Some of Trump's biggest supporters criticize Syria decision

Some of Donald Trump's longest, and biggest supporters are bitterly criticizing his decision to launch military strikes against targets in Syria.

Several prominent conservatives complained that Trump had given in to the militarists and betrayed his principles.

Politico:

“We lost. War machine bombs syria. No evidence Assad did it. Sad warmongers hijacking our nation,” tweeted conservative author and radio host Michael Savage. Savage also posted a video discussing the missile strikes, tearing into Trump’s decision.

There was a clear sense of disappointment among a certain strand of Trump supporter as the president announced a “precision strike” against the regime of Bashar Assad on Friday in response to a suspected chemical weapons attack last week.

The anguish came from supporters who latched on to Trump’s “America first” promise during the campaign. They argued that Trump’s decision undermined his promise to disentangle the U.S. from global conflicts, saying it reeked of the same old, same old.

“Donald Bush,” tweeted Mike Cernovich, a conservative author and once a staunch supporter of Trump.

“Congratulations to the Trump administration for adopting the same failed foreign policy and ignoring of the constitution as the last two administrations,” tweeted Doug Stafford, a strategist for Sen. Rand Paul’s RANDPAC.

Conservative author Ann Coulter retweeted a series of people questioning military action in Syria — as well as past tweets from Trump himself. Before his presidential bid, Trump argued former President Barack Obama would be foolish to take any action in Syria.

Coulter also quoted a news story about former Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe promising he could beat Trump if he ran against him and tweeted, “You might – if you promised no more “stupid wars.”"

The complaint that Assad may not have been responsible for the chemical attack is legitimate, given that both sides possess a chemical weapons capability. But to date, the preponderance of the evidence suggests it was Syrian helicopters dropping barrel bombs full of chlorine gas that caused the dozens of deaths and injuries to civilians.

Should Trump have waited for proof before launching an attack? It will be months before UN experts come to any conclusion, which is unacceptable given the risk of further attacks on civilians. 

As for those critics who believes it doesn't matter who was responsible, it's not the place of the US to try and deter further attacks, one can say that, too, is a legitimate complaint but hardly the point. Like it or not, "isolationism" does not mean that America abandons its responsibilities entirely, The issue of allowing the chemical weapons genie to escape the bottle is serious enough and important enough that the US is bound to act in order to protect the vital idea that it is always and forever unacceptable to use poison gas on civilians. 

One of the big misunderstandings about Trump's "America First" policy is that the US is capable of abandoning the entire post World War II foreign policy principles that have guided the United States through decades of the cold war and beyond. Those principles are not something you can turn on and off like a switch. They were decades in the making and will be decades in the unmaking - if that is what the American people want.

Some of Donald Trump's longest, and biggest supporters are bitterly criticizing his decision to launch military strikes against targets in Syria.

Several prominent conservatives complained that Trump had given in to the militarists and betrayed his principles.

Politico:

“We lost. War machine bombs syria. No evidence Assad did it. Sad warmongers hijacking our nation,” tweeted conservative author and radio host Michael Savage. Savage also posted a video discussing the missile strikes, tearing into Trump’s decision.

There was a clear sense of disappointment among a certain strand of Trump supporter as the president announced a “precision strike” against the regime of Bashar Assad on Friday in response to a suspected chemical weapons attack last week.

The anguish came from supporters who latched on to Trump’s “America first” promise during the campaign. They argued that Trump’s decision undermined his promise to disentangle the U.S. from global conflicts, saying it reeked of the same old, same old.

“Donald Bush,” tweeted Mike Cernovich, a conservative author and once a staunch supporter of Trump.

“Congratulations to the Trump administration for adopting the same failed foreign policy and ignoring of the constitution as the last two administrations,” tweeted Doug Stafford, a strategist for Sen. Rand Paul’s RANDPAC.

Conservative author Ann Coulter retweeted a series of people questioning military action in Syria — as well as past tweets from Trump himself. Before his presidential bid, Trump argued former President Barack Obama would be foolish to take any action in Syria.

Coulter also quoted a news story about former Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe promising he could beat Trump if he ran against him and tweeted, “You might – if you promised no more “stupid wars.”"

The complaint that Assad may not have been responsible for the chemical attack is legitimate, given that both sides possess a chemical weapons capability. But to date, the preponderance of the evidence suggests it was Syrian helicopters dropping barrel bombs full of chlorine gas that caused the dozens of deaths and injuries to civilians.

Should Trump have waited for proof before launching an attack? It will be months before UN experts come to any conclusion, which is unacceptable given the risk of further attacks on civilians. 

As for those critics who believes it doesn't matter who was responsible, it's not the place of the US to try and deter further attacks, one can say that, too, is a legitimate complaint but hardly the point. Like it or not, "isolationism" does not mean that America abandons its responsibilities entirely, The issue of allowing the chemical weapons genie to escape the bottle is serious enough and important enough that the US is bound to act in order to protect the vital idea that it is always and forever unacceptable to use poison gas on civilians. 

One of the big misunderstandings about Trump's "America First" policy is that the US is capable of abandoning the entire post World War II foreign policy principles that have guided the United States through decades of the cold war and beyond. Those principles are not something you can turn on and off like a switch. They were decades in the making and will be decades in the unmaking - if that is what the American people want.