Upping the ante in Syria would be politically disastrous for the president, and more important, it would damage America’s national security. Here’s why.
The questions people should really be asking are why Syria joined the Paris agreement and why it chose to do so now, two years after the agreement was first adopted.
The idea that Russia orchestrated the Trump administration’s decision to end the CIA’s funding of jihadists is totally corrupt and offensive.
Don’t hold your breath waiting for the Syrian ceasefire to culminate in some sort of peaceful resolution, or even last long. We’ve been down this road before, folks.
Can one support freedom and security for both majorities and minorities? This is the biggest question looming over U.S. policy in the Middle East, particularly for our involvement in Syria.
If a few tear-jerker images can move President Trump (or anyone) to support a war that he always opposed, we’re in bad shape indeed.
Because Syrian President Bashar al-Assad continues to possess weapons of mass destruction, and has now used them twice, a U.S. response was warranted.
America has launched air strikes against the Syrian regime, but do we have a strategy yet for Syria? Or do we have too many?
Our soft-spoken, poised ambassador to the United Nations has emerged as the star of the Trump administration, earning new admirers for her performance on the international stage.
Chemical weapons attacks by the Assad regime in Syria have amplified calls for military intervention there. We need some key questions answered first.
We shouldn’t need humanitarian prompting to care about Syria. We should care because we’re terrified of the implications for our own interests and security.
Both President Trump and the United Nations appear unlikely to take any significant steps toward ending Bashar al Assad’s reign of terror.
As we close out the year and prepare for the incoming Trump administration, here are the top ten foreign policy developments of 2016 that will set the scene for 2017.
A conservative approach toward the Middle East today should not be a choice between the two extremes of isolationism or global policing.
A recent chain of events comes within a context that supports the theory of a Trump-Kremlin alliance. You’ve got to read it to believe it.
President Obama’s ideological desires not to sully himself with military action in the Middle East have clouded his vision.
With nearly half a million dead and U.S. proxies fighting each other, Syria represents a failure of U.S. strategy and a lack of presidential leadership.
President Obama’s weakness in Syria gave Vladimir Putin an opening to make Russia the dominant power in the region.
Obama constructed the Iran Deal with a fundamental misunderstanding of Iranian politics. If his assumptions fail to manifest, the we’ll all be in serious trouble.
If the 1990s was a Holiday from History, this is the Middle Finger to History: a petulant refusal to take the threat from the Islamic State seriously.
- 6 Reasons Your Right-Wing Friend Isn’t Coming To Your Side On Gun ControlThere are several reasons Second Amendment advocates arcontinue reading >
- How A Plea Reversal From Michael Flynn Could Uncover More Federal CorruptionDid Robert Mueller’s office withhold other evidence icontinue reading >
- Is A Former Feinstein Staffer Running Fusion GPS’s Post-Election Steele Dossier Operation?A former FBI agent who served as one of Sen. Dianne Feicontinue reading >