Recent consternation from President Obama concerning the use of chemical warfare in Syria notwithstanding, a military strike would be like helping one outlaw motorcycle gang defeat another. As is typical in Middle Eastern unrest, there are many factions, each with their own agenda.
It would be easier if the leaders of these factions were not monsters. Assad, as we now know, is willing to use the worst type of chemical weapons indiscriminately. He is little concerned with the collateral damage. Entire neighborhoods of families, women, children and other innocents have died in a most gruesome manner. His adversaries are monsters as well. Rebel commander Khaled al-Hamad ate a dead man’s heart. Another faction, al-Nusra, claims its core fighters come from Iraq’s post-war insurgency and has recently pledged allegiance to Al-Qaeda in Iraq. There are other factions and I am sure we or someone else is arming.
President Obama made a huge political error by drawing a “red line” and coupling it with probable military action. Why was he so naïve to believe Syria would acquiesce? Is it hubris, is it a failure to acknowledge the region’s history or just ineffectual leadership.
In another war that we should have never been involved in, Iraq, Sadaam used chemical weapons on a much grander scale producing a much higher casualty rate but Obama made many speeches condemning taking any action. I am only pointing this out to demonstrate that our leaders are not interested in helping anyone unless there is a political benefit. That includes everyone here at home.
The bigger issue is that this is just another war fought by proxy. We arm the rebels and Russia arms the dictator. Sometimes, it’s the other way around but either way, this prolongs the war and the suffering.
Most people are the same all over the world. They just want to raise their children in a safe and happy environment. Unless of course they are sociopaths hell bent on world domination. The primary job of any government is to provide the security within which people can safely raise their children and provide for their family.
It seems to me that these sociopathic leaders are the biggest problem. Would it not be much cheaper and more effective just to pay international bounty hunters to capture or kill these monsters? Why is it that our leaders don’t do that? Is it some kind of sick elitist club? I guess someone could make the argument that removing a leader would lead to anarchy. I can see the point of that argument. After all, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and Egypt just to name a few, all seem fine. I don’t want to talk about Africa. Everything is perfect there.
Fine, violating the sovereignty of another country is wrong and against U.N. policy (unless you’re chasing Bin Laden) so don’t do it. Of course, bounty hunters don’t care about U.N. policy.
I am absolutely not promulgating the killing of leaders just because they fail to make their country a great place. I am proposing that we specifically target those which commit atrocities against their people. How many would have to disappear before monsters stopped trying to take over or run countries? This would immediately reduce the number of innocent people that die by the thousands every month around the world so some monster can garner more power and money.
I don’t want to see any child scared, hungry or homeless. If we truly want to be the good guys, we must remove evil people by targeting them directly. No army is totally comprised of soldiers that want to fight. Why destroy their army if many, maybe all, would just go home once their leader is not there to force them into battle. Most, want to be home with their families. Why do we continue to send so many into battle when both sides would much rather just see the removal of the monster?
This is all just a fantasy of course. World leaders believe themselves to be enlightened and considerably smarter than everyone else. Some even believe that they were appointed by god. Either way, they see us as a mass of troglodytes whom without divine leadership would toil in the mud unable to make any decision without their supreme guidance.
There is no perfect solution but arming and training potential future enemies is the very definition of insane (doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result). We must refrain from getting involved in conflicts throughout the world. When we get involved, the world sees us as imperialists. It also places American lives in danger both from military engagement and the potential of retaliatory strikes here at home.
We have warlords here at home we can fight. They are called gang leaders. Forget taking Syria. Let’s take back Detroit. Let’s rescue those in our country that so desperately need our help. With the almost non-existent police response, almost 50,000 empty buildings and devastated infrastructure, Detroit is very much like a third world capitol. I will not be surprised when I see gangs in modified trucks with heavy machine guns roaming the streets.
Detroit’s city council should declare a state of emergency as should the state. Restoring order and security should be the number one priority. Law enforcement from the city, county and state as well as fire departments should all be saturating the city with roving patrols. I am not suggesting a “police state”. A greater presence would be a greater deterrence. A greater presence would also mean more arrests of the people making life bad for everyone else.
Seriously, is it not time to clean up our own house before we go make a mess in someone else’s.