Trump's Big CON: He is the Hypocrite-in-Chief (or Coward-in-Chief)

UPDATE VI:  The Republi-CON party itself is hyper-partisan in support or opposition to war/the use of military force.

"In 2013, when Barack Obama was president, a Washington Post-ABC News poll found that only 22 percent of Republicans supported the U.S. launching missile strikes against Syria in response to Bashar al-Assad using chemical weapons against civilians.

A new Post-ABC poll finds that 86 percent of Republicans support Donald Trump’s decision to launch strikes on Syria for the same reason. Only 11 percent are opposed. . .

For context, 37 percent of Democrats back Trump’s missile strikes. In 2013, 38 percent of Democrats supported Obama’s plan. That is well within the margin of error."

Read the Washington Post, Reflexive partisanship drives polling lurch on Syria strikes.

UPDATE V:  Trump isn't the only Republi-CON hypocrite.

"The Republican leaders of the House and the Senate this past week were quick to praise President Trump’s strike on Syria after an apparent chemical weapons attack. But in 2013, when President Barack Obama was weighing a strike, they were opposed."

Read the Washington Post, Ryan and McConnell flip-flop on use of force in Syria to deter chemical weapons.

Read also the Washington Post, Obama aides push back against criticism of inaction on Syria, which noted that Obama "proposed similar airstrikes in Syria to the ones President Donald Trump ordered this week, but were stymied by a Republican-controlled Congress reluctant to go along with the Democratic president’s plan."

UPDATE IV:  It's a different world when you are the one in charge.

"President Trump — who ran a presidential campaign excoriating interventionism, ridiculed the idea of action in Syria, voiced confidence we could leave Bashar al-Assad in place and reintroduced the noxious 1930s “America First” rhetoric — when confronted with the real world threw away all that refuse and launched a retaliatory missile strike on the airfield from which planes carrying sarin gas took off earlier in the week. . .

And that really is the rub: What comes next, and what is our strategy for Syria? It surely seems that contrary to Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s remarks just a few days ago, we are not willing to stand aside with the false presumption the Syrian people can decide (in the fog of Sarin gas) the fate of Assad. Eliot Cohen, an ardent critic of the president, was pleased to see some action, but remarked to me that Trump’s missile strike was “Better than nothing. How much better than nothing is not clear, until you know what damage is done.” He added: “For this kind of thing to be effective, it really has to hurt the Syrian regime — and one cannot be sure whether or not it has.”"

Read the Washington Post, Trump launches cruise missile strike, eradicates 'America First'.

Trump should have targeted Assad, but at least he did something.

UPDATE III:  "Trump is now commander in chief. He must decide whether to continue our passive approach and watch continued genocide unfold or whether we chart a new course. Frequent Trump critic Eliot Cohen tweeted, 'Whining is cowardly & counterproductive.'"

Read the Washington Post, The Syrian genocide is now Trump’s problem. 

UPDATE II:  "Assad has continued to dress smart and kill with abandon. His security forces maintain jails where torture is common. His army drops “barrel bombs” on civilians. The extent of the killing, the torture, the attack on doctors and the bombing of hospitals are hard to envision and impossible to accept. Yet this week, both Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, a man of few words and no policies, and U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley said it was no longer U.S. policy to rid Syria of Assad. A day or so later, Assad apparently used nerve gas. . .

No one can say with any certainty that Assad acted after the Trump administration shrugged indifference to his remaining in office. But it is not illogical to think so. The words of a U.S. president matter and are obsessively examined by foreign governments. They assume that these words mean something. They base policy on them. They sometimes kill on account of them. Vagueness is sometimes useful; it can also be deadly.

Read the Washington Post, Trump finally realizes the truth about Syria’s Assad. Now what?

UPDATE:  "As the Western world processed stomach-churning images of dead children, apparently murdered by chemical weapons, the president couldn’t help but take a potshot at his predecessor. 'These heinous actions by the Bashar al-Assad regime are a consequence of the past administration’s weakness and irresolution,' Trump said in a statement yesterday afternoon. . .

As he ripped Obama, Trump mentioned neither Russia nor Iran. Both countries are actively propping up Assad’s regime.

The president also offered no path forward, except to say that the savagery, which observers on the ground say killed at least 72 people, “cannot be ignored.” . .

This White House is stuck in permanent campaign mode. . .

This has been a pattern during Trump’s first 75 days in office. When it suits him, the president takes credit for his predecessor’s successes. More often, he points the finger. Trump’s unsubstantiated allegation that Obama 'wiretapped' his office is the most memorable illustration, but there are many others. After the botched raid in Yemen that killed a Navy SEAL, for instance, the White House claimed that the operation was authorized by the Obama team."

Read the Washington Post, Trump keeps blaming Obama. Fresh polls show voters don’t buy it., which includes 6 other 2013 tweets that warned Obama not to attack Syria.

In August 2013, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad used chemical weapons that killed nearly 1,500 civilians, including at least 426 children.

After Obama threatened action, Republi-cons, including The Donald, warned Obama not to attack Syria.

On August 29, 2013, Trumps tweeted "What will we get for bombing Syria besides more debt and a possible long term conflict? Obama needs Congressional approval."

On September 5, Trump tweeted "AGAIN, TO OUR VERY FOOLISH LEADER, DO NOT ATTACK SYRIA - IF YOU DO MANY VERY BAD THINGS WILL HAPPEN & FROM THAT FIGHT THE U.S. GETS NOTHING!"

And on September 7, Trump tweeted"President Obama, do not attack Syria. There is no upside and tremendous downside. Save your "powder" for another (and more important) day!"

Now Assad is using chemical weapons again.

And Trump's response, blame Obama.

Read the Washington Post, A chemical weapons attack in Syria exposes Trump’s Assad problem.

Of course this should be no surprise, Trump is the 'I Want The Credit, Don't Blame Me' President.