As the bodies of women and children stack up in Syria by the hundreds, arm chair pundits wring their hands and wonder what the West can and should do to intervene in that country’s bloody civil war.
A report from MSNBC today says that two more young men were killed near Damascus where thousands of refugees are fleeing a military crackdown, which on Friday killed 109 people, many of whom were women and children.
The story says that one of the men, Riad Mahmoud, 22, was killed as he marched in a protest of 2,000-3,000 people protesting earlier massacres when he was fired upon by officers of a division of secret police. (Why is it, I ask aloud, do repressive regimes always have divisions of secret police that everybody knows about? And why are they always the scummiest people, i.e. Nazi Germany’s S.S.?)
As the conflict comes into its 14th month, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton once again condemned the violence and called for those responsible to be brought to justice. And crickets could be heard chirping as President Obama said – nothing!
The US is sending humanitarian aid to Syrian rebels, but one must wonder if that will be effective and if it will even get to the right place. The conflict of Mogadishu under George Bush Senior and Bill Clinton comes into memory and many in the US do not want the US embroiled into another protracted war in the Middle East.
The Washington Post has a pretty good timeline of events leading up to March of this year, 12 months of escalating violence where peaceful protests lead to unbridled violence by the dictator Assad and his cronies. And the people suffer while the world watches, hands in their pockets. The world is literally whistling past a grave yard.
A leftist blog disguised a credible news source, (what? Which lefty news source is credible or which MSM news source isn’t leftist? Good point. I digress.) Antiwar.com laments that President Obama may back off of earlier promises not to get involved militarily and attempt to coalesce an international effort to oust Assad the Dictator. One must wonder what these anti war people want. World peace is ok and everything but are they happy with brutal evil dictators crushing their own people do death? They put all of the onus of responsibility on the west and President Obama and cast none of the blame at the feet of the brutal evil murdering dictators.
The article, written by John Glaser, speculates that US interference in the conflict would only make it much worse and that the US would be hampered in our efforts by China and Russia. So what does China and Russia gain by mass murder, I wonder?
It is far too unlikely that President Obama will channel the spirit of our beloved Ronald Reagan who bravely stood at the Berlin Wall and demanded its removal, but maybe he could be nudged enough to pull out a Bill Clinton? While the scandal of the Monica Lewinski affair was just coming to fruition, the Clinton’s decided they needed an adequate overseas foreign affairs coup to distract the masses. Fortunately for Bosnia, the Clintons intervened and rescued those people from a murderous genocide of their own.
It’s probably too little too late for Obama. The time for intervention in Syria is past. Barry has no time to sit in smoke filled rooms deciding on war strategy. He has to hit the campaign trail and beat the pulp out of Mitt Romney, depending on the killing of Osama Bin Laden to be the wind that moves his ship. Hopefully, the Amateur’s ship of doom is bound for the rocks of failure and a moderate Mitt Romney comes into the White House next January. He better roll up his sleeves and get ready. The world is a violent place filled with evil and the next president will have his hands full dealing with them.