meta name="msvalidate.01" content="5CA2304A4C4CE9AB03BD20F71DF02D5C" />
Syrian President Bashar-al Assad is a murdering coward who is no different than a lot of the
former self-appointed dictators in the Arab world, Qaddafi, Mubarak, and Hussein. I make that
statement after hearing the news on Friday that the Syrian Government was allegedly behind that murders of 116 civilians in the village of Houla. Of the 116 victims 32 were children. As much as it pains me to see innocent people, particularly kids be the victims of a mass genocide, The United States cannot and should not get involved in the Syrian conflict.
The United States still has not repaired it's international reputation for it's war thirsty ways of the 2000's, in fact an objective pundit could make the case that The Obama Administration looks an awful lot a like The Bush Administration, especially in terms of going into Libya without the approval of Congress. Smarter people than me are inside the walls of the United Nations, surely they could come up with a coalition plan with some minimal support from us that could take care of Assad once and for all, but an all out military occupation, which seems to be on the tip of the tongue for hawks like John McCain and Joe Lieberman, should be out of the question. One thing that is certain is Syria isn't Libya and Assad's ouster, whenever it happens, will have implications that will look like Iraq circa 2004.
This brings me to the point of this column, The U.S. Government's infatuation with war. For the past two months I've been very quiet while the White House has been touting their success in the killing of Osama bin Laden. I make no apologies for saying that the man responsible for over 3,000 deaths on September 11, 2001 didn't have to be brought back to New York City for a trial that would have made Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's court appearances look tame.
What I have been very vocal about, and what every liberal worth his salt should be vocal about is what else The Obama Administration has been doing in the name of fighting terror. I literally fell out of my chair about a month back when Obama aide John Brennen gave a detailed description of U.S drone strikes taking place in Pakistan, Brennen then followed up his stomach turning explanation by basically saying this is what we as a nation must do to counteract Al-Qaeda.
According to The Bureau of Investigative Journalism between 391-780 civilians have been killed in Northwest Pakistan, 160 of those have been children. Foreign Affairs columnist Barbara Elias-Sanborn is quoted as saying “much of the information about drones suggests, such killings usually harden militants' determination to fight, stalling any potential negotiations and settlements.” Drone Strikes were put on hold for two months after 24 Pakistani soldiers were killed in the “Salala incident” they resumed however in January of 2012. Keep in mind these attacks have also been carried out in Afghanistan, Somalia, Libya and Yemen.
There is no doubt in my mind that if George W. Bush had accelerated the drone program the way that Barack Obama has the left would have stormed the gates of the White House, but instead of chants like “hey hey LBJ how many kids have you killed today” they've been more like “huh, what are you gonna do”. The amount of idealogues inside and outside of the Democratic Party is maddening.
Daniel Klaidman reveals in his new book “Kill or Capture: The War on Terror and The Soul of The Obama Presidency” says that the President was uneasy with the kill 'em first and sort it out later strategy in the infant stages of his presidency, clearly he got over it. Just like a lot of things in life it starts at the top. If the Commander and Chief puts his foot down and says no to these strikes then that would be the end of it, since that isn't the case I pine away for the days when a voice like Dennis Kucinich would make the argument that the left should be making.
Eric, I have a hard time with the question of use of force. I would absolutely say that we should always look for all ways to avoid it, but if it is going to be used then the more narrowly targeted the better. I guess I refer back to the massive bombing of places like Dresden in WWII, surely the drone strikes are better than that. I do hope for the day when we can all talk our way through differences, but the human race isn't there. We should challenge the use of force, as you do. The nature of some conflicts are that a small number of fanatics will inflict harm on many, how do we deal with that? I do think that lack of investment in aid programs has been a large part of how we got here, but now that we are, what? Something for all of us to ponder.
ReplyDelete