Pressestimmen zu US-Luftschlägen
„Trump ist eine Belastung für Amerika und die Welt“
Die westeuropäische Presse ist sich weitgehend einig: Die US-geführten Raketenangriffe auf Ziele in Syrien werden den Konflikt nicht entscheidend zum Positiven wenden. Donald Trump wird teils harsch kritisiert.
I was curious about the source of the headline for Spiegel’s international press summary here, and found it in the Observer. Made the mistake of looking at the LA Times and the San Francisco Examiner also. The Times has „liberals and conservatives upset that Trump neglected to consult Congress.“ The Examiner’s website is awash with ads, photos, and sports. There were two pieces on Syria, both from the Tribune news service and so could have been published anywhere (and likely were picked up everywhere).
Lots of good analysis in the BBC, Spiegel, Die Zeit, Guardian/Observer. I’m really relieved to have this to read.
It’s a beautiful day here in Berlin, and the sidewalks are filled with people enjoying lunch in the sun. The door to the balcony is open, and sun, air, and conversation waft into the room.
Several papers have pieces giving Mattis credit for keeping Trump in check. I am reminded of Al Haig in the Reagan and Nixon White Houses. Trump „neglected“ to consult Congress. I’m thinking of things I neglect. Sometimes I neglect to pick up my socks. I might neglect to put money in the parking meter. Does a US president neglect to consult Congress before attacking a country with bombs and missiles? I’m pondering this word „upset“. Am I upset that the world press openly writes of a general with the nickname „Mad Dog“ keeping a thuggish boor somewhat restrained as he threatens Russia and launches a hundred missiles into Syria? I think „bemused“ is probably a better descriptor. How do we step back from this situation? Where does this end?
