Monday, September 2, 2013

The Senseless Rush To War In Syria

As U.N. experts are still investigating the poison gas attack in Syria, the United States has left the world that there is no doubt they are going to launch military strikes against Syria. They will be doing it alone.

For all the talk about a coalition, outside America, no one is actually rushing to help the Americans attack President Bashar al-Assad. Russia and China will stop any resolution at the U.N. Britain cannot attack after Prime Minister David Cameron lost a vote in parliament over it. Turkey and the Arab states have no real military power to attack Syria, and France don't have any real power in the region to help in any meaningful way.

Not only that, U.S. President Barack Obama is going have to drag the United States of America into another Middle Eastern war against the wishes of Americans. One poll showed that less than 40% of Americans support an attack against Syria.

So I have to ask; what's the rush? The U.N. are still investigating, there is no support from any other countries, so why is President Obama insisting on attacking Syria before the U.N. finish their investigation? It makes no sense.

It makes as little sense as President Bashar al-Assad using chemical weapons against Syrian rebels. The man was winning. The Syrian rebels were on the backfoot for weeks already; why would the man use chemical weapons now when he didn't use them earlier when he was actually losing the civil war? It makes no sense.

Also what is this plan of a "limited, narrow" military action to attack Syria? Qassim Saadeddine, a former Syrian army colonel and spokesman for the rebels' Supreme Military Council, has openly crowed about how the rebel groups had been sent a military plan of action and that they will "take advantage" when the strike happens. He even told Reuters that their military plans include preparations to attack some targets that are going to be hit in the air strikes. Sure sounds like he know something, doesn't it?

Could it be that this rush to war was because...well the rebels needed some serious help or they would be swept from the field? That makes far more sense than anything else so far in President Obama's argument.

No comments: