U.S. Navy guided-missile destroyer USS Ross (DDG 71) fires a tomahawk land attack missile from the Mediterranean Sea on April 7, 2017. The U.S. Defense Department said it was a part of cruise missile strikes against Syria. Photo courtesy of Robert S. Price/U.S. Navy handout via Reuters

Religious voices raised over Syria bombing by US

(RNS) The missile strikes ordered against Syria by President Trump have prompted widespread responses from a variety of religious leaders, and their reactions also range widely.

Here is a roundup of some initial takes:

Jack Graham is the pastor of Prestonwood Baptist Church in Plano, Texas, and served as a member of the Trump campaign's evangelical advisory board.

Rachel Held Evans is a progressive Christian author.

Marco Rubio is a Republican senator from Florida.

Via Catholic News Service:

WASHINGTON (CNS) — Two prominent Catholic leaders in Syria criticized the U.S. missile strikes against their nation, wondering why they occurred before investigations into the origins of chemical attacks reported April 4.

Anti-Defamation League

Shane Claiborne is an author and activist

The Rev. Samuel Rodriguez, president of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference:

“The world community cannot sit idly by while brutal dictators like Bashar al-Assad are allowed to terrorize their own people and defying every international law and convention in the process. Our continued inaction would be our complicity. Too many lines have been crossed and too many lives lost. Meanwhile terrorists have seized upon the region’s instability, using it to wage jihad and deploy terrorists around the world, including to Europe and the United States. Thankfully, it seems the days of allowing such atrocities to be left unchecked are over."

Susan Thistlethwaite is a professor at Chicago Theological Seminary and senior fellow at the Center for American Progress.

American Jewish Committee

Simran Jeet Singh is a religion professor at Trinity University and senior religion fellow for the Sikh Coalition.

Rabbi Danya Ruttenberg is an author and rabbi-in-residence at the economic justice group Avodah.

Statement from the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the nation’s largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization:

"This limited attack will not end the ongoing genocide that has resulted in the death, injury, rape, torture, and displacement of millions of innocent Syrians whose only 'crime' was seeking freedom and self-determination, but it is a welcome recognition of the genocidal actions carried out for six years by the murderous Assad regime and its allies."

The Rev. Broderick Greer is curate at Grace-St. Luke's Episcopal Church and School in Memphis, Tenn.



  1. Think about how many of those Syrians would not have been gassed by Assad had we let them in as refugees.

    Trump messed up a perfectly justifiable act. Its one thing to fire off the missiles in reprisal over the gas attack, but it means absolutely zilch unless you follow it up with a public statement explaining why it was done.

    Trump being the lazy impatient know-it-all cretin, didn’t bother with getting the advice of advisors who know how to handle this sort of thing and just went off half-cocked. So he failed to give the post attack message as to why he did it and that it isn’t meant to declare war on Russia and Iran. Now we have world leaders scratching their head thinking:

    “WTF just happened?”
    “Is Trump another Kim Jong”
    “Is Trump crazy?”
    “Did he just try to start a war with us?”
    “Oh great we have to deal with the fallout of this crap?”

  2. unfortunately those ones were probably never going to be refugees here. it is a long process and they would have died before even getting a chance to flee.

  3. My point is that turning refugees back is generally tantamount to killing them ourselves. Also I am eager to see whether conservatives now suddenly love Syrians after this.

  4. well I’m not really conservative, more center left. but with some socially conservative views, and have never supported the idiotic refugee band. So I wouldn’t really say that it was a conservative view against the refugees (given how many Christian conservatives have come out against it) but more of a nationalistic view

  5. Shoebat is your source? LOL. You people are so gullible.

  6. Bat-shoe crazy is your source? It may be true, but not because the crazies say so.

  7. It wasn’t intended as dig at you. The shoebats are both of them bat-shoe crazy.

  8. Good for both of us. The tone around here is questionable enough.

  9. God doesn’t sleep and sometimes, it seems like the devil doesn’t either. Los niños y los locos dicen las verdades. And again, Más sabe el loco en su casa que el sabio en la ajena.

  10. I visit Mr. Shoebat’s site on occasion, and as one who identifies in a tightly focused and limited sense with his beliefs, i.e. the Sovereignty of Jesus, etc., I find his journalism questionable, his graphics pathetic, his management of the site juvenile, and his followers almost idolatrous in their veneration of him.

  11. But other than that, what do you think????

  12. People who rely primarily on compressed gas cylinder mortars as artillery do not have the means of delivering a nerve gas attack without killing themselves. The stuff is too volatile and deadly in small quantities otherwise.

    You need real artillery or air delivery for that. Meaning Assad, Russia or Iranian proxy forces. Yes I know ISIS did a chemical attack in Iraq, but ISIS has some modern equipment, and used a far less effective agent, mustard gas. Something not deadly on contact and more notorious for grievous injury than lethality. Old stuff. A generation behind in effectiveness to what was used this week.

    Plus Shoebat is a crazy nutjob who appeals to the uncritical.

  13. Say, David Gibson, if you’re hoping that “The missile strikes ordered against Syria by President Trump [would] have prompted [unanimous, consensus-forming] responses from a variety of religious leaders”, how about first figuring out with these clergies as to who pulled off the Idlib Chemical Attack False Flag operation in the first place – the pretext for President Trump’s missile attack on Syria? How about analyzing that situation with folks over at The Intercept, Consortium News, Global Research, The Duran, MintPress News, SOTT, once in a while?

  14. So, who do you think benefits here and, what do you think Turkey’s response will be (either directly or by taking advantage of the major distraction)?

  15. Frankly nobody.

    Assad threw away an opportunity for the US to stay at arms length, which was Trumps big plan originally. The US did a token attack which did little but increase hostilities with Russia. Russia now has to look over it’s shoulder for airstrikes when it was previously unimpeded. ISIS and the Kurds are not even bothering to engage Assad and likewise. The anti Assad rebels aren’t getting much out if this either.

  16. “How about analyzing that situation with folks over at The Intercept, Consortium News, Global Research, The Duran, MintPress News, SOTT, once in a while?”

    How come you never mention The National Enquirer or Weekly World News when discussing news media?

  17. Why is it, you asked me, Spuddie, that I “never mention The National Enquirer”? I must’ve told you this like a 999,999,999 times already. It’s for two reasons. (1) Because: “In the 1990s, salacious details of the Bill Clinton-Monica Lewinsky affair were first made public by the Enquirer.” And (2) because: “On January 19, 2010, the Pulitzer Prize Board announced that the Enquirer is eligible for consideration for the Pulitzer Prize in the categories of Investigative Journalism and National News Reporting.” (“National Enquirer”, Wikipedia, updated April 5, 2017)

Leave a Comment