Monday, June 17, 2013
Why I oppose US intervention in Syria, continued
I've been accused of being "callous" by somebody who supports arming the Syrian rebels, so I better clarify:
I'm primarily opposed to the United States acting unilaterally, and insanely intervening in yet another Mid-eastern nation. For the USA to arm the rebels and/or impose a no-fly zone is one hell of a slippery slope. It's playing with fire in the worst possible way. Iraq stands out as the most salient example, where the US armed the notoriously corrupt Ahmed Chalabi prior to 2003. Not to mention the hand the West had in providing the chemical weapons used against Iraq's Kurds in 1988. Really, it's highly dubious any American intervention would be characterized by Humanitarian traits, nor that it would be limited to sending arms. That wasn't the case in the Former Yugoslavia, where NATO bombed water treatment plants and spread Depleted Uranium. So I seriously doubt whether US military action would have a beneficial effect in Damascus. It doesn't follow that I deny the Syrian rebels every potential opportunity to acquire arms. And the Israeli factor in this equation? Don't even get me started!
I don't support Russian policy in this area, nor Vladimir Putin, nor Assad. But where is it written in stone that the United States MUST get involved in EVERY civil war, or "Revolution," as it were? Habitual aggressors like US Senators Lindsey Graham and John McCain no doubt condemn everyone like me; we believe the imperitive that the US mind its OWN, REAL strategic business outweighs America's SUPPOSED "Humanitarian Impulse." Their bellicose rhetoric is quite tacky, and the idea that ALL those who rebel against Assad deserve American weapons is questionable, at best. Seems to me there are some very uncouth elements within the insurgency. The enemy of my enemy isn't always my friend. Doubtless Senators Graham and McCain propose that I must be on the side of the Syrian regime. Nonsense. The United States always being assigned the role of "International Savior" isn't logical, legal, sustainable or sensible. Especially considering its recent history.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment