In the news cycle, context matters to truth. But context is driven by perspective. So which context is key: the domestic and global praise for the missile strike–or the fact that the Syrian air force resumed missions and flew from the struck base the next day?
Which context shapes truth: the appearance of toughness by an isolated, impulsive attack, the Russians forewarned, with no causalities, and no chemical weapons destroyed, only an old radar and several out buildings? Or what the attack reveals and affirms about Trump’s continued use of grief for political grandstanding? (He has used previously urban violence and undocumented residents fatal crimes.)
What context applies: Trump’s need for the image of the grandiosity of power to fire his narcissism and vanity, forgetting about his own statements of indifference about Syrian chemical weapon attacks in 2013/14, and even last week–or the feel good sense of justice, however false and misleading, the tomahawks provided; an appearance void of essence?
Why is the discussion overlooking the 9 children, including a 8 year-old American, killed by a Trump ordered SEAL team attack in a Yemeni village? Why has his compassion for the death of children in war zones not extended to recognizing their innocent loss; why no words of remorse—even a single expression of sorrow–for them? Why are some “defended,” and some abandoned–but all are dead, by wars amplifying the killing? Why is an American President finding glory in grief?