In debates such as this, I defer to better authorities than "sources." Someone like Jon Soltz who was on the ground in Iraq. In his latest piece on this subject (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jon-soltz/the-military-case-against_b_3865965.html), he notes that both rebels AND Syrian government troops fought against us in Iraq.
That fact should give anyone riding their soapbox of righteous indignation a moment of pause and step down for a bit.
Here are the things that are EXACTLY like Iraq:
* There is no concrete evidence to support our government's position as judge, jury and executioner.
* There is nothing to "win" in any action at all. If assad DID use these weapons, he will clearly have no less compunction to do whatever he wants against innocents.
* Whatever side "wins" the civil war, most of the combatants will not be sending us a thank you note for our part (we will be welcomed in Iraq, remember?).
* There is no end game here.
* No one else in the world community, other than France (it's almost hilarious if it weren't so utterly strange), who will sign up for this. OK, so this may be an exception, there is LESS support in the world for this action....
* We continue to feel like we are some high authority ordained to mete out justice around the globe.
I probably missed a few others, too.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
No comments:
Post a Comment