Democrats to Trump: Are you seeking regime change in Syria?


ed note–please note the 2 very important adjectives used in this query of the president–

‘confusing and contradictory’…

I could go on with an extended explanation as to why this is relevant to the recent events and to the bigger question as to whether or not Trump is ‘owned by Israel’, but I think you all get the point now after more than a year of daily reminders.

thehill.com

A pair of Democratic congressmen is pushing President Trump to clarify whether regime change in Syria is now his administration’s official policy as leaders have given conflicting statements about if President Bashar Assad can remain in control in Damascus.

In a letter delivered Wednesday, Reps. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), a Marines veteran, and Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.) ask Trump to clarify his administration’s “confusing and contradictory” statements in the wake of his decision to launch U.S. missiles at a Syrian airbase.

“Given America’s escalating involvement in this conflict, we write to request clarification of this fundamental aspect of American strategy — moving forward, will your administration actively pursue the removal from power of President Assad?” the congressman wrote in their letter to Trump.

Last week, Trump ordered a U.S. military cruise missile strike against a Syrian airbase U.S. officials say was the launching point for a chemical attack against civilians carried out by forces loyal to Assad. It was the first time the U.S. military has directly intervened in the six-year-old civil war.

But in the days since, it’s been unclear how the Trump administration plans to proceed, and administration officials have given conflicting comments about how the United States views the future of Assad.

For his part, Trump said Tuesday in an interview with Fox Business News that “we’re not going into Syria.”

But Gallego and Boyle said the conflicting statements by Trump advisers suggest the administration lacks an overarching strategy for Syria.

“Moreover, this confusion among your top advisors on such a basic aspect of US policy is compelling evidence of a lack of thorough planning in advance of the airstrikes you ordered and of a troubling failure to consider their potential ramifications,” they continued in their letter to Trump.

Congress will need the administration’s strategy, they wrote, to debate a war authorization.

In the wake of last week’s strikes, talk has picked up, particularly by Democrats, of the need for a new authorization for the use of military force, long stalled in Congress.

In statements accompanying the release of the letter, Gallego and Boyle also stressed Congress’s role in authorizing military action.

“Congress deserves a debate and a vote on authorizing further military action in Syria,” Gallego said. “But first, we need to know whether Trump intends to seek the removal of President Assad.”

Added Boyle: “Our Constitution makes clear that these decisions must come before Congress. Congress must not abdicate this responsibility. We, the people’s elected representatives, must finally debate and vote on this issue and the president must inform us of his intentions regarding foreign policy with the Assad regime.”

  1. #1 by Pete on 04/12/2017 - 9:34

    MG, what’s the deal with Brendon Oconnel talking s*** about TUT? I thought you were all friends?

    ed note–Brendon is the latest casualty in this movement who right now finds himself in meltdown mode.

    Yes, I helped him in the past–against the advice of people who knew him better and warned me that I was being taken in and that I should stay away. With his most recent stunt of threatening to kill some government officials in Australia my suspicions that he was not ‘right in the head’–borrowing a line from the character ‘Steven’ in Mel Gibson’s Braveheart–I decided I could not longer associate with him and his nuttery. His response to that was to allege that I and this website were ‘Mossad fronts’, at which point I cut off all communications with him.

    His recent tirade against Iran is proof in point that he is not of ‘perfectly sound mind’. His assertions that he was being ‘followed’ by Iranian intelligence and that his room was bugged are just par for the course for him, as well as his complaining about the smog in Tehran as being somehow indicative of an evil people populating an evil country.

    No doubt that the Iranians recognized 5 seconds after he opened his mouth that he was a head case and that whatever ‘bad vibes’ he got from them was rooted in this fact. I’ll ask some of my friends there what they thought of him and let the readers know, as I am sure that the Iranians who hosted him were not/are not particularly pleased with how he reciprocated the hospitality they doubtless showed him.

  2. #2 by MJ on 04/12/2017 - 9:34

    I believe in being invested in the truth no matter who brings it on.
    A pet peeve is bad manners. One can agree to disagree, :–) without being belligerent.

    Saw this on Saker’s website a few weeks ago, food for thought:
    Former Mossad officer predicts Tump will be impeached

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: