It seems as if the only time you can know for sure that the U.S. has made an unequivocal mistake is when both major parties and the mainstream media all support the decision. I think President Trump is probably feeling pretty good about his current bump in the polls, if not his current slump among the more vocal elements of his base (Mic, The Guardian). Trump seems to believe he has accomplished a mission of some sort in Syria with his recent bombing, though what that mission is is unclear (NYT). He’s even throwing in some new sanctions against Syria’s pal Russia for good measure (NYT).
There are some questions about this latest bombing that I haven’t heard asked by very many people–questions that seem to have been drown out by the din of consensus and justification if they were ever on anyone’s mind at all–questions like, What actual proof do we have that there was a gas attack at all (the casus belli for the bombing)? What proof do we have of who carried out the attack? What business does the U.S. have to intervene in this matter? Will this bombing be any more effective than the last one? Does the U.S. now have to drop bombs on everyone who uses chemical weapons? What else could be done with the money spent on bombing? And, is this going to lead to yet another country in which the U.S. is mired in war? Finally, isn’t this just the same place we were last year (this blog, WELT, Salon) and five years ago (London Review of Books)? It certainly seems as if all of the same players have all of the same motives (Global Research). As Seymour Hersh noted last year:
“The issue is, what if there’s another false-flag sarin attack credited to hated Syria? Trump has upped the ante and painted himself into a corner with his decision to bomb. And do not think these guys [Islamist groups] are not planning the next faked attack. Trump will have no choice but to bomb again, and harder. He’s incapable of saying he made a mistake.”