Beware of emotional thinking on Syria
Remember the Maine! Gulf of Tonkin! Iraq has WMDs! All these battle cries whipped up U.S. citizens into a war fever, and each of them was later proved to be false. Today the Obama administration and the corporate media are again trying to whip us into a fever so we will support military action against Syria.
Will this be the time we finally wake up? Which of these scenarios makes more sense: 1) The government of Syria launches a chemical attack against its citizens on the day U.N. chemical weapons inspectors arrive in the country and at a time the civil war has turned in the government’s favor. 2) Foreign fundamentalist fighters, on the verge of defeat and desperate for U.S. and European intervention, set off a chemical weapon to draw us into their fight. To me, the answer is pretty obvious.
Turns out Obama
isn’t good at his job
While I could never have voted for a hothead like Sen. John McCain — or a shape-shifting panderer like Mitt Romney — none of that changes the increasingly obvious truth: The man we did elect is just not good at his job.
He muses and hypothesizes like the law professor he is, with a feckless disregard for the fact that he is the leader of the Free World and his words are supposed to matter. He casually draws a red line and then says he didn’t, then says he did and he meant it and we’re ready to launch an attack, then decides to dump the whole thing in the lap of Congress then asks them to hold off. And the world watches.
I am as horrified as anyone over Assad’s escalating atrocities against his own people. But it gets increasingly hard to support a president who keeps smearing egg on his own face.
on Sunday morning TV
I panicked recently when the Daily Star didn’t list Sen. John McCain for his regular lecture on the Sunday morning TV news shows. Who would tell us about the need to declare war on somebody? Did he want us to invade Iran, Iraq or Mexico?
I was relieved when he appeared on TV this past Sunday morning — giving up church and breakfast with his family. He wanted regime change in Syria. He was concerned with our credibility if Obama backed down, but George W. Bush took care of our credibility. I was disappointed when McCain was asked about Obama’s pledge that there would be “no boots on the ground.” I expected him to suggest that the troops wear sneakers.
Retired engineer, Oro Valley
A few questions
for Sens. McCain, Flake
During his Tucson Town Hall meeting, Sen. John McCain said the public needs to be educated on the issue of Syria. So I have a few questions he and Sen. Jeff Flake could clear up .
Specifically, why is a military attack on Syria in our best national security interest? How does their use of chemical weapons specifically affect our national security posture?
What the does the U.S. government expect the Syrian government’s response to an attack to be, and what would our next step be if Syria continued to use chemical weapons after we attack them? Is our proposed attack on Syria really intended to be a message to Iran and their nuclear program?
Barber will need courage on Syria vote
U.S. Rep. Ron Barber is reportedly undecided about supporting President Obama’s request for a resolution authorizing an attack on Syria. Almost 50 years ago, my brother, Rep. George E. Brown Jr. of California, faced a similar dilemma. The North Vietnamese were reported to have attacked U.S. naval vessels. President Lyndon Johnson requested a war resolution. My brother was the only person on the Appropriations Committee to vote “no” despite enormous pressure from that Democratic administration. History has proved him right.
Although it’s currently on hold, Barber may still be faced with a similar choice. If so, I hope he finds the courage to vote against the request of his Democratic president. History will prove him right.
Dr. Wini Hall