Should this not be a U.N. led action though? Isn't this the kind of stuff the U.N. should be doing?
I'm not disagreeing with Trump's decision but I would like to know where the U.N. is on this.
Russia has veto power on the Security Council. It is why the UN has done nothing about Syria or Ukraine. So, no, it shouldn't be a UN led action because they will never ever get past the Russian veto. It *IS* the kind of stuff the UN was setup to prevent, but with the Security Council subject to a veto by any member there is nothing that can be done that violates the interest of any of the 5 members.
That Trump acted is just a part of the significance of this event. WHY he acted will be just as important. Was this a unilateral decision (doubtful)? Who influenced him? Ivanka and Kushner or Mattis? Or even Tillerson? Or did he even listen to someone like Rubio?
I support Trump's action, but that doesn't mean he did it for the right reason. Could it have been out of ego and a desire to show he isn't going to be punked by Syria? A desire to show he would keep his word? He said he would be unpredictable, listen to the Generals, and act quickly.
I'd like to think this is Trump turning over a new leaf, but we don't know his motivation just yet. Various angles are being pushed, but the true story will take some time to come out.
I am glad that this was done, and I thank Trump for reacting appropriately so far.
Finally, has anyone considered that Trump potentially acted to avoid Israel acting? Stories have been flying around since yesterday that Israel was considering humanitarian intervention. Which would have almost assuredly been a strike on chemical weapon locations. Israel has better Intel than us in Syria. They were probably highly involved in Intel sharing or even planning. Trump has enough decent NATSEC people and Generals around that if Israel was about to start something major they'd urge Trump to do it first. Has happened many times before in US policy and military action -- specifically involving Israel. Israel has bombed Syria a few times in retaliation for Hezbollah stuff, etc, but if Israel used truly significant force you'd have a powderkeg of a situation.
Trump didn't have a lot of options because Obama's Syria policy was a disaster. Being portrayed as under the thumb of Russia also was a potential factor. What better way to try to distance yourself and bury the Russia story than to take military action against a murderous thug?
Finally, it is amazing to watch significant Trump supporters and right wing fake news sites like Infowars, Cernovich, PrisonPlanet, etc turn on Trump. Russia is furious. Already pushing fake news that Russia shot down almost all of the Cruise missiles (they may have gotten some depending upon what air defense systems they have in Syria as Trump warned Russia before the strike). It shows you who actually supports Trump and who is beholden to Putin and the Assadist propaganda factory.
I say all this to say that I'm not ready to leap into believing Trump all of a sudden turned over a new leaf. I will support his action while maintaining a healthy level of suspicion because he has certainly not earned my trust and won't get it just because of one single action no matter how much I agree with it.
If it were up to me we'd have given Putin an ultimatum at the same time and been ready to swiftly ratchet up sanctions and PNG every diplomat they have unless he agreed to turn over Assad or allow us to drone him.
While we are at it we should accidentally drone Assange. Putin will only keep that sicko rapist around as long as he has useful value. Right now he is parroting the Russian/Assadist fake news angle which should be of no surprise to anyone.