Does it seem strange that Hillary was quoted about 2 hrs

[Algernon Moncrieff]

40. My guess is that it was an intentional (read: sanctioned) leak

I suspect the administration told the minority leadership, and that the DoD or CIA suggested a leak would be a way to telegraph the play to the Syrians so that they could evacuate the base and minimize casualties. Cruise missiles were used so there was no chance of a downed airman. The idea here was to destroy an airbase and send a message - not kill people.

If Assad wants to have any chance of staying in power, he will signal a willingness to come to the bargaining table in the next few days. Putin will likely push him in that direction -- not because he is a humanitarian who gives a damn about the photos of the dead children, but because the photos of the dead children were horrible PR.

Before you accuse me of being cruel and cynical in my tone, remember that a rollback of the ACA will likely kill many American children. I'm far more concerned with Americans keeping their healthcare than how any Middle Eastern war turns out. I'll repeat what I've said before -- our nation doesn't need to continue to choose sides in wars between monarchs and dictators or to get involved in pissing contests between warring religious sects. We are poised to be able to use wind power, solar power, and natural gas in addition to our existing petroleum resources to become an oil exporter. At that point, we really have no economic interests in the Middle East except agricultural and industrial export. By 2020, wind energy may account for 89% of Iowa's electrical energy, and they are selling KWH 15% cheaper than in neighboring Nebraska, which is still very much hooked on coal. Other states should see this and follow suit. Elon Musk's battery and electrical motor technology should only get cheaper and better.

My speculation: Long term, I think the administration wants to lock arms with Russia and impose hegemony in the Middle East -- forget that whole "Arab Spring" thingy. Ending the Syrian Civil War is the first step - the reasoning being that a stable Syria - even with Assad in charge -- would be a bulwark against ISIS/ISIL/Daesh/whatever the Hell they are called this week. Then we can go back to a Middle East run by monarchs, dictators, and Israel -- some backed by Russia and some backed by the US. Back in the Cold War days, we wanted to keep Russia out of Iran at all costs. Now, I think many conservatives (and in this context, I don't just mean Republicans) would find a secular Russian - backed strongman in Iran far more preferable than the Mullahs.