The Media Is Overhyping The Syria Strikes

[American_Jihad]

The left-wing media getting their panties all twisted up into a knot again...


THE MEDIA IS OVERHYPING THE SYRIA STRIKES
April 7, 2017

Daniel Greenfield

When I left the house this morning, the front page headline of the LA Times splashed across half the page in font worthy of a circus was about the strikes on Syria. You would think Pearl Harbor or 9/11 had just happened.

Despite the media pantswetting (by now an instinctive impulse with anything relating to President Trump) the strikes are not all that big of a deal. Clinton carried out similar strikes in Iraq as a warning to Saddam. The Israelis occasionally hit Syria when Assad steps too far over the line by aiding terrorists.

It's not a war. It's a warning.

One of the lowest moments of our national credibility came with Obama's WMD red line for Syria. President Trump has long been critical of Obama's response. He decided to enforce Obama's red line.

...

The Media is Overhyping the Syria Strikes

 

[American_Jihad]

TRUMP BOMBS SYRIA, MEDIA LEARNS TO LOVE PUTIN
April 7, 2017

Daniel Greenfield

Remember those days of yore when the media was accusing President Trump of being a Russian puppet and castigating Putin. All it took was for Trump to bomb Syria and suddenly everything flipped.

The media had been howling for ages that we needed to do something about Assad. They were all prepared to accuse Trump of not caring about children being gassed. And then President Trump took action. The action that liberals had been pleading with Obama to carry out. Trump enforced Obama's red line.

The response was consternation followed by a complete and total reversal.

"Putin denounces 'trumped-up' U.S. strike against Syria" - CNN

Who's parroting Russian propaganda now?

...

This is what the left is. They're enemies and traitors. Always. Their patriotism is as phony as Das Kapital. When a progressive tells you he cares about this country, check your wallet. And then check it again.

Trump Bombs Syria, Media Learns to Love Putin

 

[Nia88]

As a liberal I agree. Trump did nothing significant. He took out a couple of dusty military bases. It's not going to stop Assad and his goons from doing it again.

 

[EverCurious]

It's pretty much what the media does anymore. ~shrug~

 

[gtopa1]

 

[gtopa1]

 

[DrainBamage]

the strikes are not all that big of a deal. Clinton carried out similar strikes in Iraq as a warning to Saddam.

Anytime we fire dozens of cruise missiles into another country it is a big deal and worthy of front page headlines, whether it was Clinton or Trump.

 

[American_Jihad]

TRUMP BOMBS SYRIA. NOW WHAT?
A look at what the strategic objectives should be.
April 11, 2017

Bruce Thornton

resident Trump’s swift bombing of a Syrian airfield responsible for a chemical attack has been praised by our allies and even by Democrats. The mere fact that Trump followed up his condemnation of a sarin gas attack with military action sends a signal that the U.S. is no longer the “weak, pitiful giant,” to use Richard Nixon’s phrase, that eight years of Barack Obama’s appeasement and retreat had left it. Such praise is deserved, but the bombing is just the start. The real question is, what happens next? What’s the strategic goal?

The effect of the attack on restoring American prestige is undoubtedly important. Obama’s foreign policy reflected the idealistic internationalism that dismisses such old-fashioned ideas as prestige. Modern progressive thinking holds that the use of force represents a foreign policy failure, and usually makes things worse by entangling the U.S. in escalation and quagmires. Non-lethal negotiated settlements are a better way to defuse conflict, and a national humility based on recognition of past neo-imperialist sins (see Obama’s 2009 Cairo speech) can make our rivals and enemies more amenable to “win-win” agreements.

...

For Trump’s bombing of the airfield to be useful beyond one news cycle, we need to know the strategic goals such actions advance, how they serve our interests and security, what they will cost, what risks we will incur, and how far we are willing to go when they are challenged. And we have to make it clear that this attack isn’t a “one-off,” as some U.S. officials announced, but will be followed by others more devastating when an adversary calls our bluff, as Assad and Putin very well may do. Otherwise, the bombing will be just another transient photo-op that makes us feel good but changes nothing.


Trump Bombs Syria. Now What?