The suddenly hawkish Trump is a hypocrite



Even if there’s justification for President Trump’s missile attack in Syria — and I’m not saying there’s not — the gesture reeks of hypocrisy.

No less than 18 times in recent years, Trump said the United States should stay the hell out of Syria. Indeed, he’s cautioned against any kind of American military action almost anywhere in the Middle East.

In October of 2012, Trump tweeted the following message: “Now that Obama’s poll numbers are in tailspin — watch for him to launch a strike in Libya or Iran. He is desperate.”

Does Trump not remember saying these things? Does he feel no need to explain his sudden switch in attitude? Perhaps this episode arises from the man’s notorious addiction to television.

In his one public statement last night, Trump referred to the ghastly images of little children suffering from the use of chemical weapons in the Syrian government’s latest attack on its own people. Those images have been shown on television this week all over the Western world.

But there have been far worse chemical attacks on Syrian children in the past, and Trump seems not to have been greatly upset about them. Perhaps he didn’t see them on TV.

In any event, Trump’s new hawkishness seems not to be sitting well with certain elements of his political base. The alt-right crowd, for example, sees the president’s missile attack as a betrayal of the nationalist, anti-interventionist and anti-globalist views he touted during the campaign.

Nor is the military establishment entirely supportive of Trump’s missile attack. Retired Four-Star Army Gen. Barry McCaffrey said it was a “mistake” and a purely political gesture.

McCaffrey added: “The question might be why don’t we consider significant humanitarian assistance to Syrian refugees and border regions of Turkey and Jordan and Iraq in lieu of ineffectual military strikes.”

It’s probably too soon to determine whether Trump will reap any political benefit from the missile attack. If he does, it might take many months before we know if the boost in his political fortunes will last. The Presidents Bush, father and son alike, got good poll numbers from their militarism, but only at first. They both fell into disfavor with the public.


















  1. Robert Hazz Geaunads

    I agree. I found interesting what the former UK Ambassador to Syria had to say,

    “There is no proof that the cause of the explosion was what they said it was. Remember what happened in Iraq…I’ve seen testimony alleged from witnesses who said they saw chemical bombs dropping from the air. Well, you can not see chemical weapons dropping from the air. Such testimony is worthless.”

    “But think about the consequences because this is not likely to be the end of it. It doesn’t make sense that Assad would do it. Lets not leave our brains outside the door when we examine evidence. It would be totally self-defeating as shown by the results…Assad is not mad.”

    This reeks of being part of the Neocon agenda. Obama was at least able to temper his accommodations to the Neocons. Trump appears to be easily manipulated.

    I remember back during the first Iraq war when the American people were told about babies being removed from their incubators and left to die by Iraqi soldiers. We later found out that wasn’t the truth.

    People were most likely killed in this latest incident, but I challenge the narrative of who’s behind it. Just as the CIA can hack into computers and make it look like some other foreign country did it, they can create an international incident and make it look like whatever leader they want to depose was the culrpit.

    It’s unfortunate that the ex-ambassadors comments aren’t being more widely circulated and on more mainstream sources, but it doesn’t fit the pro-war agenda that the MSM seems to have.

    Its not as thought the MSM hasn’t ever misled us into supporting other interventions and war time actions. We all know they have.

    An even greater concern is how Russia will react in the short and long term. Putin has already said he reserves the right of first strike and China will side with Russia against the USA.


  2. Robert Hazz Geaunads

    One of my favorite journalist from the old style is Glenn Greenwald. He is brutally honest.

    “…the same establishment leaders in U.S. politics and media who have spent months denouncing him as a mentally unstable and inept authoritarian and unprecedented threat to democracy are standing and applauding him as he launches bombs at Syrian government targets…”

    “When asked about this yesterday by the Globe and Mail’s Joanna Slater, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau urged an investigation to determine what actually happened before any action was contemplated, citing what he called “continuing questions about who is responsible”:”

    And then we see just how much pressure there is to be a tough guy, even if it means throwing good judgement to the wind.

    “UPDATE: While Prime Minister Trudeau yesterday urged an investigation before any action is taken, once Trump’s bombs fell, he issued a statement expressing full support, directly contradicting his earlier statements: “President Assad’s use of chemical weapons and the crimes the Syrian regime has committed against its own people cannot be ignored.”

    What a mess our leaders are weaving. My support for Trump is wavering. Im not anti-war, but I don’t think we should be poking the bear, when it makes a better friend and ally in this case. The real reason behind the anti-Russian sentiment is not about subverting our democracy. There’s no proof, just innuendo. It’s about Putin not allowing NATO to place nukes on his borders and Putin’s support of Assad and the interference that provides for the Neocon ghosts that still rule our foreign policy. Don’t forget, Assad was our friend before he became our enemy. Where have we seen that?


    • Robert Hazz Geaunads

      PS – When those urgent memos start rolling in claiming incoming…

      Don’t you want a leader who is communicating and on civil terms with those nations who really can launch an ultimate war against the USA? As I’ve said, Putin invoked first strike options and not just recently. It was over two years ago that I read that.

      • Robert Hazz Geaunads

        Here’s the headline this evening on the Dailymail UK:

        Kremlin warns US it is ‘on the verge of a military clash with Russia’ as Trump says he will hit Syria AGAIN after his attack on Putin’s ally Assad triggers fears of World War Three


  3. Steverino

    Bombing while black was not acceptable but bombing while orange is.

  4. An egotistical madman with a missile button and stock in the company that makes them. What could possibly go wrong? But like they said, “Congress will keep him in check.”

  5. Robert Hazz Geaunads

    More challenges to the official narrative, Assad gassed his own people again… Trump has shown us he’s no different than the people before him. He’s there to support the MIC, even when it means making more enemies that want to come here and kill us, and all to satisfy the financial needs of the bomb manufacturers that need to show their shareholders qtr after qtr improving profits. That’s all these endless wars are, profit centers.

    PS- Don’t try to label me a democrat or a republican. Im neither. I hoped Trump would somehow challenge the status quo, albeit in his quirky, awkward and odd sometimes caustic mannerisms, but he just showed us he’s ready to oblige whoever ingratiates him.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *