U.S. Launches New Military Strikes Against Syria
President announces retaliation for gas attacks, joined by France and U.K.
President announces retaliation for gas attacks, joined by France and U.K.
A small-scale strike might be constitutional even without congressional support. But it is also likely to be useless, much like last year's missile strike turned out to be. Large-scale military action of the sort that could make a real difference, requires advance congressional authorization.
Withdrawal and diplomacy is the most prudent path forward in Syria. Not military escalation.
The president just threatened a confrontation with a nuclear power. Via tweet.
Plus: Facebook chief Mark Zuckerberg to testify before Congress, Backpage indictment unsealed, tensions rise after chemical attack in Syria.
How will Trump and new national security adviser John Bolton respond to a reported chemical attack in a war-ravaged country?
Escalating U.S. intervention in Syria comes with few benefits and lots of risks.
For now the U.S. stays stuck in Syria.
The war will continue until further notice.
The Supreme Court ruled in 2004 that Americans get due process when accused of terrorism, and yet...
Nevertheless, officials want to see the law expanded.
Including homeland security, domestic surveillance, TSA harassment, veterans benefits, and interest on associated federal debt: $61,000 per taxpayer
The president is doing everything he can do to alienate libertarians who believe in shrinking the size, scope, and spending of government.
There's not much the U.S. could have done to stop the killings.
Don't let Russia hysteria torpedo a better foreign policy.
A new film tells the story behind the website Raqqa is Being Slaughtered Silently.
The U.S. shoots down a Syrian fighter jet; Russia responds by warning US planes could be considered air targets.
The president's speech articulates non-interventionist principles despite fiery rhetoric.
Unlike his predecessor, Trump has not even done us the courtesy of coming up with a laughable excuse.
Everyone loves Trump's Syria strike but only because it really won't change anything? SAD!
Bombs shouldn't be taking the place of aid.
Only The Houston Chronicle was opposed.
Reminder: Donald Trump once opposed military intervention in Syria.
Nick Gillespie debates Bill O'Reilly about the wisdom and ethics of Donald Trump's Syrian strike.
Thaddeus Russell, Katherine Mangu-Ward, & Nick Gillespie talk Syria, Wilsonian foreign policy, and whether PBS Kids makes good soldiers.
"Guided by the beauty of our weapons."
The president's tendency to pursue easy "fixes" is going to be a problem.
Nick Gillespie talks Trump's missile strike on tonight's O'Reilly Factor, 8 P.M. to 9 P.M. ET on Fox News.
The real question is what happens next.
The rush to war in Syria will do more harm than good.
Congress may let the president do anything when it comes to war, but that doesn't make it constitutional.
Imagine what the past 15 years would have been like here and abroad if American foreign policy followed the Constitution.
Nothing says "leader of the free world" like killing bad guys.
Susan Rice, war-authorization, and confrontation with the Russkies all get a real-time workout
President Trump says attack was to protect 'vital national security interest' of U.S.
The Trump administration is slouching toward war with Syria, and Congress, as usual, is failing to assert its constitutional role.
Trump said he was "flexible" on world affairs-the public tends to be less skeptical of interventionism in the wake of chemical attacks, too.
A U.S. airstrike in Mosul could have caused the largest civilian casualties since the start of the Iraq War.
Reports show possible loosening of restrictions on strikes, more CIA participation.
Bombing campaign in Yemen intensifies as additional troops head to Syria, elsewhere.
President Trump has promised both non-interventionism and "safe zones" in Syria. He can't have both.
As worldwide refugee populations peak, the American president slashes numerical targets toward historic lows. Meanwhile, conservative apologists call his stance 'moderate.'
The dissonance between the countries the Trump EO primarily affects and countries associated with 9/11 is embedded in U.S. foreign policy.
Putin is an awful, awful ruler. But can the United States get real about his goals and and his limits?
Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.
This modal will close in 10