
The desire to “do something” seems to triumph over pragmatism and reality for many in D.C. Of course, the trouble with that sort of mentality is it usually results in Americans getting killed because of a politician wanting to be seen as caring.
Not that this is merely an American political class problem. David Cameron, Britain’s prime minister, wants to get involved in Syria. His military, on the other hand, are rather less enthused if not downright against the idea.
In addition to the fact that the public is war weary and sick of paying to save people abroad while their own suffer at home, there is genuine angst about the “sides.”
With reports coming out of Syria of rebels killing entire villages of the Christian minority, and in the face of a video of one of their leaders at the heart of an enemy, you can’t blame them. How is it that the public realizes that it is a mistake to wade into a war where we have no idea who the “good guys” are and the great and the good in D.C. can’t see that? Does the water in D.C. make everyone there chronically dense?
Claims that if we got involved earlier we could have helped the “better” ones are now irrelevant. Al-Qaeda and Hezbollah are heavily involved in the conflict, two groups it would be moronic to arm. Hezbollah was practically a spent force a few years ago. Now it has been given a new lease on life, thanks to this conflict.
We have no idea what will happen when the vacuum is created by Assad failing. And the Middle East, like nature, abhors a vacuum. Does the world and the Middle East really need another Muslim Brotherhood or Islamist-controlled, heavily armed country?
Though I am sure, like with Libya, we are already involved in some way in the conflict, we should not be arming anyone. This is not the Cold War anymore and we need to butt out of civil wars in the Middle East or anywhere else, for that matter.
It is always a no-win situation for the West. We should have learned our lessons by now.
Syria, like Libya and Egypt, are matters we should stay the hell out of. Let them settle their own squabble, however they do.
No one ever gives us credit for helping anyway, and helping one side always makes enemies of the side that loses.
Time for the United States to forgo “foreign adventures” and concentrate on protecting itself, instead of worrying about the plight of others. The public has no stomach for it, we can’t afford it, and no one will thank us for it anyway.
And as we have learned several times before, this sort of meddling doesn’t work well when everyone is not 100 percent behind it. Half-minding this sort of thing, no matter how minimal the involvement, tends to lead to making things worse, not better.
Foreign policy should be about self-preservation, not something for presidents to fluff their ego and legacy with.
ANDREW IAN DODGE is a libertarian former U.S. Senate candidate and writer who lives in Harpswell.
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less