I’m shocked and saddened by the mainstream media’s apparent lack of concern about what ought to be recognized as President Donald Trump’s criminal action against Syria. It’s a blatant violation of international law to attack a sovereign state without U.N. approval, even if Bashar al-Assad was responsible for the attack, which killed many civilians, including children, and even if the weapon was a chemical agent.
But there has not yet been an international investigation on these questions. Did we learn nothing from our 2003 invasion of Iraq, so costly in human life, treasure and international repute? We couldn’t wait for the international inspections, which finally gave the world the truth about the WMDs and exposed the vicious deception of the U.S. administration, the intelligence community and their media sycophants.
But at least Trump’s attack was better than the “pacifistic paralysis” of Barack Obama after the much larger chemical weapons attack in 2013, right? Apparently not. It now seems Obama was ready to execute a devastating attack on Syria but backed off when British intelligence raised doubts with evidence pointing to rebel groups aided by Turkey. Plus Obama wanted congressional approval, which was not forthcoming (see Seymour Hersh’s piece on the matter in the London Review of Books).
At Russia’s suggestion, Syria agreed to join the chemical weapons treaty and give up its stash under international/U.N. inspection. (Too bad Israel and North Korea haven’t done as much.) Could it be that Trump is banking on a “good” war to unite a divided country (and stifle any unpatriotic thoughts of impeachment)?
RAY PERKINS Jr.
Concord