Once again the
United States is engaging in a war it is destined to lose. Add Syria to the long list of nations where
the United States has unnecessarily used military force to its disadvantage since
the end of World War II.
There is an
alternative to waging war against other nations and their people, and the
United States will continue losing such wars until it adopts a better strategy.
The United
States has not "declared war" against another country since Pearl
Harbor; however, it has engaged in a series of losing wars ever since. Unlike World War II, which resulted in the
complete defeat and unconditional surrender of enemy forces, these wars were
not fought to defend the United States against military attack. To the contrary, they were wars of
convenience fought to advance the economic and political agenda of the United
States government.
In the
absence of clear-cut victories, the passage of time has demonstrated,
repeatedly, that these wars have wasted trillions of dollars and millions of
lives. In every case, the war resulted in
a loss of prestige and advantage for the U.S.
In other words, the United States lost these wars.
The only beneficiary
of these wars has been the military industrial complex and those who profit
from the excesses and violence of war.
Unfortunately, "they" have come to control the U.S. government
and the means of communication. Thus,
they can easily start wars for profit and successfully peddle the wars to those
who pay the price, in the lives of their children and their hard-earned taxes.
In every one
of these wars, it is possible to identify an individual or small group of
individuals who were engaging in conduct that may or may not have been
dangerous to the safety and security of the United States, but which was always
contrary to the best interests of their own people.
Here,
precisely, is where the United States should focus its attention and target the
projection of its power. In Syria, the
individual is named Bashar Assad. He is
the military dictator of Syria and he inherited the job from his father.
If the Syrian
people hate Assad, why is it necessary to destroy the nation of Syria and
kill its people in order to remove Assad?
President
Obama has signed an intelligence "finding" that authorizes U.S.
intelligence agencies to secretly support the Syrian opposition. The CIA is now providing money and funneling
weapons from adjacent countries to the Free Syrian Army.
Ultimately,
Assad will be killed or will leave the country, but in the meantime, thousands
of lives will be lost, billions of dollars will be wasted and the Syrian people
will transfer their hatred from Assad to the United States.
A
Law Enforcement Model
Why not adopt
a national policy of avoiding war against other nations and their innocent
people as a matter of principle?
Instead, to confront the danger posed by foreign dictators, such as
Assad, who threaten its national interests, the United States should adopt an
alternative policy based upon a law enforcement model.
What if,
instead of pouring gasoline on the flames of the Syrian civil war, President
Obama were to make his case to Congress, using the truth as best known to the
administration, and was able to prove that Assad, himself, represented a
serious threat to our national interests.
If convinced
by the evidence, Congress could pass a simple resolution ordering the president
to, first, file a lawsuit against the "government" of Syria in the World Court
of Justice in The Hague.
Next,
Congress could authorize the use of reasonable force and other legitimate
tactics to secure the appearance of Assad, personally, at the World
Court to defend his "government" against the charges.
What
then? One of the things professional
police officers have learned the hard way is that it is bad tactics to
immediately rush an armed and barricaded suspect.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).