The title of the article suggests that it was President Trump's fault that the strikes began.
Unless I have read this incorrectly, the strikes were scheduled to begin yesterday, before President Trump's Tweet.
This is an example of the media prioritizing its vendetta against President Trump above millions of lives.
No, I didn't read it incorrectly, it's just vague enough to be easily misunderstood, because here's another article about it:
This is what Mr. De Mistura said about President Trump's Tweet:
He's been working with this situation for years, and you'll notice that, unlike the media, he had nothing bad to say about the Tweet.
"Time is of the essence," he said. It always was of the essence. If the media hadn't first spent years promoting sexual harassment and rape during the Obama administration, and then every day since the 2016 election attacking everything that President Trump says or does, the conflict in Syria might have finished years ago.
Instead, the media is very reliable for aggressors to know that the media will blame President Trump, rather than the aggressors, for atrocities that he tries to prevent.
Even if all of those people are moved, won't Mr. Assad and his allies attack them again? They were already moved to where they are now from other places.
The attacks aren't really about stopping terrorism; they are about terrorizing the country so that there's never another rebellion.
This question may be ignorant:
Why are we letting Russia push everyone around? Every negotiation is a joke to that government; they say "Yeah, uh huh," and then they do whatever they want.
If they're hit back, will they escalate? Would it really be another World War, or would they blink?
Does it even matter if it does escalate? When are they going to be confronted? After they have already taken all of the territory that they need to make it as difficult as possible to defeat them?
I don't know everything; sometimes I feel like I don't know anything. However, it's starting to get on my nerves, if you'll pardon the expression, that every time that Mr. Assad and his allies are about to cause horrible pain and suffering to millions of people, dominate the news for weeks, and provoke another crisis for countries that have to decide whether or not to accept more refugees, it all gets trivialized by warnings about not using chemical weapons.
Dead is dead. Starving is starving. Despair is despair. Unfettered despotism laughs at warnings not to use chemical weapons; it's like telling someone who has broken into your house and who is going to kill you not to put his feet on your coffee table.
