What is the urgent force behind the latest pounding of the war drums for a strike on Syria?
The current challenge to Assad’s rule has already cost over 100,000 lives and displaced one third of its population, but the recent chemical attack near Damascus, we’re told, is different. The fountain of blood so far has been acceptable, but chemical weapons are an abomination that cannot be tolerated; crossing an international “red line”. The US must “teach a lesson” so that it never happens again.
I agree that Syria’s attack “…should shock the conscience of the world”, whether it was launched with Assad’s approval, a rouge commander under his leadership, or an false flag attack by rebel forces. Chemical weapons violate the world’s standards, not just ours. There should be accountability, but if the world community cannot back a unified response, then it’s not our job to do it for them. UN weapons inspector Hans Blix said unilateral US action “…would be the action of self-appointed global policemen.” He’s wrong. We would not be policemen, but self-righteous war criminals.
President Obama said he has “…no interest in any kind of open-ended conflict in Syria” but lobbing cruise missiles (at $1.5 million apiece) into a sovereign country is an act of war. Syria has a political ally in Russia and very close ties with Iran. If they do not sit quietly and take the spanking we think they deserve, then there are likely to be dangerous and unpredictable consequences despite the President’s fond wishes.
A coordinated effort by the world community with a rational chance of stopping more chemical strikes might have merit. Indeed, our morals, ethics, treaties, and laws might even compel us to act in that case. But that is not what we’re facing. I would urge everyone to look deeper into the forces behind this recent rush to “surgery”. I think there is more to the story than a crossing of the “red line”.
Calls for peace rarely still the drums of war, but sanity may yet have a chance to prevail. President Obama acknowledged the Russian proposal for Syria to avert war by agreeing to destroy its chemical weapons stock as “a potentially positive development.” It was quintessentially an un-Bush moment when this presidential “decider” suddenly seemed possessed of a brain capable of absorbing new information and changing course appropriately. This may still come to naught- as I write this, the President is preparing to address the nation. The situation is changing on a minute-to-minute basis, but we’ll soon see if Obama can muster the wisdom and independence of a Nobel Laureate, or if he will mindlessly dance to the tune of others.
Complex proxy wars, historic religious divisions, US-Israeli relations, a proposed Iranian-Syrian liquid natural gas pipeline, armament industry control, war permanence… all these intertwined factors and more are behind a rush to dethrone Assad. I think the “red line” is a simple story for simple minds to buy into an illegal action. Let’s not be rushed into irreversible actions by the pounding of the drums. Only the drummers will benefit.
Take Care and Make a Great Day!
Curious? Want to know more?
General Wesley Clark- US plan to “take out 7 countries in 5 years” (video)
Syria profile and chronology of key events BBC News
Syria ‘Red line’ debate: Are chemical weapons in Syria worse than conventional attacks? Josh Levs, CNN
Opposition presses for weapons as Syria death toll tops 100,000, Ed Payne, et al, CNN
Kucinich says US war on Syria could become WWIII, Dennis Kucinich, Press TV
22 reasons why starting World War III in Middle East is a really bad idea, Michael Snyder, Press TV
Does Obama need Congress to approve Syria strike? (+video), Jennifer Skalka Tulumello, DC Decoder
Chemical weapons 101: Six facts about sarin and Syria’s stockpile, Howard LaFranchi, DC Decoder
Attack on Iran: A Looming Folly, William Rivers Pitt, Truthout
Even if Assad used chemical weapons, the west has no mandate to act as a global policeman, Hans Blix, The Guardian