Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., left, and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., right, hold a joint press conference in Washington D.C. (Photo: Reuters)
Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., released a joint statement applauding President Donald Trump for taking military action in Syria. The two war hawks, who have been frequent critics of President Trump’s policy in Syria and other regions, were among the first to weigh on the President’s response to one of the deadliest attacks in the country’s 6-year civil war.
“Unlike the previous administration, President Trump confronted a pivotal moment in Syria and took action,” the senators said in a joint statement. “For that, he deserves the support of the American people. Building on tonight’s first step, we must finally learn the lessons of history and ensure tactical success leads to strategic progress.”
The chemical weapons attack claimed the lives of an estimated 72 people and wounding at least 400 others.
“The measure in such a strategy must be to take Assad’s air force–which is responsible not just for the latest chemical attack, but countless atrocities against the Syrian people–completely out of the fight,” the senators added. “We must also bolster support for the vetted Syrian opposition and establish safe zones to address the ongoing humanitarian crisis.”
But while it has been widely reported the new U.S. administration has had greater success against the Islamic State in Iraq, it was unclear how far President Trump was willing to go to respond to President Assad in Syria, particularly considering the regime is acting as a countering force to the Islamic State.
Fifty-nine (59) tomahawk missiles were launched from the USS Porter and USS Ross in the Mediterranean Sea and hit multiple confirmed targets at Shayrat, which is located roughly 120 miles from Homs. It is believed that the base was used as a staging point for the chemical weapons attack on Tuesday and both warships have been training for the past two days to execute this mission.
U.S. Pentagon officials tell People’s Pundit Daily the attack was limited but meant to send a message to Assad and Russia that U.S. foreign policy toward Syria has fundamentally changed and will not allow the use of chemical weapons on innocent people.
Preliminary investigations point to Sarin as the chemical involved in the attack. Sarin is a colorless, odorless liquid and is highly volatile moving easily from liquid to a gas.. However, unlike chlorine, which is the preferred chemical weapon of the Assad government, Sarin does not dissipate quickly.
That accounts for the high number of fatalities in what is a painful death– including twitching, jerking and foaming at the mouth.
The most damning journalistic sin committed by the media during the era of Russia collusion…
The first ecological study finds mask mandates were not effective at slowing the spread of…
On "What Are the Odds?" Monday, Robert Barnes and Rich Baris note how big tech…
On "What Are the Odds?" Monday, Robert Barnes and Rich Baris discuss why America First…
Personal income fell $1,516.6 billion (7.1%) in February, roughly the consensus forecast, while consumer spending…
Research finds those previously infected by or vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 are not at risk of…
This website uses cookies.
View Comments
As Donald Trump has tweeted:
Donald J. TrumpVerified account @realDonaldTrump
What will we get for bombing Syria besides more debt and a possible long term conflict? Obama needs Congressional approval.
11:14 AM - 29 Aug 2013
1,594 replies 28,735 retweets 17,488 likes
And, he was right.
The War Powers Resolution is quite clear. The President may initiate the use of military force only under three specific conditions.
From the resolution:
SEC. 2. (c) The constitutional powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only pursuant to (1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.
Have any of these conditions been met? No!
Trump is in violation of the law. And, any lawmakers who support his actions, no matter their political party, are complicit.
Now, let's have a look at those tax returns.