Last updated: September 05. 2013 6:36AM - 850 Views

Story Tools:

Font Size:

Social Media:

Around America, some conservatives and U.S. newspapers accuse President Obama of slowness to unleash a military strike against Syria … But stop and think: Why should America police all other countries, attacking those that commit suspected atrocities? Who appointed America the sheriff of the world? Can America undo every wrong on the opposite side of the planet, or even on this side?


There seems to be evidence that the Assad government used sarin gas to slaughter women, children and other innocents in suburban neighborhoods. (At least, the current evidence is clearer than bogus “weapons of mass destruction” claims that plunged America into the disastrous Iraq War.)


Countries like France, Germany, etc., don’t feel compelled to punish ugly behavior in foreign civil wars. Actually, the United Nations should fill the role of global peacekeeper. The task shouldn’t fall to America alone. It’s bizarre for Washington to decide which war-torn places will be struck by deadly U.S. cruise missiles.


Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution gives Congress sole power to declare war. So far, it appears that the White House is on the brink of losing a war strike without asking Congress and without U.N. approval. Such a horrendous action shouldn’t be decided by just one person.


A month ago, Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, warned Congress about attacking Syria. “Once we take action,” he wrote, “we should be prepared for what comes next. Deeper involvement is hard to avoid.”


During the years since then-President George H.W. Bush first sent armed forces to Kuwait in the 1990 Gulf War, America, NATO and the West have made eight military onslaughts into the Mideast. London’s Guardian said America shouldn’t launch a ninth without convincing proof. …


— Charleston (W. Va.) Gazette

Comments
comments powered by Disqus


Featured Businesses


Poll



Mortgage Minute