“American war planners in the Trump Administration must, therefore, opt to hit Assad’s air force, but to leave him enough capabilities that he has a reasonable chance at stemming the jihadist surge that will inevitably come from the American air campaign. Trump must also use the 2,200 American troops in Syria as a bargaining chip to get Russia and Turkey to pull both Iran and Assad himself back from the hostilities, and help to create a negotiated settlement that not only ended the conflict, but helped to establish a more stable political environment in Syria.”
“The president should strike back against Bashar al-Assad for having committed this brazen act of genocide. But, he should also go to Putin and Erdogan—cutting out the Iranians completely—and offer to reduce American presence in Syria in exchange for them forcing Assad (and Iran) to end the civil war peacefully.”
“The president’s options on North Korea are bad. However, the president must make a choice. This is the sad world we currently live in today. It’s a simple lose-lose calculation: do we lose little by dictating the course of conflict with preemptive strikes before North Korea gets fully functional ICBMs, or do we lose big by suffering a mass casualty attack and, potentially, being forced out of the Asia-Pacific entirely?”
In my most recent piece at American Greatness, I argue that the recent Trump attack on Syria is in keeping with his campaign promises.
Now that the Trump Administration has retaliated against Bashar Assad’s chemical weapons attack in Syria, where does the world go from here? I answer this and other pressing questions about the Syrian Civil War and Trump’s foreign policy.