Debating the Syria Strike's Long-Term Consequences

• 11:03Tim explains the Syria strike debate: most people view it with an eighth-grade mentality asking "what will this accomplish," but the lack of action and the signal it sends matter.
• 11:31Russia's forces were warned before the U.S. strike, which Tim sees as rational and contradicts the "Trump's in bed with Russia" narrative.
• 12:11Tim predicts the Syria strike will be a mistake that draws America into a prolonged conflict with no winners except defense contractors, similar to Iraq.
• 12:38The George W. Bush invasion of Iraq was unprecedented in putting boots on the ground again after a long period of avoiding that approach.
• 13:11The U.S. has a 30-year history of making punitive strikes after terrorist actions—against Gaddafi, the PLO, and others—that doesn't necessarily lead to full-scale war.
• 13:34As the de facto police of the world, America sometimes makes proportional punitive strikes, which Tim says is acceptable if that's what Syria was.
• 14:07Even without boots on the ground, if the U.S. removes one side in Syria, the result could be chaos and a refugee crisis to Europe and America.
• 14:32Tim notes that if the administration really wanted to escalate in Syria, they wouldn't have made this strike; they'd assemble a case the way they did for Iraq.
• 15:18Chemical weapons are the rationale for the strike, and Tim understands that—you can't allow it—but questions whether the model itself is outdated.
• 15:36Assad is probably a monster by any measure, but the instability following his removal raises complications about sectarian protection in the region.

IraqSyriaISISRussiaGeorge W. BushBashar AssadDonald TrumpGaddafi