I can tell you’re not much of a thinking person.
Answer this, idiot:
1. Deny we made ISIS / ISIL who Did kill Many thosands in Syria.
2. Russia has been in a position of killing ISIS fighters we created.
3. The missile attacks have huge potential to kill large amounts of innocent lives if they malfunction.
4. Where is the moral authority to launch an attack on a sovereign country engaged in fighting our murderous ISIS aligned islamic rebels who are tring to overthrow Asad and his fellow Christian supporters?
5. What is the moral imperative that drives us to engage in a war crime against a sovereign country, and further provoke Russia?
Do you want WW3?
“What is the moral imperative that drives us to engage in a war crime against a sovereign country,”
OK, you are a loon.
2. Russia has avoided killing ISIS as much as possible, and has instead been assisting Assad to kill his own people, leaving the heavy fighting against ISIS to the US, the Kurds and Iraqis.
3. Well, yeah-- if they malfunction. But they usually don't.
4. As I said, neither Russia nor Syria has done much fighting against ISIS. The Syrian Christians are between a rock and a hard place, and have chosen to ally themselves with Assad's Alawites and the Shia against the Sunni majority. Sucks to be them.
4. Drop the histrionic "war crime" horse hockey-- you sound exactly like the hate-America left when you engage in that nonsense.
It's in our strategic interest to keep the Iranians and Hezbollah out, the Russians down and ourselves in the game at minimum cost.
I will be pragmatic and neutral and state that these questions should be asked to this administration. I can understand both sides of this argument. Right and wrong can be so subjective. I will say Syria takes away from the agenda at home and to a lessor extent gives more reason for the left to b*tch and moan i.e. more reason to think they can impeach.
The moral authority is using WMD against international law.
But you knew that...
I guess Putin is the equivalent to you of the Great and Powerful Oz?