A few weeks ago I noted in my good news feature that Obama did not appear anxious to get himself involved in Syria. That was then, and this is now, and all I can say is that I was acting on the basis of the intelligence I had then.
The monumental hypocrisy of our insistence on punishing Assad is, of course not lost on the world. Our war criminals go unpunished; in fact, some of their enablers are in the forefront of those demanding war now. The last I looked, torture was every bit as much a violation of international law as chemical weapons. Speaking of chemical weapons, I have a hard time understanding why killing people with chemicals is any worse than killing them with bombs, drones, napalm, or any of the other “legal” weapons that we use with such abandon.
I confess to being completely confused about this misadventure, which seems fated to occur, no matter the opposition in the country and in Congress. What puzzles me most is that we are being left completely in the dark as to what, if anything, will constitute success. We are not looking for regime change, according to Obama. Apparently we are trying to “punish” Assad for using chemical weapons. So, we will bomb other people, some tangentially involved, perhaps, but many, if history can be our guide, who were not. Assad himself is unlikely to be a victim. How do we declare victory? Will it be sufficient if Assad says a sincere act of contrition? We can only hope that some in Congress will demand an answer to this fairly fundamental question, but I don't see it happening.
Post a Comment