It had to be done. Can no longer make excuses for gassing of civilians. There would be plenty of evidence. US sees and knows a lot more than we realise and made a very precise and clinical strike, minimising civilian casualties unlike Syria and Russia.
But here we have all the usual apologists for war criminals.
Hold on @DrWazzock with all due respect, would that be the same non existing evidence which brought us the Iraq war?It had to be done. Can no longer make excuses for gassing of civilians. There would be plenty of evidence. US sees and knows a lot more than we realise and made a very precise and clinical strike, minimising civilian casualties unlike Syria and Russia.
But here we have all the usual apologists for war criminals.
I don't think the Americans are trying to change the regime or trying to tell the Syrian people who should be in charge
In that case you might want to explain why Rex Tillerson said Assad can't have a role in the future government of Syria.
I cannot see why chemical weapons are singled out as being particularly terrible. If a bomb lands on a house with a family inside and they are all trapped and slowly the fires increase until they are all slowly burned to death, women children. It is all terrible. To be hit by a bullet and have half your head taken away and still be alive is pretty bad.
I cannot understand the moral ground in many circumstances. For instance there are rules about not shooting an enemy soldier if he has put down his arms and is not a direct threat and yet snipers can target a soldier from a mile away who is obviously not a direct threat, or someone in a room in Texas can take out dozens of people with a drone, and seemingly ignore possible "Collateral Damage"
They are putting pressure on him. Shape up or ship out.
So they're entirely contradicting your earlier statement.
Just slightly.
I understand @DrWazzock 's outrage, but I think we should get the story straight, unilateral actions like that, without real evidence, based on a belief, just does not cut it, that lesson should ve been learn in Iraq, Afghanistan and Lybia, just the current ones.
I understand @DrWazzock 's outrage, but I think we should get the story straight, unilateral actions like that, without real evidence, based on a belief, just does not cut it, that lesson should ve been learn in Iraq, Afghanistan and Lybia, just the current ones.
It hasn't been confirmed 100% that it was Assad ...Isis captured lots of chemical weapons in the past ....Makes no sense that Assad starts using them now ..when he is winning the civil war and risks international condemnation.They aren't being singled out because they are any more or less terrible. The US is making the point that Assad agreed to destroy his chemical weapons arsenal a while back then suddenly they appear again. He has shown utter contempt for global regulatory organisations and so he should expect a response.