I'm as ambivalent about Syria as I am on most things, but I'd urge my representatives in Congress to support limited military action in response to the use of chemical weapons.
Seems to me we want to raise the costs of the use of such weapons anyway we can, both now and for the future. I'd even recommend a corollary to the "Obama doctrine:" anytime and anywhere we determine that chemical weapons have been used, the perpetrators of such use may be struck by our military forces. (Did you know there was an "Obama Doctrine"--I didn't until I checked wikipedia.)
Having said that, I'm assuming our military has identified targets, the destruction of which will thread all the needles of the obstacles critics have raised: minimum harm to civilians, maximum harm to those involved in the use of the weapons, least degradation of Assad's command and control over such weapons, most painful to Assad, etc.
[posted prematurely]
No comments:
Post a Comment