Has Trump ever attacked Robert De Niro

Debate US airstrike in Syria: never again?

It is tempting to think now: “Finally.” Because the intervention in Syria is correct. But the doer is the wrong one. Where is Europe?

Coffins for the victims of the attack Photo: dpa

"A good plan today is better than a perfect plan tomorrow": US President Donald Trump acted according to this motto of General Patton (1885–1945) on Friday. At 4:40 a.m. Syrian time, Trump ordered 59 tomahawk missiles to be fired at the Syrian air base in Shairat. Trump was also guided by a second motto of the general: "Avoid paralysis through analysis".

A Trump-led military strike cannot be right. Even the attempt to analyze Trump's motives and possible further actions must fail. His political interest is determined by the person he is speaking to or the current television program. His convictions are kept safe in bank accounts and in real estate portfolios. Just because he suffered with the dying Syrian babies yesterday doesn't mean he can't call Syrian ruler Assad a great strategist tomorrow. The White House has no plan. A fundamental turnaround in the Syrian war for the better is therefore questionable.

Anyone who does not follow Trump's will is quickly removed. In these days, however, his health concept failed because of the Republicans. It was a shameful defeat for the US president. He has just withdrawn his closest advisor, Stephen Bannon, from the National Security Council. The Muslim ban has failed for the time being. His team's contacts with Russia pose a risk of explosion. Why should it come as a surprise that Trump is now following a different rule of law: If things get tight domestically, then gather the people around the flag?

In the Hollywood film “Wag the Dog” (1997), Robert De Niro, as a Washington adviser, staged an alleged war in Albania with the camera in order to distract attention from a sex scandal involving the president. "A good plan today," says Bean for his strategy, "is better than a perfect plan tomorrow."

There is no strategy

But the international community is actually paralyzed. The UN Security Council demonstrated the fact just last week. It is true that the poison gas attack must first be investigated before anyone can be reasonably certain that the poison gas actually came from Assad's bombing arsenals. But even level-headed skeptics in Germany such as Left Party politician Jan van Aken tend to attribute the character of alternative facts to the Russian-Syrian version of the bombing of a poison gas arsenal by the Syrian rebels. And none of that changes it: Assad's murders and war crimes are politely negotiated at stylish tables in Vienna. Sequel follows. The alliance of Russia, Iran and China is cultivating its strategy, Turkey is pursuing its own, the other Arab states are doing little in the frozen status quo.

Today's right call “lying press” because they feel they are not represented by the established media - similar to the 1968 left. Read in the taz. On the weekend of 8./9. April an essay on the career of a battle term. Also: A report about a hotelier in Bautzen who let refugees move in and who was happy when the hostel father was - until incendiary devices flew. And: How the Oscar damaged the credibility of the gay drama "Moonlight". At the kiosk, eKiosk or with a practical weekend subscription.

A military intervention in Syria carries high risks, that is the mantra. But haven't the past five years shown the risks of failure to intervene? Has Russia stayed out of the conflict? Have the moderate oppositionists been spared fumigating their quarters? The German left in particular has been asking itself the same question again and again since the war in Bosnia: What will actually follow from our decided “Never again”? What does this mean for crimes against humanity in Syria? If nothing follows, it's worth nothing.

The effects of US interventions in the region were to be studied in the Iraq war. If anyone can act, it is a resolute Europe. This force - militarily, politically and economically - should have been built up a long time ago. In times of Donald Trump at the head of the world's strongest power, it was even more decisive. That would be better than approvingly approve of him.