National Security

We will not be bombing Syria for reasons that are unclear

By Mark Benjamin | April 23, 2011 | +

President Obama late last month told the American people that he would dispatch U.S. military might against Libya’s Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi to avoid the slaughter of innocent civilians, killings that had already “reverberated across the region and stained the conscience of the world.”

That’s a clear standard. President Bashar al-Assad in Syria unleashed his forces on protestors Friday. They used live ammunition, killing at least 109 people. Saturday, Assad’s thugs opened fire on civilians attending the funerals of those murdered the day before. Another 11 died.

TIME’s Michael Crowley has noted that when it comes to the slaughter in Syria, the White House is monitoring events closely.

Related Topics: National Security

  • Latest on Battleland

    Army photo / Sgt. Michael J. MacLeod
    Afghanistan May 16, 2012

    Humpin’ It…And Jammin’ It…

    Reuters
    Pacific May 16, 2012

    China’s ‘Security Dilemma’ Risks Arms Race in Asia

    TOKYO – A shooting war with China may not be inevitable, but a dangerous arms escalation seems a dead certainty. That’s the take from a rare public discussion here this week among naval experts from Japan, the U.S. and China.

    Chris Hondros / Getty Images
    Military Mental Health May 16, 2012

    Mental Ills Top Reason U.S. Troops Now Hospitalized

    Four of the top five non-combat medical conditions sending troops to the hospital in 2011 were mental ailments, the Pentagon reports:

  • pintortwo

    The reasons are unclear to you because you are focusing on innocent civilians. It is quite obvious that the Libyan war has nothing to do with them, same with Syria (hell, we recently joined the Saudis to help Yemen’s ruling regime slaughter its own innocent civilians). The locals have nothing to do with these decisions.
    .
    Focus instead on what is unique to Libya. Qaddafi is isolated, so there is little down-side to toppling him. They have oil and access to the Mediterranean Sea. Libya borders on “transitioning” Egypt- enduring bases will give us leverage over whatever new regime rises in order to protect the Suez Canal and her border with Israel (and leverage over N Africa in general).
    .
    Bombing Syria would be more risky while offering less reward.
    .
    Also, the Libyan intervention already set the desired precedent (no need to repeat it so soon)– a US President now only needs a UN resolution to commit military forces.. not Congress, not a formal declaration of war, not an AUMF. As we dominate the UN, Obama has essentially assumed to the executive office the power to declare war.

blog comments powered by Disqus