Is Trump Enlisting in the War Party?

By Pat Buchanan

John Mccain and Lindsey Graham
John Mccain and Lindsey Graham : If the president has thrown in with the neocons and War Party, and we are plunging back into the Mideast maelstrom, Trump should know that many of those who helped to nominate and elect him — to keep us out of unnecessary wars — may not be standing by him.
Pat Buchanan
Patrick J .Buchanan

USA –  -( By firing off five dozen Tomahawk missiles at a military airfield, our “America First” president may have plunged us into another Middle East war that his countrymen do not want to fight.

Thus far Bashar Assad seems unintimidated. Brushing off the strikes, he has defiantly gone back to bombing the rebels from the same Shayrat air base that the U.S. missiles hit.

Trump “will not stop here,” warned U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley on Sunday. “If he needs to do more, he will.”

If Trump fails to back up Haley's threat, the hawks now cheering him on will begin deriding him as “Donald Obama.”

But if he throbs to the war drums of John McCain, Lindsey Graham and Marco Rubio and orders Syria's air force destroyed, we could be at war not only with ISIS and al-Qaida, but with Syria, Russia, Iran and Hezbollah.

A Syrian war would consume Trump's presidency.

Are we ready for that? How would we win such a war without raising a large army and sending it back into the Middle East?

Another problem: Trump's missile attack was unconstitutional. Assad had not attacked or threatened us, and Congress, which alone has the power to authorize war on Syria, has never done so.

Indeed, Congress denied President Obama that specific authority in 2013.

What was Trump thinking? Here was his strategic rational:

“When you kill innocent children, innocent babies — babies, little babies — with a chemical gas … that crosses many, many lines, beyond a red line. … And I will tell you, that attack on children yesterday had a big impact on me … my attitude toward Syria and Assad has changed very much.”

Two days later, Trump was still emoting: “Beautiful babies were cruelly murdered in this very barbaric attack. No child of God should ever suffer such horror.”

Now, that gas attack was an atrocity, a war crime, and pictures of its tiny victims are heart-rending. But 400,000 people have died in Syria's civil war, among them thousands of children and infants.

Have they been killed by Assad's forces? Surely, but also by U.S., Russian, Israeli and Turkish planes and drones — and by Kurds, Iranians, Hezbollah, al-Qaida, ISIS, U.S.-backed rebels and Shiite militia.

Assad is battling insurgents and jihadists who would slaughter his Alawite brethren and the Christians in Syria just as those Copts were massacred in Egypt on Palm Sunday. Why is Assad more responsible for all the deaths in Syria than those fighting to overthrow and kill him?

Are we certain Assad personally ordered a gas attack on civilians?

For it makes no sense. Why would Assad, who is winning the war and had been told America was no longer demanding his removal, order a nerve gas attack on children, certain to ignite America's rage, for no military gain?

Like the gas attack in 2013, this has the marks of a false flag operation to stampede America into Syria's civil war.

And as in most wars, the first shots fired receive the loudest cheers. But if the president has thrown in with the neocons and War Party, and we are plunging back into the Mideast maelstrom, Trump should know that many of those who helped to nominate and elect him — to keep us out of unnecessary wars — may not be standing by him.

We have no vital national interest in Syria's civil war. It is those doing the fighting who have causes they deem worth dying for.

For ISIS, it is the dream of a caliphate. For al-Qaida, it is about driving the Crusaders out of the Dar al Islam. For the Turks, it is, as always, about the Kurds.

For Assad, this war is about his survival and that of his regime. For Putin, it is about Russia remaining a great power and not losing its last naval base in the Med. For Iran, this is about preserving a land bridge to its Shiite ally Hezbollah. For Hezbollah it is about not being cut off from the Shiite world and isolated in Lebanon.

Because all have vital interests in Syria, all have invested more blood in this conflict than have we. And they are not going to give up their gains or goals in Syria and yield to the Americans without a fight.

And if we go to war in Syria, what would we be fighting for?

A New World Order? Democracy? Separation of mosque and state? Diversity? Free speech for Muslim heretics? LGBT rights?

In 2013, a great national coalition came together to compel Congress to deny Barack Obama authority to take us to war in Syria.

We are back at that barricade. An after-Easter battle is shaping up in Congress on the same issue: Is the president authorized to take us into war against Assad and his allies inside Syria?

If, after Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Yemen, we do not want America in yet another Mideast war, the time to stop it is before the War Party has us already in it. That time is now.


Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of the new book “The Greatest Comeback: How Richard Nixon Rose From Defeat to Create the New Majority.

  • 6 thoughts on “Is Trump Enlisting in the War Party?

    1. Homework assignment everybody, including the Prez and all federal politicos.

      Read: The Haj.
      This is a work of “fiction” that was apparently based on extensive research as well as personal experience and cultural connection. When I read it years ago it rang true to what I was aware of in world news, and continues to ring true to this day. Me thinks Uris knew what he was writing about. As I recall there is a passage in the book referring to the cultural mentality prevalent in the region that goes something like: “Brother against brother, brothers against the father, the family against the neighbors, the neighborhood against the state, and everyone against the infidel”.
      Nothing seems to have changed.

      It’s not our war. As noble as our intentions may be, we don’t think like they do, our values are very different and we are intruders. Whatever change we attempt will not endure beyond our presence and financial support. After reading the book I recall thinking that the best solution would be to arm both sides to the teeth and let them have at it. Whatever the result of the conflict would only last until the next convulsion. Basically a hopeless situation of endless conflict. Brother against brother….

      Author: Leon Uris
      Publisher: London : Corgi, 2011. (originally published 1984)
      Edition/Format: Print book : Fiction : EnglishView all editions and formats
      Database: WorldCat
      Haj Ibrahim – known as the Haj – is leader of the small but strategically placed village of Tabah. Sworn enemy – and secret friend – of Gideon Asch, Israeli settler, pioneer, fighter, the Haj and his men are seen first in all their false courage and manic ambition. Theirs is a world of oaths, blood, death and vengeance.
      A good quote from another review:
      “An extraordinary epic of a novel, in reality a Shakespearean tragedy with the Middle East as its background, ranging from 1922 to 1956. It is told in first person through the eyes of the Haj’s son, Ishmael, the only family member who learned to read and write. It is a very compassionate novel, yet critical of all the major global players: Israel, the Arab states, Britain, Russia and the United States. Most of all, it is critical of the Arabs, whom Uris presents as prisoners of their culture of fifteen hundred years. There are many characters, Arab and Israeli, who enter and leave the story. Only the main ones persist to the end: Ishmael and Haj Ibrahim. One finishes this book and closes the covers with sadness, wishing things could have been different for these people. After all, they merely wanted to improve the conditions of their lives. It is not an easy story to read; it is long, and has several gruesome scenes that this reader found hard to wade through, including a description of the corpse of Ibrahim’s favorite daughter, Nada, whom he loved dearly, hacked to pieces by his own hand because she loved men outside of marriage and of anyone the Haj would have chosen for her in the old desert way. It was hard to take for this reader. Regardless, this is a fine novel.”

      You won’t enjoy but you will gain perspective,

    2. I agree, this does seem to be a ‘false flag operation’. And that was my first thought when I heard of gas being used [again].

      It doesn’t make sense for Assad to have taken this type action, when he has both the Russian’s and USA doing his bidding. Why would he jepordise us bombing terrorist in his country. My second thought was, either the affected rebel group itself set off the gas or another terrorist/rebel group in the region.

      Though for now, we have no choice but to believe Prez Trump saw evidence we have seen.

    3. The American people “ARE NOT GOING TO TOLERATE THE BLATANT STUPIDITY OF LINDSEY GRAHAM AND TRAITOR McCAIN” If they continue to represent the Obama administration, they will not be asked to cease, they will be removed from their positions!! End of their story!!!

    4. I stopped reading at “Another problem: Trump’s missile attack was unconstitutional” and just skimed from there. The President does have that exact power and followed the letter of the law in doing so. This was not a declaration of war, but a targeted strike. He is required to notify Congress within 48 hours of such a strike, which he did.

    Leave a Comment 6 Comments