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Over the weekend, President Trump celebrated firing more than 100 missiles into Syria by Tweeting, “Mission Accomplished!” They say if you cannot learn from history you are condemned to repeat it. So I guess we are repeating it.

We all remember that “Mission Accomplished” was the banner behind then-President Bush as he gloated aboard a US navy ship that the war in Iraq had been won. After his “victory,” however, some 4,000 US military personnel were killed, perhaps a million Iraqis were killed, and the country’s infrastructure and social fabric were so badly destroyed that they probably can never be repaired.

Actually, there is much about the US attack on Syria that reminds us of Iraq.

With Iraq, the US moved in to start bombing before international inspectors had completed their mission to verify whether or not Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. Had they been allowed to complete their mission and verify that he did not, imagine the suffering, death, and destruction that could have been avoided. In Syria, the US decided to start bombing before the international inspectors were even allowed to start checking claims that Assad gassed his own people in Douma. Why? What was the rush? Was Washington afraid they might not find Assad guilty?

Who really benefits from US attacks on the Syrian government? There were reports that ISIS began making moves immediately after the air strikes. Do we really want to be al-Qaeda and ISIS’s airforce? Is that going to keep us safer? I remember when al-Qaeda was actually considered our enemy, not an ally in overthrowing the last secular government in the Middle East.

Will Syria’s Christians be better off after the recent US attack? Just over a week ago Christians celebrated Easter in Aleppo for the first time in years. What changed? The Syrian army kicked out al-Qaeda, which had been occupying the eastern part of the city. So no, Christians will be much worse off if our “moderate terrorists” take control of Syria.

If Syria really had sarin and other chemical weapons factories, does it make sense for the US to bomb the buildings and risk killing thousands by widely disbursing the poisons? Does it make sense to risk killing Syrian civilians with chemical weapons in retaliation for allegations that the Syrian government killed civilians with chemical weapons? No, it seems more like the phony “mobile WMD labs” we were told that Saddam Hussein had constructed.

If the US knew Syria was manufacturing chemical weapons in the buildings they bombed, why not notify the Organization for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons (OPCW)? The OPCW had certified the very building the US bombed as chemical weapons free not that long ago. Why not just call them up and ask them to check it out? After all, they were just arriving in the country as the US started bombing.

There are many more questions about President Trump’s terrible decision to again make war on Syria. For example, where is Congress? It was disgraceful to see Speaker Paul Ryan telling the President he needs no Congressional authorization to attack Syria. All Members of Congress take an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution and the Constitution says that only Congress can declare war. Does that oath mean nothing these days?

President Trump will come to regret the day he let the neocons take over his foreign policy. Their track record is abysmal. His attack on Syria was clearly illegal and should his party lose the House in November he may find his new fair-weather friends in the Democratic Party quickly turning foul.

(Republished from The Ron Paul Institute by permission of author or representative)
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: American Military, Donald Trump, Russia, Syria 
Hide 12 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. c matt says:

    If he thinks impeachment is bad, just wait until he gets tried for war crimes.

    • Replies: @Carroll Price
  2. @c matt

    Tried for war crimes by who, when Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld continue living lives of luxury?

  3. “Do we really want to be al-Qaeda and ISIS’s airforce?”

    Are you kidding me? How could Ron Paul not know that this has been the reality for years now?

  4. there has been no (((neo-con))) takeover over of the Trumpenthal regime:

    Trumpenthal has been a stooge for the Wall St./Las Vegas Zionist banksters and billionaires his entire adult life.

    the appointments of shabbatz goy warmongers Pompeo and Bolton are what he intended all along.

    next step, after the enroute Truman carrier battle group arrives in the eastern Med:

    another murderous false flag, and then an attempt to blow the Russians out of Syria.

    when/if that succeeds, Iran will be hit next

    and then Russia itself, probably via the Ukraine.

    Putin could have short-circuited the ZOG escalation by sinking the 2 ‘Murkan destroyers that fired most of the missiles. Now, his deterrant credibility is close to zero.

  5. Svigor says:

    Libertardians’ disastrous ignorance of HBD, open borders, the dangers of hard drugs; their abject venality and cowardice, dereliction of duty, concerning anti-freedom (so-called “anti-discrimination”) laws….

    Libertarians are a joke.

    • Replies: @Grumbler
  6. Svigor says:

    Tried for war crimes by who, when Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld continue living lives of luxury?

    They weren’t elected over the unified opposition of the Deep Shit State and The Swamp…

  7. Grumbler says:

    Svigor, not being confrontational just asking – What do you mean by “dereliction of duty”? “Duty” to whom or what?

    • Replies: @Svigor
  8. Even Ron Paul dares not utter the J-word.

    We live in a Fake Democracy.

    • Replies: @Svigor
  9. Miro23 says:

    President Trump will come to regret the day he let the neocons take over his foreign policy.

    He couldn’t care less – this is all about “Winning” i.e. Winning the race to become President.

    Jews and SJW’s were not going to help him with that, so it had to be traditional white Americans tired of ME wars, mass immigration and outsourced manufacturing – so he sells them the goods.

    There are no ethics or morality in any of this. Trump is a high rise property developer from New York and knows better than anyone that those massive WTC buildings didn’t collapse due to some mostly extinguished fires.

  10. Svigor says:

    Their own (ostensible) principles. It’s all libertardians can lay claim to, and even that claim is bogus.

    To elaborate: anti-freedom laws (“anti-discrimination” laws) are the biggest violation of libertarian principles in the US today, but libertardians have jack shit to say about them.

  11. Svigor says:
    @mark green

    We can’t even get libertardians to oppose laws telling us how and to whom we may sell our property, how we can hire and fire and promote, how we constitute our private institutions, businesses, and communities, who we sell our products to, etc. Good luck getting them to name the Jew.

    Libertardians are a shameful lot, reduced to leftism + crony capitalism, hard drug advocacy, and bill of rights advocacy (as long as leftist racists don’t push them off).

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
  12. @Svigor

    I’ve grown disillusioned with the LP long ago, but luckily they’re not the bulk of the libertarian movement.

    You make fair points about the pie-in-the-sky libertarians and the antifamily homosexual-glorifying drugs-are-no-big-deal hipster-wiseass “Reason magazine” libertarians.

    But still you are attacking something of a straw man, because many libertarians are not moral relativists, are not naive about the destruction caused by hard drugs, and do not support open borders. Especially those of us who are long out of unrealistic college days and are trying to protect and raise our children.

    I’ve been basically libertarian my whole life, yet have never tried hard drugs and would immediately stop associating with people who take them. I want a moratorium on all nonEuropean immigration, plus a Wall, land mines, and National Guard on our entire border with our dirtbag southern neighbor, an end to birthright citizenship. Numerous libertarian and libertarianish acquaintance’s think the same.

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Ron Paul Comments via RSS