04.07.2017 07:56 AM

Trudeau takes the right stand on Syria

I’m bewildered as to why Trump gave the Syrians advance warning that he was going to bomb Syria.  But I’m delighted Trudeau has said exactly the right thing, in precisely the right way.  Kudos.

Statement by the Prime Minister of Canada on U.S. strikes in Syria

Ottawa, Ontario
April 7, 2017
The Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, issued the following statement today on U.S. strikes in Syria:

Canada fully supports the United States’ limited and focused action to degrade the Assad regime’s ability to launch chemical weapons attacks against innocent civilians, including many children. President Assad’s use of chemical weapons and the crimes the Syrian regime has committed against its own people cannot be ignored. These gruesome attacks cannot be permitted to continue with impunity.

“This week’s attack in southern Idlib and the suffering of Syrians is a war crime and is unacceptable. Canada condemns all uses of chemical weapons.

“Canada will continue to support diplomatic efforts to resolve the crisis in Syria.”


  1. Darren H says:

    I’m bewildered that you are bewildered. The warning to the Russians was critical, otherwise it would have been considered an act of war to kill Russians in an unannounced attack at the air base. Do you honestly think it would have been prudent to have escalated the situation to a state of war between two nuclear superpowers? Besides, the mission as it was stated was accomplished, as Trudeau pointed out. The USA is not at war with Syria or Russia.

    • Warren says:

      I’m bewildered by you. Would a head’s up to the Syrians not give them to move out of harm’s way any of their ordinance and whatnot? I’m guessing yes.

      Anyway. Nothing irritates me as much as people on the Internet conducting military strategy. The strike, while perhaps empty and something that Obama should have done long ago, was necessary. Period.

      • Tim says:

        I think, for the administration, the message matters more than the tally of destroyed munitions. It says to Syria (and beyond) that there will be military repercussions for certain actions.

      • Darren H says:

        The US must consider the LOAC as there may have been non-combatants at the airfield. Also I agree completely with the strike (empty as we may have thought it to be) and your position on engaging the Syrians.

  2. Tim says:

    Like most, I despise Trump, but I think that giving the Russians a heads up (which would tacitly give the Syrians a heads up), was a smart move. If Russian military personnel were killed by an American attack, it would be a major international incident that carries much more risk of spiraling out of control.

  3. Aongasha says:

    Too bad Obummer didn’t stick to his decision to do this 31/2 years ago. Lot of innocent children, women & men might be alive today had he done so. & Assad might have been long gone. Even Barry said the Syrians crossed his famous Red Line, but he weasled.

  4. Ronald O'Dowd says:


    P-R-E-S-I-D-E-N-T Assad? (Almost as bad as Mr.)

  5. Wayne says:

    I’d be more impressed by the statement from Junior and his boys in short pants if they hadn’t have waited so long to first see what way the wind was blowing before releasing it.

  6. JH says:

    Gotta wonder though, did all this have more to do with the 10 civil servants and the $459,000 spent this year on chasing that UN Seat?
    Has to better places to send tax dollars than on that useless organization.

    • Ronald O'Dowd says:


      The United Nations, deeply flawed though it may be, has done one thing consistently right: decircuited and defused the march to a generalized European war. For that, it’s worth its weight in gold.

      The ineptitude of its predecessor, The League of Nations, contributed to the building up of international tensions that led to the outbreak of World War I.

  7. Ronald O'Dowd says:


    Did I miss something? All I heard about during the Harper PMO was about the boys (and girls?) in short pants. And here it is again under Trudeau?

  8. Aurelia says:


    This Red Cross link explains that human rights laws and conventions require warning a civilian population prior to invasion or attack. Otherwise, it’s a war crime.

    And this custom goes back at least 4000+ years when invaders would surround a citadel and send in messengers to warn the leaders to come out and fight so the women and children and elderly could get out.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.