Larry Schweikart, author of the Patriot’s History of the United States, offers an inside look at the most likely reasoning behind Trump’s logic on Syria:
… the strike was a multifaceted message, and unfortunately one that absolutely had to be sent, somewhere, somehow.
Recall as many of you have posted, in the past two years, the Russkies have been getting extremely provocative, doing flybys of American ships, sailing into our waters, and so on. Forget who is “responsible” for Ukraine, the fact is Ukraine unloaded its nukes cuz we promised them we would protect them via NATO. Now that promise is vanishing. Our word certainly is not good from the Ukrainian perspective.
I start Syria with Russia because at some point, somewhere, Putin had to get a message that while we want peace and want to work with him, he cannot possibly be allowed to threaten (as he already has) American ships at sea and sail in our waters. This is flat out aggression.
It can be stopped, and nipped in the bud, but how? Consider Syria a “brush back pitch” to the Russian batter. (In baseball, when the hitter takes advantage of the plate and gets too far into the pitcher’s zone, the pitcher throws one high and tight to brush him back and say, “No, you have to play by the rules.”)
I do believe Putin not only got this message, but was expecting it. He wanted to see if Trump was Obama The bad news is that it had to go on this long, but like any aggressor, the longer you wait, the bloodier it becomes to stop him. I think Putin got the message. Yes, he’s making a lot of threats. But he now knows Trump will act when provoked and act DECISIVELY. Whether you agree with the strike or not, you can’t accuse Trump of “indecision.”
Further, I think the brush-back pitch worked on Iran and the NORKs. Coming as it did when Xi was at dinner (indeed, I hear he was the first one to receive the news of the attack!), it was the equivalent of Trump pulling out a Colt .45 and laying it on the table and saying, “ok, Xi, let’s chat.” The fact that Xi apparently gave his blessing to American responses to the NORKs–in their own back yard—suggests the meeting was a 100% success. The brush back pitch was felt in China, too…
For the reasons I’ve outlined above NOT particularly relating to Syria, I believe the latter. Further, this was an opportunity to throw the brush-back pitch without civilian casualties and without a bunch of dead bodies being hauled out of a mosque. In other words, if Team Trump was looking for the “perfect” place to send a message, gas or no gas, this was it.
It is a great analysis by a solid conservative, click over for the full read.
I was instinctually averse to doing anything in Syria, but I didn’t bother to write about it. That was because President Trump is the first politician I have seen in a long time who I believe is not compromised by the elites at all, who genuinely loves the troops, and who is a genius level IQ. As a result, I do not worry about him doing anything for the benefit of the elites at the expense of the nation or its troops, and as a genius he will almost always tend to be right as he seeks to protect the troops and the nation.
Whatever he did, was most likely right, and my aversion to it would only be due to lack of knowledge, or some mistaken conclusion. This analysis only increases my belief in that, and makes me more grateful an ever for a President who is actually a patriot.