Consider the chilling reality that if this commentary were written and published in Russia, and the headline included Vladimir Putin instead of Trump, the author would be arrested, tried, and ultimately convicted of treason.
In the United States, Americans can call out the truth as they see fit—and when that perceived truth is supported by undeniable facts—such truth becomes more than simple subjective reality that can be easily dismissed by critics or ideological sycophants.
Donald J. Trump has the lowest approval ratings and highest disapproval ratings than any President since such ratings have been recorded. For every bench mark past and present—Trump is absolutely the worst President of all time.
Compare this with Russian dictator Vladimir Putin’s staggering 83% approval rating. How does Vladimir Putin maintain such high approval ratings? The answer can be found in one word: WAR!
War brings higher oil prices and a distraction away from daily pain. But war brings death and destruction to those in the war zone. Time and time again, Vladimir Putin has utilized the horrors of war and the horrific pain and suffering it inflicts in order to maintain power and sway over the Russian people. Any descension by the Russian people or an opposing political party is met with swift reprisals and harsh imprisonment.
Trump parrots Putin in many respects and has openly demonstrated his willingness to wage an outright war on all that disagree with him by directly targeting dissenters in the United States.
Trump has installed political loyalists throughout the government to monitor what right wing provocateurs call the “Deep State” and he has taken direct steps to remove career government employees that may slow down his agenda.
Trump continues to test and overreach the Office of the President—exactly like dictators of the past—by encouraging law enforcement agencies to overstep their legal mandated authority in order to squash free thought by employing intimidation tactics such as those used to unmask Twitter users who openly resist the Trump Administration.
Trump has publically demonstrated a deep and profound callousness towards the disabled and anyone who does not placate to his narcissism. Trump has never expressed any remorse nor any degree of empathy towards those that have experienced tremendous loss.
Are Americans suddenly supposed to believe that Trump was so deeply moved after seeing images and video of dying babies that launching missiles at an already emptied military air base would elevate him above his despicable behavior—let alone let him off the hook for green lighting the heinous chemical attack committed by Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad.
Trump remained silent after Russian forces moved into and began a genocidal assault on helpless civilians in Aleppo, Syria beginning the day after the November 8th, 2016 election. Granted Obama was still the President of the United States, but maybe if Trump spent as much energy condemning the evils of the world instead of attempting to illegally circumvent the sanctions against Russia and collude with a foreign adversary who supports the Assad regime, launching of missiles at an empty air base would have meant more than what it actually was—a political public relations stunt.
The City of Idlib, Syria, where the latest chemical attacks have taken place, has been under a relentless bombardment campaign by Russia backed Syrian forces, attacks that began shortly after the fall of Aleppo—while Trump, in lieu of articulating any cohesive Syrian strategy, has been consistently more focused on publicly praising Vladimir Putin, escaping his Presidential responsibilities by running off to Mar A Lago to play golf, and making false acquisitions of illegal wiretapping by the Obama Administration.
The facts speak an undeniable truth—the Trump Administration provided a green light for the carrying out of the latest chemical attack by publicly stating six days prior that it was no longer a priority to oust dictator Bashar al Assad.
The BDA—or Battle Damage Assesment—and reports that the Russians were notified before the 59 TLAMS, or Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles, were even launched provides fodder that the entire “retaliatory strike” was a political public relations stunt.
Consider the following:
Mach 1 is defined as a ratio of the speed of a body (aircraft) to the speed of sound in the undisturbed medium through which the body is traveling. It is said that the aircraft is flying at Mach 1 if its speed is equal to the speed of sound in air (which is 332 m/s or 1195 km/hr or 717 miles/hour.
Tomahawk missiles have a reported speed of up to 550 miles per hour—less than the .80 Mach of the same type of aircraft Trump used as a prop during the 2016 election campaign—a Boeing 757-200.
Idlib, Syria is approximately 50 miles inland from the shores of the 970,000 square mile Mediterranean Sea where the Tomahawk missiles were launched from two destroyers; the USS Porter (DDG-78) and USS Ross (DDG-71).
Tomahawk missiles fly low to the ground and around terrain to evade defensive radar and anti missile counter measures. The Russian military have placed advanced anti missile systems around various air fields utilizing S-400 and S-300 anti-missile hardware and trained personnel—all of which appeared not to be factor around the targeted airbase.
With a cruising speed of 550 miles, Tomahawk missiles could theoretically hit their intended targets 150 miles away in less than five minutes. With a range of 550 miles to target, missiles would make impact in approximately one hour from launch. The intent of this missile launch was not to generate significant damage or to degrade Syrian military capabilities, but to garner political support and to boost historically low approval ratings of a President who has failed on every undertaking.
BDA—Battle Damage Assessments—and enemy Force Depletion Reports provide evidence that there was sufficient time for Russian forces to exit the intended target area and for Syrian military aircraft to be dispersed.
With all the information made available—from public comments made by Trump to the capabilities of military weaponry—it can only be concluded that the targeted military strike on Syria was not a measured proportional response, but a political stunt to sway a public growing ever more weary and frustrated by a President who is a evidently a text book example of a pathological liar.