Michael McFaul認証済みアカウント

And in Syria that is likely to be a good thing.

Yes, I'm sure you'll be able to mount a convincing defense of a pointless Syrian quagmire three years from now.

Limited action to punish war crimes and the use of internationally banned weapons is not entering a quagmire. As you know.

Exfiltrating millions of pounds of schedule 1 chem weapons under threat of military action is greater punishment than bloodless fireworks

But the Assad regime didn't give up all its chemical weapons after 2013 and carried on using them. So that didn't work.

& yet the decimation of their stockpile remains a concrete result with substantially more benefit to American interests than Kabuki strikes

Aside: after Ghouta, the regime transitioned to small-scale, deniable chlorine. Only when Trump came in did they risk another Ghouta.

I'm no fan of Trump in general and the regime imagined that he'd follow up on his apparent support of Assad.

His gial seems to be "undo everything that came befire him."