Here we are again – the U.S. is taking the lead in the world on deciding whether or not to punish another country for despicable actions against their own people. In this case, evidence seems to support the allegation that Syria’s Assad used sarin gas on his own people, resulting in more than 1,400 deaths.
When I say here we go again, I do not mean we’ve gone to Syria before. What I mean here is that the U.S. is again being the one making the decisions without a lot of support from our supposed allies.
President Barack Obama has asked that Congress allow us to take military action against Syria. I can’t say I completely understand his and Secretary of State John Kerry’s attempts to say this is not an act of war. You may not be asking for soldiers on the ground, but you are still planning a missile attack. It’s not a friendly warning – this is an act of war.
At one time, I was all for the U.S. being the ones to do what’s right and take action, but years of experience has me thinking otherwise.
My main question is this – Why is it always our responsibility, our duty to take the lead?
We have supposed allies who seem to disappear every time these tough decisions come to the table. The U.N. is becoming more and more irrelevant. While France offers support, the U.K.was quick to say they won’t support any military action. Jordan said they wouldn’t offer their land in support of an attack.
But, we have the president saying we cannot let them cross this “red line” and it’s our credibility we have to protect. What exactly do we lose in credibility if we decide not to be the ones to take action?
President Obama has some good points in his argument of why we should take action. However, here at home, there are plenty of arguments that should be debated before actually taking any kind of action.
First, look at the economy. We are still trying to get back on track from two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Upon being elected, the president said he would get us out of both countries. However, I’m not sure if he realized how tough an actual exit plan would be.
The president is receiving both support and resistance from both sides of the aisle, but I have to say I am surprised by Ariz. Sen. John McCain’s reaction. Not only does he agree with the president, but he wants the plan to go even further. He wants more than just some missile attacks to send a message. No, he wants to aim for a regime change.
Let’s face it, it’s obvious the president has very little experience with foreign policy that involves military action. Between how this issue has played out in the media and his strategy to seek congressional approval, his ability is questionable.
I disagreed with the president when he took action against Libya without congressional approval. With that said, I was glad he is seeking full approval before taking action, but we’ve waited too long and let’s face it, now the president can blame Congress if things go badly.
Will things go badly? You never know when you are dealing with the Middle East, which is another reason why we should be hesitant to enter another military conflict.
Jon Stewart of Comedy Central’s “The Daily Show” recently said it correctly. Basically the popular host said while America continues to say we are a superpower, we forget that we can’t actually fly, we can’t rule the world and it’s not our job to do so every time there is a crisis somewhere else in the world.