The president of the United States is attempting to make a case to support his bombing of Syria. This administration has called the Bashar al-Assad regime in Syria a nest of murderous leaders. This may indeed be the appropriate words to make the case for him being a dictator but it doesn’t provide a rational argument for war.
Here are the facts that most agree with. On or about august 21, 2013 a town near eastern Damascus was attacked by what was clearly a chemical weapon of some sort. The result of that attack left an estimated 1300 people dead (the numbers vary) including over 400 children. Both sides deny the use of these weapons and both sides blame the other.
The combatants on the ground are a murky mix of terrorist, Islamic radicals, and proxy armies on one side and the murderous butchers of Assad’s army on the other side. There may be some legitimate elements of the Assad resistance that are actually wanting a free country based on what we in the west define as free, but they are few and far between. There are no good guys in this conflict.
This presidents attempt to involve the united states in this conflict is not only flawed but it is fraudulent and deceptive. It is not based on the long held American military and diplomatic positions. It is based on an amateurish, self-centered approach to foreign policy.
The American military and former presidents have held to a long stated position by our government as it relates to the use of force. They are clear and specific;
- The use of military force can only take place if the United States is under the threat of eminent danger. That’s if some nation, group or organization is clearly about to attack the Unites states or its interest here or abroad.
- The use of military force can take place if the vital interest of the United States is threated here or abroad.
Mr. President where does Syria fit in this? How could the use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime as horrid as it may be warrant the use of force based on this long held American policy?
Any attempt by this administration to lead us to war outside the scope of these points will be fraudulent, illegal and a violation of our constitutional principles.
What we have witnessed from this white house is gross negligence and incompetence. Here is what the president said last year about the potential use of chemical weapons by the Syrians.
Last year the president said; “red line” that “would change my calculus”… “Would change my equation”. Last week the president back away from those comments in fact denying he brought up the red line comments. Stating, “I didn’t set a red line in Syria….The world set a red line when governments representing 98 percent of the world’s population said the use of chemical weapons are abhorrent and passed a  treaty forbidding their use even when countries are engaged in war.”
That is flawed reasoning; first the world is not with you Mr. President. Our closest ally, the British have even rejected any involvement in the Syrian civil war. Second the Syrians are not a signature of the chemical weapons ban treaty. How do they violate an agreement that they never signed?
Our military should be used to inflict a devastating and lethal blow to our enemies not to prove a point. The military is there for shock and awe, not show and tell.
This administration needs a comprehensive foreign policy that includes the cooperation of our allies in the region, building economic and diplomatic relationships that serve our interest and a strong permanent military presence where needed.
Syria is not worthy of Americas direct military involvement. The president has further demonstrated his fraudulent thinking by concluding that he has the power to act without congress, yet he has decided to go to congress for authorization anyhow? I don’t think he will be happy with the results.
This continued amateur hour in the white house is surrounded with folly. He knows as we do that we have no national interest in Syria’s civil war. This reasoning is dangerous; it is being crafted as an act of necessity by master manipulators that are only looking out for the personal interest of Mr. Obama. This arrogant horde of politicos would risk US lives and prestige to make a point about Obama’s RED LINE?
I say clearly patriots that if the president attacks Syria after the congress rejects his resolution, he should be impeached.