Originally Posted by
Azor
Interesting. "Slinging lead around the battlefield", to quote CJTF-OIR's prior spokesman, was exactly what Russia began doing in Syria in late 2015. Despite the fact that Russian support on the ground - including providing Assad's forces with the latest in armor and artillery, repairing it and sometimes even crewing it - was decisive, it was the small, ineffective but swaggering air campaign that was considered decisive and which caught the world's attention. This despite the fact that Obama was killing tens of thousands of Daesh fighters and meticulously avoiding civilians where possible. So why is Russia's air campaign considered a turning point, but the American one is forgotten?
Very simply. It was the style of the strike.
Putin gets style. Trump gets style. Obama never understood it. You might as well have appointed a Chief Risk Officer from a large insurer in the Midwest to Chief Executive Officer of a performance hedge fund in New York, when it comes to Obama's "don't do stupid stuff" and "lead from behind" foreign policy.
Trump didn't wait weeks for international agencies to determine whether Sarin really was used and for the false flag propaganda to overwhelm people. Nor did he ask for support from the British parliament or Congress for a military action that was well within his authority to order. He knew that he would be tested and that if he failed here, he might face a bigger test in the Strait of Hormuz, or the DMZ, or in Narva, or in the South China Sea.
Perhaps you'd like to argue for Clinton's proposed no-fly zone, and how that would be preferable?
Bookmarks