thanksgiving before we attacked north, thanksgiving in 1990. our our family members who remained in germany, i remember coming back as a major, and they said, boy, did we have faith in our leadership. president bush, colin powell, at the time secretary of defense cheney. so that just example of leadership, of understanding what s going on, of knowing the plight of the service member is all role of the commander in chief. and i saw one of your earlier takes this morning where he said the toughest decision of a president is to send forces to war. that certainly is difficult, and he understood that, i think, more than many other presidents of our recent time. let s expand this conversation about leadership. you talk about it domestically during desert storm, but really globally the president s leadership leading into desert shield and desert storm in creating the coalition of the
action taking place, he acts and this is the second time he s done that. paul, you ll know this quite well, we can look back at president clinton and how he horribly botched not even botched, just didn t intercede when it came to the genocide going on in rwanda and it came back to haunt him terribly, forcing him to apologize for it. president trump, i believe, does not want to look at humanitarian things like this happening, chemical weapons on these children, seeing those images, and looking at and saying, i did not do anything about it, i didn t wait for congress, i consulted with the coalition of the willing, i listened to my generals, and we acted. i think that was the right thing to do in this limited form. paris, if president trump really, really was deeply concerned about the humanitarian crisis in syria, i think he would do a number of things. one, he would have some kind of refugee program and allow some of the refugees to come to the united states. two, he would look at m
purpose to eject the resistance from damascus, it s now game, set, match, assad is in charge and owns the syrian heartland. as far as assad is concerned, he doesn t need to use nuclear weapons anymore. and we move now into i think an entirely different era of this horrible civil war where chemical weapons simply will no longer be a factor. the use of chemical weapons and the response. i do want to get your reflection of what came out of the u.n. security council hours ago. that vote 3 for, 8 against. again, what russia was asking for was to condemn the attacks that were made by the united states, france as well the u.k. as a violation of international law and the u.n. charter. where does this tell you in terms of the coalition of the willing and the very reaction to
of german milan antitank missiles helps the save many lives in their fight against the barbaric i ask you this as a cotton dress example shows what madness german arms exports are germany is exporting weapons irrespective of all law and order into crisis stricken regionals in regions marked by tensions and even into war zones violation of our existing laws and without anyone controlling where these weapons might end up. with it and it will close it with them and so is the fight against bias not justified. of course the fight against the barbaric ah yes is justified. the kurds did join the coalition of the willing under leadership of the. united states to valiantly fight and defend themselves. but that makes it even more macabre that the german government and its ally erda one in turkey are fighting the kurds who stood up to
u.n. said we ll be watching those who don t have our backs and taking names and figuring out how to respond accordingly. this is the rhetoric they use, that the administration s uses at the u.n. and i don t think it s winning them more friends. yeah. i remember the coalition of the willing rhetoric somewhat similar, steve, by the george w. bush administration when they were trying to assemble the iraq coalition and didn t exactly work and people didn t want to be involved and a carrot approach with the stick. apparently a tweet from the ambassador of a save the date picture invitation. nikki haley invited 64 countries that voted against or abstained to come to a party onnian 3rd. among those partying with the united states as a reward for being obedient, honduras, the marshall islands, nauru, palau, togo. is that a way to influence people in the world? no. it s ridiculous. i mean, look who won t be there.