Israel says Assad still has chemical weapons

Bruno Cirelli
Aprile 20, 2017

The result could be a drawn out exchange that would eventually degrade US military readiness for other contingencies, and like in the Iraq case, could eventually create schisms within the Western coalition between states that support punitive actions and those that do not. It is wrong for a nation to use chemicals and gas its own innocent citizens.

The movement of the aircraft to the air base at Bassel Al-Assad International Airport began shortly after the US's April 6 Tomahawk cruise missile strike on Shayrat air base, which destroyed some 24 Syrian warplanes in retaliation for a chemical weapons attack that the United States says Syria launched from that airfield.

"The Assad regime is really meant to eliminate these rebels so that the stark choice is the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) or Assad, at which point the Western states-particularly the United States-won't have as much leverage in removing Assad", Castellano said. This was an impulse action that was not well though out.

Israel, along with the United States and much of the worldwide community, have accused Assad's forces of carrying out the attack, which killed at least 90 people, including dozens of children. Where is the logic in that? There would still be fighting in Syria and the civilians trapped inside would still continue to get hurt by the Assad regime/ISIS as the rebels do what they can to take back their homeland. Mr Trump is finally responding to the crossing of the famous red line that his predecessor had drawn but then failed to enforce.

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Marine Gen. Joseph Dunford has previously emphasized that Trump's plan to defeat ISIS will be "a political military plan". The U.S. could be in danger because of this air strike. Even as the option of additional military force must exist, a message to the Syrian regime that it's in its interests to negotiate and cease its attacks in the aftermath of a missile strike would most likely be met by a willingness to come forward out of fear of what might happen should they not. Controversy also rose as President Trump did not seek Congressional approval before directing the missile launch.

First, I find it dissatisfactory to think that recent reports of chemical warfare are the first that Trump has heard of the humanitarian nightmare that has been Syria since 2011.

It's not to say that progress in this direction is impossible, but to pretend it's doable in short order and won't demand significant sacrifice from the USA and a global coalition is short-sighted and risks opening the door for unintended ramifications.

Altre relazioni OverNewsmagazine

Discuti questo articolo

SEGUI I NOSTRI GIORNALE