Most, if not all, of my political postings deal with economic issues. But since Syria and the potential use of force, even if only from the air, is dominating discussions at this time I'd be remiss if I completely ignored it.
I'll admit part of me is torn. The use of chemical or biological weapons is supposed to be one of those international, common across all nations and peoples, no-nos. It violates all sense of human dignity and standards of behavior.
So on the one hand how can it be done with no consequence, with no outcry or punishment from the international community?
On the other hand there is precedent for that. Saddam Hussein gassed his own people (Kurds I believe) in the late 1980's with very little protest from the United States let alone retaliation. After all back then he was our ally, our buddy, our buffer against Iran and the Ayatollahs. Supplying us with oil also probably didn't hurt. Poor Assad, if only Syria had large oil reserves.
The other side to the story is that America is not as directly impacted by what is happening in Syria as are the Europeans and others in the Middle East. Why can't the Saudis or Kuwaitis with their air forces get involved? We already know the Europeans won't participate, with the possible exception of the French. So why should we be the ones spending billions and potentially putting our people at risk to enforce an international standard nobody else seems that willing to stand up for.
The final question is what will we accomplish and what are we trying to accomplish? A few missiles won't do much. And if we are trying to strengthen the rebel anti-government forces and bring about the fall of the Assad regime, well good luck with that. Easier said than done. And if he goes who takes his place? There doesn't appear to be any good guys in this struggle. On both sides we find many Islamic extremists, so how does that help anything?
So for all those reasons when I'm finally forced to decide 'yes' or 'no' in internet polls this week I put my distaste for Assad and his use of chemical weapons and slaughter of his people, and my distaste of wanting to hand Obama's opponents or the media any reason to dump on him, and vote a resounding "no".
I'll admit part of me is torn. The use of chemical or biological weapons is supposed to be one of those international, common across all nations and peoples, no-nos. It violates all sense of human dignity and standards of behavior.
So on the one hand how can it be done with no consequence, with no outcry or punishment from the international community?
On the other hand there is precedent for that. Saddam Hussein gassed his own people (Kurds I believe) in the late 1980's with very little protest from the United States let alone retaliation. After all back then he was our ally, our buddy, our buffer against Iran and the Ayatollahs. Supplying us with oil also probably didn't hurt. Poor Assad, if only Syria had large oil reserves.
The other side to the story is that America is not as directly impacted by what is happening in Syria as are the Europeans and others in the Middle East. Why can't the Saudis or Kuwaitis with their air forces get involved? We already know the Europeans won't participate, with the possible exception of the French. So why should we be the ones spending billions and potentially putting our people at risk to enforce an international standard nobody else seems that willing to stand up for.
The final question is what will we accomplish and what are we trying to accomplish? A few missiles won't do much. And if we are trying to strengthen the rebel anti-government forces and bring about the fall of the Assad regime, well good luck with that. Easier said than done. And if he goes who takes his place? There doesn't appear to be any good guys in this struggle. On both sides we find many Islamic extremists, so how does that help anything?
So for all those reasons when I'm finally forced to decide 'yes' or 'no' in internet polls this week I put my distaste for Assad and his use of chemical weapons and slaughter of his people, and my distaste of wanting to hand Obama's opponents or the media any reason to dump on him, and vote a resounding "no".
The final straw was when I read about proposals to have American forces training the anti-Assad Syrian rebels on Jordanian soil. For anyone who was alive during Vietnam that had to send chills down your spine. That's how we got started there wasn't it? We just had people in there training the South Vietnamese soldiersders. Deja vu all over again.
It is everyone's issue, which means it cannot be an issue for the United States to deal with alone.
Just say no.
It is everyone's issue, which means it cannot be an issue for the United States to deal with alone.
Just say no.
RSS Feed