Conspiracy theories about the Syrian air strike:

[JHan]

Some of these arguments are not persuasive.

I know Bannon and Trump don't give a fk about norms but some of these conspiracies give these unevolved fools way too much credit.

Conspiracy #1- Trump greenlighted the strike to boost his stock in Raytheon -

We have seen no proof Trump liquidated his stock holdings last summer as he claimed, but I don't see the big pay off here if he still retained those stock assets. The main areas of conflict of interest for Trump are his business assets. What should set alarms off on the outrage meter is his proposed increase in the defense budget made possible by starving critical agencies like the EPA, not his stock portfolio last year.

Conspiracy #2 - The strike was Putin's idea.

Russia and Syria were notified of the attack and this advice would have come from either McMaster or Mattis. The purpose of the attack was "symbolic" or to "send a message" - they chose the minimal option that would ruffle the least feathers. A minimal attack doesn't prove Putin whispered in his ear. Increased military activity by the U.S. doesn't advance Putin's interests since his alliance with Assad has less to do with love for Assad and more to do with retaining unimpeded access to Russia's naval base in Tartus.

Conspiracy #3 Trump used the strike to deflect from Russiagate.

This is possible, but it again gives Trump too much credit.

The chemical attack on Syria's innocent children begged a response from "the Leader of the Free World" and he chose a strike. After a year on the campaign trail decrying interventionism, he has since realised that continuing to push isolationism has made him look weak . Nikki Haley receives more praise for her forthrightness on Russia and Syria, while McMaster and Mattis are considered the only two grown ups in his administration leaving Trump looking ineffectual . So he decided to do something.... A political leader with a comprehensive raison d'être behind their foreign policy would not look as weak, but Trump is incoherent, has no philosophy or convictions beyond enriching himself which is why as POTUS he will continue making rash, impulsive decisions and why he has no business being in the W.H.

[HoneyBadger]

1. No one is talking about Syria

I think that focusing on United conspiracy theories is more relevant

[JHan]

2. For many Syrians, you'll find varying views..

this Syrian was treated like a troll at an Anti-War demonstration because he asked why were there no placards against Assad.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-39540340#

"I didn't see them protesting against the chemical attacks, I didn't see them protesting against Putin bombing Syria for the last two years.
"I wanted to go to that protest and I wanted to observe.
"I went to the protest and I saw a group of 30 people with placards, not a single mention of Assad.
"All the placards are against Donald Trump and they're repeating baseless slogans with their megaphones."
He added: "I went to them respectfully and said, 'Listen I'm a Syrian refugee who lives here and I have an opinion, it's a protest about Syria I want to say something'.
"They didn't even address me, they ignored my existence. With their megaphones they went louder and louder and the organisers told them to carry on."
Mr Akkad left Syria in September 2015. He says he was imprisoned twice and tortured for protesting against Assad's regime.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

3. Number 3 seems highly plausible to me.

An empty airbase in Syria's an easy target, he and Putin can Kabuki it out to make it seem like they're on different pages, and then they'll insist it proves lack of collusion between them and Russia.

Point proven by Eric Trump himself:

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/04/eric-trump-russia-syria-strikes-237102


Eric Trump: Syria missile strikes prove there's no Trump-Russia connection

By Louis Nelson
| 04/11/17 10:01 AM EDT


Syria’s deployment of chemical weapons against its own people, and the U.S. missile strikes targeting a Syrian military air base in response, proved that there is no connection between President Donald Trump and the Russian government, Trump’s son said in an interview published Tuesday.

“If there was anything that Syria did, it was to validate the fact that there is no Russia tie,” Eric Trump told The Daily Telegraph during an interview at the family’s Trump Turnberry golf resort in Scotland. Russia, the most powerful ally of Syrian dictator Bashar Assad, has condemned the U.S. missile strikes and been critical of the U.S. president for ordering them.

[JHan]

4. Yes Eric would spin it that way..

The low risk nature of the attack doesn't help his argument - it's the low risk nature of the attack that birthed many of the conspiracy theories anyway.

I still think the push to respond likely came from Mattis or McMaster, and their thinking would have been to give a "proportional" attack signaling that America is paying attention but doing it in such a way to not cause a spike in the conflict. If Trump had a more coherent, strong position about foreign policy and didn't have a Sec of State who has been a waste of space, there may not have been a chemical attack to test the U.S. response in the first place.

So the question really is how to interpret a low-risk attack - is it to distract ( because the Russia scandal is not going away) or was it to send a message? For me, I see McMaster's fingerprints all over this , with russiagate off the headlines just an incidental , temporary plus for the adminstration.