Caution: Enter at your own risk
The current situation in Syria is difficult to stomach and even comprehend. The lifeless bodies of poisoned children evoke such sadness and rage that no one living in a civil society can withstand the call for justice over these attacks.
Yet, before we lock and load to redeem the fallen innocent, here are some suggestions of caution: do not rush, take your time, and think it through.
The sudden necessity for military action eerily feels like the eve of the Iraqi war, along with the government’s insistence that this is all necessary. Like Iraq, Syria is deeply connected with the entire Middle Eastern community. Military action in this area is much different than other foreign theatres of war such as Libya and our involvement in setting up a no fly zone.
Another point of caution for the American people is the lack of information we have yet to receive. According to major news sources, later this week the Obama Administration is set to release an intelligence report, conducted by the U.S. independent of the U.N., confirming the Assad regime to be the obvious aggressors in the attack. But, as of today, Assad is still denying that his military conducted the attack. Besides Fox news, the other major news organizations have downplayed this fact. And according to Fox news, Russian and Iranian news agencies are interviewing Assad and reporting his military’s innocence. If the U.S. military prematurely strikes this already charred up state, its credibility will suffer far worse than if we exercised caution before charging into the fray. Also, a premature entrance into the conflict may have the consequence of rallying our enemies to take action against our interests worldwide.
In the fragile structure of the entire Arab world, it is necessary for America to think this through. The Arab League recently supported the notion that the Assad regime is responsible for the attacks, but claimed that any attack without the consent of the U.N. Security Council would be improper and would harm Western relations with the people of the Middle East, who vastly oppose any military action against Assad’s regime even for humanitarian reasons.
Unlike John McCain, John Kerry, and many other congressmen that were quick to sound the war drums, Newt Gingritch released a statement to CNN saying, “Both sides are bad (and) there is no victory to be had there.” This echoes what Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, stated in a letter to Senator Engel, D-NY: mainly that rebel groups would not support the interests of the United States if they seized power, and that their ability to even uphold power in the absence of Assad is unlikely. Which begs the question, if the Assad regime is crippled and dethroned, who is going to fill the void?
Obama may have the answer to this question, but he has yet to address the American people about the particulars. As the situation unfolds, the current administration needs to heed the caution sign: Enter at your own risk.
Short URL: http://www.jenningsdailynews.net/?p=22062