The judgment will have to wait until time proves what affect the attack had in any immediate sense, and will yet have on unfolding events in Syria.
For instance, we can now best assess the Obama administration claims (John Kerry, Meet The Press, 2014) that all chemical weapons in Syria were either destroyed or removed. Anyone could have said that “success” was praiseworthy at the time. Just as others could have said that making the claim set a bad precedent, because it was not a really verifiable claim. History shows the Obama claims were far from correct - bad precedent and not praiseworthy.
Well again, we will have to wait and see.
I think in regard to Middle East WMDs the only successful case was that in Iraq in and after 2003, where we did not leave any guessing to chance. That came at a high cost, and it is understandable that succeeding attempts to thwart production and use of WMDs in the Middle East have not wanted to repeat that method.
Well said. This looks like a setup to me. How many creepers are still hawking against the prez who reassured a nation on 9/11?
We should not be in Syria protecting European pipelines.