Syria - what is to be done?

If I was so unfortunate to be a mother who had just lost my child due to military action, I would weep just as much for my child whether she had been killed by chemical means or simply blown to bits.

iam64 that's not sitting on the fence that is the sort of intelligent considered action a world leader should be undertaking. My worry is that IS and other jihadis will take heart from Trumps actions.

Congested, maybe, No point with the UN as Russia and China will veto it!

Action without forethought is worse than no action.

I meant Congress!!!

Agreed, whitewave.
What will be his next action without thinking?
Lots of republicans are feeling uneasy now, as they were told he would not take them into another war.

How do we know it was done without thinking? Obama had thought about it but then been persuaded that Russia would make Assad destroy his chemical weapons. I wouldn't be surprised if even Trump (even Trump!) and his advisors had thought about the crossing of the red lines of international war crime law and what should be the reaction of the US and its allies.

"Three of Trump’s top officials delivered that message to the public, careful to sidestep the president’s long history of contradictory statements and his love of a “flexible” negotiating position. In doing so, they sketched a foreign policy as reactive and mutable as the commander-in-chief himself. "

Pretty much without thinking. I'll go along with the experts on trump.

www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/apr/07/us-russia-relations-syria-military-strikes-putin-trump

Was all the talk about Trump cosying up to Putin from "the experts" as well?

Trump and his administration are in favour of imposing more sanctions on Russia after the chemical attack in Syria. Our government supports this idea. But our European allies don't. Hmm.

Elsewhere I read that the Foreign Ministers of the G7 states, US, Britain, Canada, France, Italy, Germany & Japan do support the idea of the use of "smart sanctions" to drive a wedge between the Kremlin, the Assad regime, and Iran.

What to believe? Who to believe? What to expect? All unknowns. A little more watching and waiting, I think.

It'll take the G7 foreign ministers a while to agree on appropriate sanctions, I should think.

In theory sanctions, non-military force if you like, seem like a better idea than Cruise missiles, though I don't think the US was wrong to send that sharp message in support on international law condemning the use of nerve gases that cause people to suffocate. I don't think it's good idea to try and effect regime changes in unstable states but I don't think that standing back and watching a revolting civil war is ethical either. There are no absolute rights and wrongs in these cases. There is only mess.

Bags you are a logical wee body. But you are trying to apply that same logical thinking to the workings of Trump's wee brain and it won't work (your logic that is not his brain...though come to think of it...).

Trouble is, he's now so puffed-up with his 'success' and the general approval that he now has Kim Yong Whatever The Fat Controller From North Korea calls himself, in his sights and that's another matter altogether. Two big spoilt kids, raised to think the sun shines out of rises and sets on them and with nukes to play with.

Thanks for the backhanded compliment, anya, . No, I'm not applying my logical thinking to Trump's wee brain. I'm applying it to the US government. Trump is not acting alone. He is not incapable of being influenced by the people with better political brains (whether one agrees with their ideas is irrelevant to that remark) around him.

There is masses of fudge (compromise/grey area, whatever you want to call it) in politics. That was my main point. I'll stick with that for now.

Anya, Love your name for Kim Yong thing, Fat Controller is funny and so apt.
This whole episode with USA / Syria is worrying but t least things are happening, let's hope G7 comes up with sanctions which actually hit home. There is so much we don't know but help is clearly needed for those people caught up in it all.

So too was Obama influenced by those around him bags but with very different outcomes. It's who they choose to place around them that matters, but the final call is the president's.

'Better political brains' ? All relative. I'd be happier with best political brains.

Thanks CF

Thinking about what to do next is the easy part. What is difficult is to come up with a strategy that produces peace and prosperity. Something not a single leader has yet achieved. That is why Obama appeared to prevaricate. He understood as do so many that action without forethought as to what next and how to get to the desired goal without a devastating loss of life. An almost impossible task in the Middle East

Just a note whilst we mourn those poor people who died at Assad hands. It would be expedient to note that 150 people lost their lives at Americas hands in Mosel last week.

The issue is who back Sunni Muslims and who back Shiite Muslims and minority religions. Currently the west are supporting the larger Saudi based Sunni Muslims who spawned Al Quaeda and ISIS, this because of beneficial trade links, there is little consideration to the fact that Sunni Muslims tend to overwhelm any other religions as shown creeping through such places as Turkey and Egypt.
Russia and Iran support the Shite and minority religions of which Assad is one.
The west dislikes both Iran and Russia as they wont dance to their tune so inevitably there will be a biased view. There are millions of Syrians who back Assad against the Sunni insurgents but their voices are rarely heard, they do not want a Sunni majority knowing how repressive these regimes become, think Saudi, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Indonesia et al. where other religions are not tolerated. Syria was always a multi faith country it seems the West will be happy to see this wiped out to keep trade flowing. There are atrocities on both sides, but if you take note the news flow is very skewed towards reporting on the government atrocities, there is very little showing the other side. Note that all the Arabic nations calling for Asad's overthrow are both Sunni majority and 'friends' of the west.
If all the secondary interest countries could/would butt out the conflict would probably end sooner, but that won't happen so we will continue to be shown heart wrenching images to play on our emotions whilst not being given the full picture to understand why.
We are all goaded to call for the overthrow of Asad, but as time has told with Sadam Hussain and Iraq and Gaddafi and Libya they were keeping the lid on pressure cookers which have spewed chaos, atrocities and misery within these now failed countries. Libya, Iraq and Syria were wealthy countries with good infrastructure and well educated people...we can't seem to learn the lesson that the western way is not always the right way for certain cultures and religions.

That may or may not be true whitewave but the truth is that thousands more will be relieved when IS is defeated there.

I agree with your last paragraph Joelsnan with certain reservations because I cannot forget what happened to the Iraqui Kurds and other minority groups in some of these countries.

jalima the problem doesn't stop there though. So IS and Al Qaeda are defeated say by those fighters the Americans are supporting, which at present is the most likely
scenario. These fighters are implacably against Assad and the Russians, and are the fighters who are being hammered by Assad and Russia. So America and Russia will find themselves on opposing sides.

Partition may be the answer short term, but we know never works long term, and given the volatility of the area, extremely unlikely to work.

Yes, I know how complicated it all is.
Which is why we should never meddle but it's far too late now to say that now

I've just been listening to Shadi Hamid, who is senior fellow at Brookings Institute Centre for Middle East Policy. He describes himself as "on the left" (so not a Trump supporter) as regards American politics.

He talks about Trump's remarks on Syria after the US response to the chemical attack: "Obviously some of this is just rhetoric and we are going to have to wait and see what Trump actually does, but I am somewhat encouraged by some of this rhetoric".

He then says: "I do think Syria is a direct national security interest and I think one of Obama's biggest mistakes was not realising that."

I'm interpreting that to mean that aiming the Cruise missiles at the airport from which the chemical attack on civilians was launched is not seen by Shadi Hamid as "meddling" in things that will not directly affect the national security of the US. It seems he doesn't see it as meddling in things that are nothing to do with the US and Europe. Interesting.

He also talked about the (new?) phenomenon among Western liberals of not supporting democratic outcomes if the outcome is not what they wanted. It certainly does appear strange in places that talk the talk of believing in democracy as the best form of government so far. He was talking about it with reference to the toppling of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, even though they were democratically elected and of course with reference to all the protests about Trump being elected as POTUS and the protests against the Brexit vote here.

His family is Egyptian, though he and his parents are Americans.

The problem with not taking action is that that is an action with consequences itself, possibly worse consequences than taking positive action. I've pretty much come to the conclusion that the more I know about what's going on over there the less I feel able to come to any view about the best way forward. But I'm still just about with Trump here though, as a simple and quick response to the use of CW.