こりゃあ、すごいぞな、もし。
ｂuvery
@buvery
空母カール・ビンソンが朝鮮半島近海に到着するのが4月15日。
9:50 - 2017年4月11日
Throughout the presidential campaign, Trump made it clear that he was perfectly comfortable with the notion of using military force to advance US interests abroad, despite chiding President Obama and Hillary Clinton (in her role as secretary of state) for involving the United States in protracted Middle Eastern conflicts. Last September, when asked how he would respond to a recent incident in which Iranian naval craft veered dangerously close to American ships in the Persian Gulf, he told reporters, “With Iran, when they circle our beautiful destroyers with their little boats, and they make gestures at our people that they shouldn’t be allowed to make, they will be shot out of the water.”
In the few months since he has occupied the White House, moreover, Trump has demonstrated ever-increasing comfort with the use of force, giving his top military officials—“my generals,” as he likes to call them—greater leeway to plan and conduct military actions in active war zones, including Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen.
The Tomahawk strikes against Syria on April 7 should be viewed against this backdrop. Over the 77 days between his inauguration and his decision to launch the missile attack, Trump had grown increasingly comfortable with the exercise of military force, authorizing increased US combat activities throughout the Middle East. From all accounts, he did not hesitate in ordering Friday’s strikes: There was no agonizing over international law, the need to consult Congress, the impact on America’s foreign relations, or other such considerations that might have preoccupied President Obama. We can also be certain that Trump is highly pleased with the outcome: Not only did many Republican hawks, including Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham, praise the move, but so did many of his fiercest Democratic critics, including Senator Chuck Schumer.
Of greater concern, this all must be viewed as part of a Trumpian learning curve, whereby the president is gaining experience with—and evident satisfaction in—using military force against those weaker than us. This is an impulse that will not be fulfilled by the single-salvo strike against Syria alone—there will be a third, a fourth, and successive steps up the ladder of escalation.
What might those next steps look like? The most likely scenarios are preemptive military strikes against North Korea and/or Iran.
North Korea will celebrate the 105th birthday of its founding president, Kim Il-sung, on April 15, and some analysts speculate this could be the occasion for Kim’s grandson, and the country’s current ruler, Kim Jong-un, to order a fresh round of nuclear or missile tests—the possible pretext for a US preemptive strike against North Korea.
選挙中も、例えばイランについて、軍事力を使ってとっちめちゃうよ、と宣伝していたが、大統領になって、イエメンについても、シリアについても、軍人にかなりの裁量権を与えてゴーサインを出しており、軍事力を使うことについて、躊躇していない。しかも、シリア攻撃について、共和党、民主党の大半からも支持されているわけで、これに気をよくして、今度は、イラン かつ/または、北朝鮮をやるかもしれない、と。
四月十五日 金日成誕生日に核ミサイルの実験をするかもしれない、と言われており、これを口実に、アメリカは北朝鮮に先制攻撃をしかけるかもしれない、と。
