Thursday, April 6, 2017
They're so cute when they're small
The chemical attack by Syria's Bashar al-Assad that killed scored of civilians, including dozens of children, appears to have touched whatever portion of Donald Trump's heart isn't reserved for himself.
“When you kill innocent children, innocent babies — babies! — little babies,” the president of the United States said Wednesday, “that crosses many, many lines. Beyond a red line, many, many lines.”
Which is so odd. Put those babies in the arms of their parents, strand them in a miserable refugee camp somewhere, and they are proto-terrorists that the United States has no responsibility for whatsoever.
But let those same babies, stranded in Syria and killed by Assad who, like Trump, is best buddies with Vladimir Putin, and we get this unusual display of Trumpian sympathy for people who he can't see in any convenient mirror.
This flash of humanity could be a lie; highly probable, given that it consists of words that came out of Donald Trump's mouth. The stuff about crossing red lines, just another swipe—veiled for Trump—at Barack Obama, who said chemical attacks would be a red line that, if crossed, would demand action. Then Obama did nothing.
Which is what I expect from Trump. Whatever action Trump might be considering didn't even involve saying empty words about the Russians who, if they aren't stirring the poison gas and pouring it into bombs for Assad with big funnels, are helping him every other way.
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
"I will tell you that attack on children yesterday had a big impact on me"ReplyDelete
If you listened to the audio of his speech, when he said this, Trump emphasized the word "me".
He is constitutionally incapable of experiencing the world in any fashion besides how it affect him. Even the butchering of small children is about him.
He is the emperor of the kingdom of personal pronouns.
"Malignant narcissist." I strongly recommend the Rolling Stone article describing where shrinks are finally, heavily weighing in on Drumpf's mental illness. http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/trump-and-the-pathology-of-narcissism-w474896Delete
I read the malignant narcissist article not 5 minutes before I heard Trump on the radio emphasizing the word "me" when commenting on murdered children. His supporters will call the article liberal fake news. Psychologists who have carefully observed Trump will call the article a case study.Delete
Yes. A bit like the old line about the actor who goes on about his career and then says. "But that's enough about me. What did you think of my last performance."ReplyDelete
"Then Obama did nothing." If memory serves, he deferred to the Congress, which voted against military action.
When asked what he will do about it Trump said he doesn't like to tip his hand. "I will do such things, what they are yet I know not. But they will be the terrors of the earth." Lear, Act 2, Scene 4.
Tom--Exactly. Congress pissed and moaned about Obama's "imperial presidency," and then, when presented with an opportunity to validate action against Assad, ran like little bitches.Delete
Now there's nowhere left for them to run. They have the White House and both branches of Congress. They can't escape responsibility and they can't blame Obama anymore (although they'll try--roughly half of Trump's 78-word statement about the gassing consisted of slagging on Obama). Syria is sliding deeper into destruction and misery, and it's time for them to do something other than sit on the sidelines and jeer.
I think that after milking the horror for all its worth, Trump will grab the Russian life line and question whether the chemical weapons belonged to Assad or to ISIS, thus weaseling out any commitment whatsoever. I'm afraid, however, that he's going to do something really stupid in Korea, not realizing how vulnerable the millions of people (ostensibly our allies) are who live quite close to North Korea. Sure we could squash the North like a bug, but not without consequences to the South.ReplyDelete
A cynic might observe that Trump is horrified at Asad killing women and children with gas, but unmoved when we or our Iraqi allies do the same with high explosives. A piece in thie morning's Tribune was about some 300 civilian bodies being recovered from a bombed building in Mosul. He can probably be excused for that, since gas has inspired a particular revulsion ever since it was first employed as a weapon of war. The most memorable of the many fine poems that came out of WW 1, the one that exposed "that old lie: 'Dolce et decorum est, pro patria mia,'" was about a gas attack.ReplyDelete
Sorry. "pro ptria mori."ReplyDelete
I believe the only reason Trump is going after Assad now is to score popularity points, while getting in a dig at Obama, which also pleases the hawks on the right. I guess once Syrian children are exterminated they no longer pose an ISIS threat, which allows him to pretend sympathy for their plight.ReplyDelete
Don't jump to conclusions. https://consortiumnews.com/2017/04/05/another-dangerous-rush-to-judgment-in-syria/ReplyDelete
The facts on the ground are different, of course. Assad hit a 'moderate rebel' depot that had chemical weapons and the after effects killed the nearby population. And Obama didn't strike because for the first God Damn time both British and American representatives said NO TO ANOTHER GOD DAMN WAR! NO TO WAR WITH IRAN OR SYRIA! NO MORE WARS IN THE MIDDLE EAST, ever. If you feel so bad about it Steinberg jump on a plane and join the rebels.ReplyDelete
As much as I dislike Trump or Assad & Putin, I also had read about the info above from other sources. They aren't saying much on the news channels about it.ReplyDelete
The rebels, Isis or not, bear some responsibility as well. But it's ridiculous, though not surprising, how Obama is suddenly now blamed for all things.
Some postcripts after the missile launch could be used here.ReplyDelete