In response to the alleged use by the Syrian dictatorship of weapons of mass destruction against its civilians, the Obama Administration is finally considering military action against
Syria. The United
States had warned Syria that using weapons of mass
destruction would be unacceptable.
The Obama Administration has waited until after more than 100,000 people have died in the Syrian civil war, including countless civilians killed in indiscriminate shelling by the Syrian regime, after the Syrians crossed the line against which the U.S. urged them not to cross, not only of moving their chemical weapons around, but of actually using them against civilians. The Administration has also waited until after al-Qaeda and other Islamists have become a dominant force in the opposition to the Assad regime, which will complicate the international community’s efforts to support the non-Islamist Syrian opposition and replace the Syrian dictatorship with a representative government that respects the liberty of its citizens.
The Syrian regime, starting with the late President Hafez al-Assad in 1983 and continuing up to the present with his son, President Bashir Assad, has been at war with the
for thirty years, either through direct combat or through its sponsorship of
jihadists who have targeted Americans by acts of terrorism or other unprovoked
violent acts. Syria harbors and financially
supports Lebanese Shi’ite terrorists Hezbollah, as well as Palestinian
terrorist organizations, all of whom have targeted Americans, French, Israelis
and Lebanese. Furthermore, Syria is the closest ally of Iran, the mortal enemy of the U.S. As such, the Syrian regime has been complicit
in Iranian machinations against the U.S.
and its Iraqi allies in Iraq. There is no doubt that the elimination of the
Assad dynasty would serve critical American interests and promote peace in the
I note what we are seeing in response to the Syrian civil war is the international community’s liberal diplomatic mindset that compels it to negotiate in good faith with despotic regimes that butcher their own or other people as these dictators negotiate in bad faith and string out the negotiations while squeezing out more blood. As the international diplomats favor exhausting every method of persuasion in order to avoid the most effective one – military force – and as they assuage their self-righteousness in not appearing to have “started” an “unnecessary” war, the despotic regime slaughters more and more civilians. Only when a consensus is finally reached that there is no other option, does the international community send in combat forces, or after the regime has satisfied its blood-lust and changed matters strategically to a more favorable position, does the international community send in peacekeepers. Then the international community congratulates itself on what a good thing it has done, ignoring all the deaths that its pointless, protracted diplomacy in the name of “peace” had allowed beforehand. Indeed, there is something in the liberal mindset that makes it difficult to recognize evil in anyone, except, of course, in conservatives, especially those conservatives who espouse morals based upon objective truths.
The Obama Administration has been right to oppose the Syrian regime, but wrong to have allowed Assad and his henchmen to get away with murder for far too long. Now is the time for American leadership – and not “leadership from behind,” as in
Libya, but moral and military