Steve Bannon reportedly opposed Syrian airstrike

The tension and conflict within the White House has been well-documented since President Donald Trump took office a few months ago. Various groups and spheres of influence have sought to gain the attention of the President, with power struggles resulting in an internal mess for the Trump administration. It largely comes down to two groups: the more politically mainstream types like Jared Kushner and the America First nationalists such as Steve Bannon.

These conflicts have been magnified by Thursday’s missile strike in Syria, where President Trump ordered an air base be targeted for attack. While the America First grassroots have largely stood against the airstrike for various reasons, the Trump administration has seemingly remained unified behind the decision.

Except for Steve Bannon.

Bannon, the former Breitbart News executive chair, was long considered a close ally of President Trump himself, influencing policy decisions and political choices. The controversial figure is known for his nationalist rhetoric and belief in putting his own country before others. Many grassroots activists who supported President Trump through last year’s election share the same belief.

His diminishing influence became apparent earlier in the week when it was announced he had been removed from the National Security Council. The move came as part of a greater shake up by H.R. McMaster, the President’s new National Security Advisor.

Days after the shakeup, Syria was attacked.

According to internal sources, Bannon opposed this:

Two sources close to Bannon told me the former Breitbart executive chairman argued against the strike — not because of its questionable constitutionality, but on the grounds that it doesn’t advance Trump’s America First doctrine. “Steve doesn’t think we belong there,” one Bannon ally told me. Bannon’s position lost out to those inside the White House, including Jared Kushner, who argued Trump needed to punish the Assad regime.

Bannon has become representative of the nationalist faction within the Trump administration, which appears to be losing influence in recent weeks. While the America First message arguably was President Trump’s biggest boost during the primary and general election, it seems to be becoming a mere afterthought at this point.

Even the Constitution itself puts America first by requiring Congress to debate the merits of a proposed war and then vote on the proposal. This did not occur prior to President Trump’s action.

Does the Syrian airstrike benefit America? Does it have America’s best interests in mind? Bannon seems to disagree.

While this airstrike seems to be opposed by the nationalists within the administration, many who opposed the America First message over the past year are on board. Individuals ranging from Bill Kristol and Jake Tapper to Senators John McCain and Chuck Schumer all strongly supported President Trump’s strike in Syria, citing the regional politics and the actions of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

The Syrian missile strike illustrates the fall of the America First message within the Trump administration and the diminishing influence of nationalists such as Steve Bannon and Stephen Miller. However, Bannon has decided not to quit, instead insisting that President Trump must fire him if he is to go.

Is the Syrian airstrike a simple show of force by a President known for his temperament and ego, or is it the beginning of a greater war that is only beginning?

Chris Dixon is a liberty activist and writer from Maine. In addition to being Managing Editor for the Liberty Conservative, he also writes the Bangor Daily News blog "Undercover Porcupine" and for sports website Cleatgeeks.


  1. Agree with the President Trump to go into Syria for humanity Rights act. If the leader of Syria, president wouldn’t have gone in there.

  2. I wish he was President instead of Trump. Bombing the only forces fighting ISIS in Syria, (Assad’s and Putin’s troops) and thereby turning the country over to ISIS (the Saudis) is a VERY bad plan. It’s what Hillary and the rest of the globalists want. Notice how Trump is suddenly CNN’s sweetheart, now that he gives the Muslim terrorist invaders air support, just like Obama was doing?

  3. The president should be exposed to all ideas and view points offered by the people around him. I support the president.

  4. There are atrocities like this happening all over the world every day. It’s only because CNN covered this and it could be blamed on Assad (with no real evidence) that it became an object of selective outrage. Trump has fallen for the same con that both Bushes swallowed. Hillary (who started this war and caused 500,000 deaths) might as well be president now.

  5. It’s a piss poor situation if there is a gaggle of “yes men” chanting go, go, go! It’s a much more constructive situation to have serious disagreements so every body has to look at the situation in a different light!

  6. This is the same Steve Bannon who has extensive military Intelligence back ground seven years as a Navy Surface Warfare Officer and later as special assistant to the Pentagon’s Chief of Naval
    Operations and even an applicable Masters degree in National Security Studies
    as well a Harvard MBA …but who the White House (McMaster) suddenly says has no background for the intelligence committee?
    Seeing McMaster interviewed causes the Observer to realize that Bannon is also smarter and more articulate than the Anti-Trumps CFR puppet Gen McMaster.

Comments are closed.

Latest from News

Thanks for visiting our site! Stay in touch with us by subscribing to our newsletter. You will receive all of our latest updates, articles, endorsements, interviews, and videos direct to your inbox.