it did have a big operational or practical impact on the ground or in the syrian military s operations. another option would be, something slightly more aggressive. the u.s. officials that offensive been speaking with seem to think that this is this is where this international response is going to fall is some sort of a slightly larger response, more broader response, which would include, you know, other u.s. allies being involved. it would include probably going after maybe some bashar al assad command and control. so something that would actually have more of an impact than halting operations at one syrian military base for one day, which is what we saw in april of 2017. and, of course, the most aggressive option would be for the united states and france, britain, whatever countries were willing to go in on this to actually go after not just syrian military but iranian and even russian military targets. now, we ve seen some pretty aggressive language out of the russian military. when
some are in the atlantic. so on the other side leaving today is a carrier strike group that has an additional seven destroyers. that takes a few days to steam across the atlantic. but when you look at what those destroyers can do, they can fire off the tomahawks. that s what the trump is saying are smart and. can get through syrian defenses. syria has a system that russia has. it didn t work last time knocking down the tomahawks in april of 2017. unclear if it would work this time. they have other assets. don t forget they are prosecuting a war in eastern syria bringing in a lot and flying those out from bases further south in the middle east. thank you for that. let s go back to the white house. kristin welker still standing by. the president went on a lament this morning about the u.s. relationship with russia. i m quoting here. our relationship with russia is worse now that be it has ever been. that includes the cold war.
field last year. we have bob menendez that said that assad is proof that a limited use of military force in syria without a broad and fully resourced diplomatic strategy as president trump chose to do in april of 2017 was ineffective. the democratic whip adds that my heart breaks for the people of syria and the victims of this attack. as we ve seen today and countless times before, assad s rulety with putin s support knows know bounds. his continued use of chemical weapons is a stain on humanity itself. if there s a large scale military response, congress wants to be consulted. we have no reason to think that s coming, not right now, shep. shepard: thanks, peter doocy. let s go to jeff mason, white house correspondent for reuters. hi, shep. shepard: is there anyone s requirement that the president consult with congress prior to
as we heard president trump say, they re trying to work out who did this. so the question is, would we have another one of these strikes like in april of 2017 that s meant to send a message but doesn t have a real long-term practical implication for their operations. or do we see something that s a little more aggressive? i think that s the question that everyone wants answered today. the question is will we get an answer to that? i don t know. and bill neely, it is such a complicated mess in the region, if you will. you had vladamir putin, iran, turkey all meeting and celebrating last friday, the fact that they were in charge of syria. that the united states, the president said we want out and arguing with his own pentagon leaders, we want it in months to get out of there, 2,000 troops, months not years. and now the president is facing having sent that signal, having to become much more engaged if he s going to back up his
what is this setting the stage for? i think it s tempting mr. trump to want to respond in a tougher manner. the russians have threatened grave consequences at a time when we re at least on a roll in terms of adopting tougher sanctions against the russians for wanton interference in our election system. the president may well believe that a response is required. let s not forget, in april of 2017, driven largely, i think, by his desire to be the un-obama and to enforce a red line and presumably reportedly by pictures with the effects of serin gas on civilians, mr. trump took 36 hours to respond with a one-off important strike against syria and an airfield. that strike did very little to preempt or deter assad s use of these weapons. now you have a situation in