Does it strike anyone as odd?
All the hand-wringing (and justifications) over President Trump’s strike against the Syrian base housing chemical weapons ignores one HUGELY important fact…
…American troops are in northern Syria, and have been since 2016.
So worrying about the ‘constitutional’ privilege of an American president to conduct military actions against a nation where our troops are there on the ground is moot.
Funny, though, that no Trump detractors – or supporters – mention this. What are they waiting for…an ‘errant’ Syrian chem-missile strike that hits American forces?
As posted previously, we’re certain those American troops in-country are glad that their Commander-in-Chief showed Syria, and the world, red-lines are red-lines.
Maybe those arguing fine-points would see it differently if their kids were in-country.
But sadly, even then, their rabid anti-Trump sentiment might still prevail.
(UPDATED) Sidney K argues the American troops are there to fight ISIS, and thus the act of addressing an objective outside that focus is unconstitutional.
What he fails to consider is that a Commander-in-Chief’s primary responsibility is to protect his troops in order that they can accomplish their mission; ignoring forbidden chemical weapon attacks when our troops are in-country is a fool’s game.