Thread: Trump supporters rip decision to strike Syria

Trump supporters rip decision to strike Syria

By HENRY C. JACKSON
04/13/2018 11:43 PM EDT

Some of President Donald Trump’s staunchest backers tore into his decision to attack Syria late Friday night, arguing it was unnecessary, reactionary and even Clinton-esque.

In tweet storms and video responses, they compared Trump’s decision to attack Syrian targets to actions taken by President George W. Bush or a hypothetical President Hillary Clinton.

“We lost. War machine bombs syria. No evidence Assad did it. Sad warmongers hijacking our nation,” tweeted conservative author and radio host Michael Savage. Savage also posted a video discussing the missile strikes, tearing into Trump’s decision.

There was a clear sense of disappointment among a certain strand of Trump supporter as the president announced a “precision strike” against the regime of Bashar Assad on Friday in response to a suspected chemical weapons attack last week.

The anguish came from supporters who latched on to Trump’s “America first” promise during the campaign. They argued that Trump’s decision undermined his promise to disentangle the U.S. from global conflicts, saying it reeked of the same old, same old.

“Donald Bush,” tweeted Mike Cernovich, a conservative author and once a staunch supporter of Trump.

“Congratulations to the Trump administration for adopting the same failed foreign policy and ignoring of the constitution as the last two administrations,” tweeted Doug Stafford, a strategist for Sen. Rand Paul’s RANDPAC.

Conservative author Ann Coulter retweeted a series of people questioning military action in Syria — as well as past tweets from Trump himself. Before his presidential bid, Trump argued former President Barack Obama would be foolish to take any action in Syria.

Coulter also quoted a news story about former Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe promising he could beat Trump if he ran against him and tweeted, “You might – if you promised no more “stupid wars.”"

Trump has veered back and forth on U.S. activity in the country, insisting recently that he wanted the U.S. out of Syria as soon as possible.

The president’s tone changed earlier this week, after reports emerged that Assad’s regime used chemical weapons in an attack over the weekend. He promised a U.S. response.

For Trump supporters, the president’s decision to make good on that promise was cause for despair and disappointment.

“After Trump’s first year we have: 1.3 trillion omnibus, no wall, war in Syria. Is Clinton secretly President?” wrote Lucian B. Wintrich, the D.C. bureau chief and White House correspondent for Gateway Pundit.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/...strikes-523061

Related:


Trump attack on Syria underway

https://www.alipac.us/f19/trump-atta...37/index2.html

I think most Trump Supporters will not be happy with this unless it is soon followed and I mean very soon followed with a removal of our ground troops from Syria. Time to pass the Baton. Russia's got this, they've done a hell of a job ending a very complicated, complex civil war. They are cool heads, very pragmatic, they know how to restore Syria to stability and order. We don't know how to do that. We were just totally duped by these stupid fake videos. But that said, I've no problem with taking out their chemical production facilities, so this is a good thing. It's over, hopefully no casualties, and no attacks on US by Russia or Iran, so that's good.

All in all, a merely eventful Friday the 13th in TrumpWorld. Now get the troops home and let Russia handle Syria.

We should have wen't straight to the source and bombed Assad's palace! Why continuously beat around the bush. Destroying Assad would end his murderous ways and be a wake-up call to his murderous partner in crime, Putin.

I know, I know, not the politically correct thing to say and probably a very dangerous thing to do. However, I'm long past getting sick and tired of playing games with folks like Assad who constantly push the line of human decency. The thinking that it's okay to control your population through indiscriminate mass murder and mayhem needs to end.

Too bad there's not a logical candidate to replace him because I do understand that leaving a void could end up giving the people of Syria worse than they already have. It's a very complex situation.

Do you know anything about Assad? He's a medical doctor, an ophthalmologist, an eye doctor. He went away to London to study medicine, married a British woman, worked as a doctor in London for years until his older brother was killed in a car crash and was called back to Syria by his aging father to run for President in the case of his death. Bashar Assad was elected in 2000 to be President with 88% of the vote. He ran a secular government, free of religious bias, he initiated many reforms and Syria did very well.

Then there was a bad drought, discontent among some, rebels formed militias, protests broke out, and a civil war started. Americans under Obama got involved in funding the rebels with cash and equipment. A firm hand is required during civil wars with opposition intent to overthrow an elected government. Did he take it too far? His army probably did. He crossed the line using chemical weapons and having rebels disappear. Could he have quashed the rebellion sooner had the US not funded and aided the rebels who were really in cahoots with those wanting an Islamic State and behold, now ISIS is taking over large portions of Syria? Yes.

What Bashar Assad has had to deal with during the past 7 years is not what an eye doctor educated and working in London is trained to deal with or ever wanted to deal with, it's just what he ended up with.

For other nations to ignore the 250,000 to 500,000 Syrians who have died in a war started by religious fanatics, while focusing on an alleged 42 deaths due to a "chemical attack" .... is strange and imbalanced if you ask me, because it lacks all sense of "proportional".

But decisions here and in Europe were made, the strikes were on property, not people, they're over and no casualties. So our military and the President did a great job with the mission they decided to undertake. Maybe it will push the envelope forward to final peace and a new beginning for Syria. I sure hope so.

Originally Posted by Judy

Do you know anything about Assad? He's an medical doctor, an ophthalmologist, an eye doctor. He went away to London to study medicine, married a British woman, worked as a doctor in London for years until his older brother was killed in a car crash and Bashar was called back to Syria by his aging father to run for President in the case of his death. Bashar Assad took over Syria when his father died. He was elected in 2000 to be President with 88% of the vote. He ran a secular government, free of religious bias, he initiated many reforms and Syria did very well. Then there was a bad drought, discontent among some, rebels formed militias, protests broke out, and a civil war started. Americans under Obama got involved in funding the rebels with cash and equipment. A firm hand is required during civil wars with the intent to overthrow an elected government. Did he take it too far? His army probably did. He crossed the line using chemical weapons and having rebels disappear. Could he have quashed the rebellion sooner had the US not funded and aided the rebels who were really in cahoots with those wanting an Islamic State and behold, now ISIS is taking over large portions of Syria? Yes.

What Bashar Assad has had to deal with during the past 7 years is not what an eye doctor is educated and working in London is trained to deal with or ever wanted to deal with, it's just what he ended up with.

For other nations to ignore the 250,000 to 500,000 Syrians who have died in a war started by religious fanatics, while focusing on an alleged 42 deaths due to "chemical attack" .... is strange and imbalanced if you ask me.

But decisions here and in Europe were made, the strikes were about property, no deaths, they're over and no casualties. Maybe it will push the enveloped forward to final peace and a new beginning for Syria. I sure hope so.

Who really cares about his history? What he is now is what's at issue, not his education or upbringing.

Assad is not what you think then or now. Neither was Saddam. Neither was Gaddafi. Neither was Catro. So, I think most fair-minded people will care, most Americans usually do.

It is such a mess. Government change may bring the same situation or worse. Lots of bad actors and tricks and difficult to know the truth at times.

It does seem odd to have President Trump say he would like to withdraw from Syria and then do this to draw attention and military attacks.

Originally Posted by Judy

Assad is not what you think then or now. Neither was Saddam. Neither was Gaddafi. Neither was Catro. So, I think most fair-minded people will care, most Americans usually do.

It's a little presumptuous of you to think you know what I think about Saddam Hussein, Muammar Gaddafi or Fidel Castro since I don't recall sharing that information with you.

Most people aren't as naive as you would like to think and many of us do know how to research using modern technology. I'm fairly certain any information you've had access to in the past and present doesn't exceed the content of information that has been available to me or other people. Actually, my former job position gave me much more information on Saddam Hussein than would have been made available to you. So please don't presume to know any more or less than someone else without knowing that individual personally.

Thought for the day: A difference of opinion doesn't change fact.

Originally Posted by MW

It's a little presumptuous of you to think you know what I think about Saddam Hussein, Muammar Gaddafi or Fidel Castro since I don't recall sharing that information with you.

Most people aren't as naive as you would like to think and many of us do know how to research using modern technology. I'm fairly certain any information you've had access to in the past and present doesn't exceed the content of information that has been available to me or other people. Actually, my former job position gave me much more information on Saddam Hussein than would have been made available to you. So please don't presume to know any more or less than someone else without knowing that individual personally.

Thought for the day: A difference of opinion doesn't change fact.

You said that history didn't matter. Apparently you now think it does or you wouldn't be boring me with yours. I think you just proved my point.