Reading Trump's martial week: A few questions
President Donald Trump struck Syria with dozens of cruise missiles on April 6 for Syria's chemical attack on civilians. What was rather amazing about this was that the president didn't ask permission from Congress, the United Nations, NATO, or even the New York Times. He did not engage in endlessly debating the pros and cons of this action; he just did it, right on the heels of the gas attack.
A week later, out of the blue, we hear that the U.S. military has dropped a massive GBU-43 21,600-lb. bomb on an ISIS nest in Afghanistan. Boom! This is the first time this weapon has been used in combat in spite of being in our arsenal for over a decade.
In between these actions, the president ordered a U.S. Naval aircraft strike force, lead by the USS Carl Vinson, to the waters of the Korean peninsula in response to the continual threats from North Korea.
Several questions come to mind, given these actions of the past week.
Would the Iranians have dared to capture a U.S. naval vessel and humiliate its crew, as they did on January 12, 2016, under the administration of President Barack Hussein Obama, if Trump had been commander-in-chief?
Do you think the Russians might now pull in their horns in Ukraine and eastern Europe with Trump in the Oval Office instead of Obama?
And will America get cooperation from China in helping the world get rid of the psychopath running North Korea – something Obama never tried to do – now that Trump has put his foot down?
Everyone but the most hopeless Obama sycophants, which includes most of the mainstream media, knows the answer to those questions.