Get PJ Media on your Apple

VodkaPundit

To Nuke or Not to Nuke

December 5th, 2012 - 2:44 pm

It’s been a long time — maybe never — since I found myself nodding to something from the editors of CSM. But here it is:

The rationale for any US intervention in Syria may be important for Americans to know sooner rather than later. Intense fighting has erupted around Damascus. President Bashar al-Assad appears dangerously cornered. On Monday, Mr. Obama seemed to tip his hand more strongly on the moral versus self-interest question. He warned Mr. Assad that “there will be consequences and you will be held accountable” if the Syrian Army uses its stockpile of chemical weapons.

The weapons pose little or no threat to the American homeland. Yet Obama’s moral stance on Syria’s weapons of mass destruction – similar to his tough warnings to Iran about building a nuclear bomb – has pushed him to promise a response in Syria that is only lightly veiled as one involving force. That contrasts with no threat of US force to end Assad’s killing of tens of thousands of civilians.

I must be stupid, because all of this smart diplomacy just confuses me.

Click here to view the 8 legacy comments

Comments are closed.