Some Perspective on the Syria Strike

American Thinker.com ^ | April 16, 2017 | Jonathan F.Keiler

[Kaslin]

A good rule of thumb for conservatives is that If Nancy Pelosi favors something, oppose it. Pelosi liked the administration's April 7 cruise missile strike on Syria.

Time to roll out another truism: there is an exception to every rule.

A fair number of conservatives don't see it that way. A strange conglomeration of hardcore Trump supporters and die-hard Trump-haters objected to the attack variously on populist, constitutional, and Realpolitik grounds. To make the situation even odder, they effectively joined the leftist lunatic fringe (where Pelosi can often be found), which opposes almost any American military action based on strained interpretations of both existing and imaginary international law.

All of these various groups are likely wrong about the attack, an assertion that seems increasingly true as time passes. But let's quickly review their briefs.

On the hardcore Trump side, some commentators see the attacks as inconsistent with Trump's electioneering (which is true) and his general America First bent. Trump felt compelled to explain away the charge by asking Americans to recognize and accept the difference between campaigning for president and governing. If he did not do this at some point in his administration, he'd be truly unique. Trump's turned rather quickly on this issue and others, but he took a lot of positions during the campaign that were bound to be brutalized by reality. Duly assaulted, Trump is punching back in an increasingly sensible manner that might irk some true believers but was probably inevitable.

[TomasUSMC]

Russia allowed poison gas to be used in Syria. All the world talked the talk except one Country.

U.S.

WE walked the walk. Proud to be an American

Viva Trump.

[blueplum]

Trump has not stopped that, and he broke his promise on that score

Totally disagree. Trump has tried two bans - completely within his promise. Two Courts stopped him. The only tool left to Trump at this point is making everyone give up laptops, phones, and assorted other items when flying into the US. That, and stringently enforcing overstayed visas.

[blueplum]

strawman - how’d you go from Syrian strikes to daca?

anyway priorities, priorities - Set under Zero and Bush, btw:
1. Threats to natl security, criminal offenses
2. 3 or more misdemeanor offenses or multiple misdemeanor offenses, abuse of the visa system, or illegal entries
3. Individuals issued a final order of removal after Jan 2014
4. Individuals who’s DACA status (visa waiver) has expired without renewal or application for residency

Trump is doing all the above, and, since Jan 2017:
1. Local LEOS have been given back 287g authority to apprehend illegals. DACAs are not being singled out but if a DACA status fails 1 thru 3, they’re gone, status is forfeit same as if they fail #4.
2. “Prosecutorial discretion” has ended - deportations can no longer be put off for years using the court system against itself.

[Pining_4_TX]

It seems to me he could pressure Congress into defunding all the invader (not refugees at all) resettlement programs. He doesn’t seem to be concerned about it at all now, but then, he and his family have plenty of security.