We hear a lot on the TV news these days
concerning chemical weapon use in Syria. Reports are confusing. No chemical
weapons are being used. Yes, chemical weapons are being used by the Assad
regime. No, they are actually being used by the rebels, who are claiming the
Assad regime is using them.
Does it really make a difference? Pres. Obama drew a line in the sand saying that use of chemical weapons by the Syrian regime would constitute justification for retribution by the US. A big mistake! The Obama administration is now trying to find out where chemical weapons are being used, and if so, who is using them.
Normally, I will give credit to Obama for his reluctance on war. He is trying to get us out of Afghanistan, and hopefully will not put us into the Syrian conflict.
With large conventional explosive bombs, one can kill hundreds or thousands of people. With chemical weapons, the same thing can be a accomplished. Does it make a difference whether those people will have died from conventional explosives or chemical weapons? If one says we should also consider ancillary nonlethal casualties, there will be no greater pain and hardship from chemical use than from bombs and bullets.
A segment of the Syrian population has chosen to oust their president by physical means. It is their country and they have the right to do this, if they wish. Simultaneously, Pres. Assad has every right to try to retain power by conventional means of using military force to repel rebel attacks. In total, it is no business of the US, whether one side or the other wins. It is not significant to the American public, and because it is not significant, the US government should not be involved.
If one could make the case that there is a real potential danger to the US, if one side or the other wins, that would change the situation. Similarly, if any of our allies would be threatened, that would also change the situation. However, we see no specific threat to our ally Israel on the outcome of the Syrian conflict, and again see no justification for involvement.
Unfortunately, we have nation builders in our midst and they are vociferous. They want to turn the world into a democracy, or mostly their brand of socialism/communism. They must be contained in the same way we would contain potential terrorists. In fact, the nation builders could do more harm to our country than any single terrorist incident.
We also have "hawks", who will start a war at the slightest provocation. Sen. McCain is in that group. He spent many years in a prison camp, which emotionally crippled him to an unreasonable judgment state on the matter of war. In addition, he actually knows nothing about war, other than his experiences in the prison camp. His promotions of war for Syria or anywhere else should be completely disregarded.
In antiquity, wars had some justification, because the winners had access to spoils, which were an economic advantage. However, in the modern concept of war, the winners bear the cost of the war itself and the rehabilitation of the vanquished. Can we afford that? We seem to be unable to even afford a semi-peacetime economy rampant with waste. Do we want to add the waste of another war to that?
Does it really make a difference? Pres. Obama drew a line in the sand saying that use of chemical weapons by the Syrian regime would constitute justification for retribution by the US. A big mistake! The Obama administration is now trying to find out where chemical weapons are being used, and if so, who is using them.
Normally, I will give credit to Obama for his reluctance on war. He is trying to get us out of Afghanistan, and hopefully will not put us into the Syrian conflict.
With large conventional explosive bombs, one can kill hundreds or thousands of people. With chemical weapons, the same thing can be a accomplished. Does it make a difference whether those people will have died from conventional explosives or chemical weapons? If one says we should also consider ancillary nonlethal casualties, there will be no greater pain and hardship from chemical use than from bombs and bullets.
A segment of the Syrian population has chosen to oust their president by physical means. It is their country and they have the right to do this, if they wish. Simultaneously, Pres. Assad has every right to try to retain power by conventional means of using military force to repel rebel attacks. In total, it is no business of the US, whether one side or the other wins. It is not significant to the American public, and because it is not significant, the US government should not be involved.
If one could make the case that there is a real potential danger to the US, if one side or the other wins, that would change the situation. Similarly, if any of our allies would be threatened, that would also change the situation. However, we see no specific threat to our ally Israel on the outcome of the Syrian conflict, and again see no justification for involvement.
Unfortunately, we have nation builders in our midst and they are vociferous. They want to turn the world into a democracy, or mostly their brand of socialism/communism. They must be contained in the same way we would contain potential terrorists. In fact, the nation builders could do more harm to our country than any single terrorist incident.
We also have "hawks", who will start a war at the slightest provocation. Sen. McCain is in that group. He spent many years in a prison camp, which emotionally crippled him to an unreasonable judgment state on the matter of war. In addition, he actually knows nothing about war, other than his experiences in the prison camp. His promotions of war for Syria or anywhere else should be completely disregarded.
In antiquity, wars had some justification, because the winners had access to spoils, which were an economic advantage. However, in the modern concept of war, the winners bear the cost of the war itself and the rehabilitation of the vanquished. Can we afford that? We seem to be unable to even afford a semi-peacetime economy rampant with waste. Do we want to add the waste of another war to that?
No comments:
Post a Comment