Just below of "nuking civilian population centers" and "bombing hospitals and refugee camps" is "bombing religious and cultural sites."
There is literally no upside.
But hey, watch the clickservative media fanboys...
Of course, a few members of the Senate will do the "Well, the President isn't a politician and sometimes he speaks off the cuff and I wish he wouldn't tweet." <furrowed brow emoji>
We had this little war with Saddam when he got frisky. It worked out pretty well, and I want to revisit something from it.
I have consulted my copy and wish to provide you with a quote about the RULES the US followed in the planning and execution of the air war.
It's important, because it's the same rulebook...
"Though formal restraints by civilian authorities on the military planners were never articulated, in retrospect five can be identified. First, casualties among Iraqi noncombatants would be held to a minimum."
The military doesn't produce leaders at the senior level who wake up and think, "Our national interests are served bombing religious sites or civilian populations." This is a good thing, and by design.
Ambitious men (hai, Mike Pompeo) and ambitious generals seeking to please a President without limit, strategy, or the ability to see beyond the time horizon of his own ADD-ragetweets are common in today's Washington.
Military and civilian defense leaders might want to be careful...
"Fourth, the lives of the hostages held by Iraq would be protected to the extent possible."