MENU

The world reacts to President Trump's military action in Syria

Trump speech.00_00_27_21.Still009.jpg
(The Pentagon)

In an announcement from West Palm Beach, Florida on Thursday, the President announced the action.

“It is in this vital national security interest of the United States to prevent and deter the spread and use of deadly chemical weapons,” he said.

That chemical weapons attack is believed to have been launched by Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, killing more than 80 people including young children.

Trump’s action also seemed to shift the global chessboard back to a place of familiarity, with countries like Iran and Russia condemning the action.

Russian Prime minister Dmitry Medvedev posted on Facebook the move was “in contradiction with international law” and “puts the U.S. on the verge of a military clash with Russia.”

Meanwhile traditional allies like Israel, Japan and others are voicing support.

“The Australian government strongly supports the swift and just response of the United States,” said Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull in a speech.

In Washington, there’s quite a bit of support from lawmakers as well.

"It was the right move,” said Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL)

Sen. Rob Portman (R - Ohio) agreed, adding “the nations of the world ought to join us in condemning what Assad did.”

Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Mississippi) was also on board.

“I actually applaud what the president did and the way he went about it,” he said.

It is a change of tune from 2013, when President Obama asked for the backing of Congress to take military action after another chemical attack, and didn’t get it.

Even many Democrats have not denounced the airstrikes themselves.

"Making sure that Assad knows when he commits such despicable atrocities, he will pay a price, is the right thing to do,” said Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) on the floor Friday.

The major criticism has come from the President’s decision not to involve congress

Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minnesota) Commented Friday “If the admin has a broader strategy in mind we must have a debate on the authorization for use of military force.”

Sen Tim Kaine (D-Virginia) has perhaps been the most outspoken about the matter.

“The constitution we all pledge an oath to is very, very plain that except for defending the nation against imminent attack, you can't start a war without an act of Congress,” Kaine said.