The U.S. military launched an airstrike assault on Syria Thursday in response to Tuesday’s chemical gas attack in Idlib, which U.S. officials say Syria President Bashar al-Assad was behind. President Donald Trump ordered the strike of nearly 60 Tomahawk missiles against the government airbase where the chemical attack was reportedly launched.
“Tonight, I ordered a targeted military strike on the air field in Syria from where the chemical attack was launched,” Trump told reporters. “It is in this vital national security of the United States to prevent and deter the spread and use of deadly chemical weapons.”
The response garnered praise from lawmakers on both sides of the aisle:
There are a number of questions that remain unanswered, including where the U.S. will go from here. Will the U.S. take additional action? Will Trump consult Congress? How will Syria’s government respond? How will Russia? There is also the question, what happens to the Trump-Russia narrative now?
Many Democrats have continued to push the narrative that Trump and Putin are as thick as thieves. The 24-hour news cycle runs nonstop coverage of allegations and speculation of possible ties between Trump and members of his team and the Russians. Yet Moscow has long supported the Assad regime and has taken a strong stance against any military action against Assad or his government. There is no way Putin could be happy about the airstrikes, especially since there were reportedly Russians on the base.
U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has also spoken out against Russia in the wake of the chemical attack:
So, what happens to the narrative? Do the Democrats stay the course on Trump-Russia? Does the media? Can they at this point? Or will it all now dissipate?
On Syria, the ball is in Russia’s court now. However, in some ways here at home, the ball is in the Democrats’ court. How will they respond?