-
In Defense of Mark Sanford
May 2, 2013 | 142 comments
-
Rand’s Real Reachout
April 11, 2013 | 83 comments
-
Drone Coming
July 10, 2012 | 45 comments
-
Cyber-Cataclysm Prevention
March 28, 2012 | 11 comments
-
The Curious Case of Craig Benedict Baxam
January 26, 2012 | 49 comments
A Further Perspective
Syria Post-Libya
Pro-interventionists are paying the price for their earlier success.
It is a strange fact of the human experience that we order tragedy by aggregate so as to dull the shock to our collective conscience. Horrific killings are immortalized in names made infamous — the Rwandas and Srebrenicas — remembered as much for their casualty count, as for their circumstances.
In Syria, the 1982 massacre at Hama has haunted the 15-month uprising against President Bashar al-Assad’s government. Tens of thousands lost their lives when the Syrian army — under orders of the country’s president, Hafez al-Assad, and the command of his younger brother, Rifaat — exacted a scorched earth operation against the town in order to quell a simmering uprising, led by the Muslim Brotherhood.
Thirty years later, and the nation has suffered another defining massacre. In the wake of the slaughter at Houla, the international community has been reawakened to the regime’s brutality. Bashar al-Assad — son and nephew of the architects of Hama — is operating in the YouTube age of citizen journalism, unshielded from the immediacy of modern information-sharing. His atrocities have been televised, tweeted, and broadcast in real time. Yet he also lacks the convenience of diversionary violence — his father managed his massacres behind the veil of a vicious civil war in Lebanon. The son enjoys no such distraction.
Instead, the Syrian premier has channeled his inner-ostrich and elected to disavow or disagree with accusations against him. On Tuesday, President Assad expelled diplomats from Turkey and 10 Western countries — including the U.S. and the U.K. — in response to their respective decision to eject Syrian envoys after the Houla massacre. Such is his sense of reciprocity.
Although smaller in scope than aforementioned mass-murders, the 108 people killed in Houla seem somehow more tangible. One must assume that’s what happens when dozens of women and children are slaughtered, execution-style, by shabiha militia retained by the government to perform their duties absent any sense of moral balance. The killings sickened the world — the discovery of mass graves confirmed horror stories and convinced many that Assad is a man who will not be convinced or cajoled to compromise. His death toll now exceeds 10,000. Tens of thousands more have been subjected to arbitrary arrest and torture. But cumulative counts don’t stagger us like a climactic atrocity committed against women and children — particularly when we can witness the violence, for ourselves.
Houla represents a defining moment in the unrest that has rocked Syria since March 2011. Just witness the fallout.
While Syrian officials (and Assad himself) have blamed the killings on “foreign elements” and “terrorist groups,” the United Nations Human Rights Council accused “pro-regime elements,” in no uncertain terms. UN and Arab League joint envoy Kofi Annan described the slaughter as a “turning point” — a subtle, yet significant statement from the draftsman of the utterly toothless “peace-plan” that’s currently failing the Syrian people. France’s newly elected President François Hollande called for an armed, international intervention. Even China and Russia — Syria’s stalwart allies on the UN Security Council — expressed condemnation; naturally, without pointing any fingers.
At this point, there will be no negotiations, no transitional governments, and no reconciliation. The world will watch in muted horror while Assad maintains half-hearted assertions of plausible deniability about the atrocities his regime will continue to commit.
So what is the appropriate response to a bloody stalemate between an obdurate tyrant and an insurgency that won’t go away? When it comes to atrocity-prevention policy, satisfactory answers to complex questions are scarce. It is insufficient to offer empty nods to “good governance,” “security sector reform” and the “rule of law.” But the international order sits atop an architecture of path-dependent, normative behavior. What does recent history tell us?
Recall, not long ago, the Libyan adventure was hailed as a success across academia and the media, precisely because it proved less arduous than 1990s style humanitarian intervention. Advocates of airpower hailed an age of low-cost military actions fought in support of all-volunteer forces battling regime-sponsored thugs. NATO’s support of Transitional National Council (TNC) forces was said to mark the advent of an evolving international norm — and one in stout cascade. Although the laws governing the use of force at the UN are the same now as they were in 1991, whispers of an international “responsibility to protect” (R2P) grew into a chorus.
Loosely derived from the just war precept of jus ad bellum, and its relevant attention to the protection of innocent civilians, R2P has changed since it was first conceived as a doctrine of international ethics — as witnessed in Libya, it may now prompt a “justified” response to intrastate violence. As such, R2P may be waged in violation of sovereign authority, for a “good cause” and with “best intentions.” A horrific act of aggression committed against (or within) a sovereign state, or race of people who are unable to defend themselves against an inhuman adversary offers sufficient cause to wage just war on behalf of the weak and vulnerable.
So why not Syria? Why has an apparent success in Libya — as defined by the protection of “civilians” in Benghazi, the ouster of Gaddafi, and the evasion of an expensive quagmire — not intensified our commitment to protect innocent noncombatants in Homs and Houla?
Certainly, there are strategic concerns. The application of no-fly zones, tactical air strikes, militarized safe areas, and the arming of opposition forces often proves ineffective, unwieldy, and incendiary. And, by all means, Russia is unlikely to forfeit her warm water port in Tartous, and the lucrative arms deal that’s helped keep the Assad regime in power. Plenty of analysts and observers have suggested as much.
But perhaps more importantly, the NATO campaign in Libya has proven a victim of its own success.
We have learned that an international prevention framework to avert atrocity does not necessarily sync with regime change in problem states. NATO’s decision to interpret UNSC Resolution 1973 as free license to topple Gaddafi provoked a vocal response from many UN member states. The emerging BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) offered some of the most vehement criticism of NATO’s sense of its “responsibility to protect.” Considering two of these states hold permanent seats at the UN Security Council, this dissent suggests future exercise of R2P will prove more limited in scope. The conspicuous absence of action in Syria provides a case in point.
About the Author
Reid Smith is a staff writer and editor at FreedomWorks.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (50) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Reid Smith
More Articles From A Further Perspective
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/06/06/syria-post-libya
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- A Panoply of Beauties
- Happy Fourth
- There’s Something About Cambridge
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
TLP| 6.6.12 @ 8:54AM
One Bullet, in the 1930's, could have saved Millions of lives. One Bullet.
In 2012, one Cruise Missile could put an end to one more Human Tradgedy, brought down on a Civilian Population, by a Madman Son, of a Madman Father. A piece of Sub Human Scum, who will lay waste to everything around him, before he will relinquish his Throne. But, in the end, he WILL Relinquish his Throne, along with his B*tch Wife from Hell. Just don't hold your breath.
With Fellow Members of the Sub Human Club - Iran and Russia - sending Arms to the Psychopath in Damascus, the Arab League sought to Arm the Opposition to Assad. That plan was Vetoed by the Christian Boy who was raised in the Muslim Schools, and Mosques, of Indonesia. The Christian President, who believes that "The Muslim Call to Prayer is the most Beautiful sound in the world" Vetoed an Arab League Plan.
Can anyone tell me, exactly, WHEN the Muslim Arab League started taking Marching Orders from an Infidel President of The Great Satan?
One bullet could have prevented a World War.
One Cruise Missile could put an End to the Slaughter of the Syrian people, in the streets.
One total Assault on an Apocalyptic Islamist Regime's Nuclear Facilities could stop a Nuclear Holocaust, before it ever happens.
"An ounce of Prevention".
Too bad it will never happen.
Brooksifier | 6.6.12 @ 10:40AM
Paul Kengor wants to put an ABM in Poland to provoke the Russians and perhaps restart the Cold War.
You Rightists love war.
TrueBlue | 6.6.12 @ 2:01PM
Yes, because no country has the right to build defensive structures in their own territory. Such an evil war-provoking thing building a DEFENSIVE WEAPON. Heck, by that measure no wonder Europe's military is so tiny, if they were to actually build up a military capable of defending themselves they'd be provoking Russia!
TLP| 6.6.12 @ 3:07PM
If you would stop peeking at your Mom, in the shower, you would know that we're ALREADY in a Cold War.
Get your eye out of that Key hole, and your Head outta your Ass.
Idiot.
Von Mises Jr| 6.6.12 @ 11:44AM
Hey, it looks like we still got Brooksie. Perp and Margie probably got fired by Soros for being so stupid to answer using the wrong troll name. Brooksie is just so dumb he can't use two names in one day, so he just changes it and sticks with the new one. Of course, Brooksie and Brooksifier was a brilliant deception.
Brooksifier | 6.6.12 @ 4:55PM
You goddamned Kraut-- you and Kengor.
Brooksifier | 6.6.12 @ 5:11PM
"Ordinary Russians who tend to view the West as a threat to their well-being, peace, and standing in the world. Some of them simply think it’s too early for Russia, some of them think it is not the right system in general. They like to vote, but not for 'change'. Change has been often catastrophic (and sometimes genocidal) for Russia. It does not help that the USA has military bases all around Russia (in Eastern Europe, Scandinavia, Turkey, Iraq, Afghanistan, Central Asia, Mongolia, South Korea, Japan and of course Alaska), whereas Russia has virtually no military presence far from its immediate borders). If the European Union was moving swiftly and smoothly towards unification and this helped Europe remain a world power, if the USA were increasing its power on the world, if the Arab Spring led to economic booms, and so on, Russians might be interested in Westernizing their country. As it stands, the benefit of adopting Western-style politics are dubious. The West should just stop lecturing Russia on democracy and accept that, for the time being, they have a more popular leader than any of the Western countries. After all, Russians enjoy a lot more freedom now than they did 20 years ago, and probably more than US citizens enjoyed in their first 20 years (especially women and minorities)."
TLP| 6.6.12 @ 5:20PM
They have a more popular Leader than any of the Western Countries, ala Saddam Hussein, and the Kim Family, who always won their "Elections" by Landslides.
Tell me why a White, Christian Country, would consistently side with The Muslim Enemies, of the Christian World.
I'll wait.
TLP| 6.6.12 @ 5:34PM
I'm waiting.
Occam's Tool| 6.6.12 @ 6:43PM
Because as any Jew from the Ukraine knows, Tim, the Russkies are natuarally nekulturny. They need liberal applications of the knout to learn the simplest things, such as using toilets properly, eh Dmitry?
Occam's Tool| 6.6.12 @ 6:47PM
Please note that histories of Nikita Khrushchev did note that he learned how to use a modern toilet as an adult.
Occam's Tool| 6.6.12 @ 6:41PM
I certainly encourage smashing Iran until it glows, TLP. But striking Syria before that is done is kind of futile. Both sides in Syria--Assad and his foes, are vermin who support Jihad. The Truman Commentary on Russia versus Nazi Germany in July, 1941, may apply.
Now, AFTER Iran kneels to Zod, this may make more sense to choose sides. But the side we choose needs to know that we are jealous, unbelievable vicious and cruel when crossed and will SEVERELY PUNISH any double dealing, and that ANY attacks on Western countries, including its neighbor, will be met by us letting Israel off the chokeleash.
William R| 6.6.12 @ 6:57PM
Another mass murdering Jew. Get out of the United States you treasonous SOB
Occam's Tool| 6.6.12 @ 7:02PM
Bill, since I am an American citizen, and a land owner, screw off you traitorous Obama loving POS.
William R| 6.7.12 @ 11:57AM
Face it punk, everything the heroic Alfred M. Lilienthal predicted in his classic book, "What Price Israel" has come true!!
http://books.google.com/books/.....dJpxQubwUC
A treasonous fifth column that always puts the interest of a foreign country first. Get the FUGG out of the United States!!!
TLP| 6.6.12 @ 8:31PM
We don't need to attack Syria, my friend.
We just need to ARM them, like the Drunks! in Moscow, and the Goat Humpers, in Iran, are doing, for Assad.
We have got to LEARN from History.
We just have to.
Like I said, earlier.
One Bullet could have prevented a World War, and a Holocaust.
One Cruise Missile could prevent, yet another Holocaust, of innocent Men, Women, and Children.
Quartermaster| 6.7.12 @ 8:01AM
What is going to replace Assad is far worse. The Alewite minority in Syria will be slaughtered if he is deposed and we will have the Muslim Brotherhood, as we will probably get in Egypt.
nathan| 6.6.12 @ 9:14AM
@TLP: Are you so well versed in the affairs of the area that you are positive that getting rid of ONE man will end all the carnage? Or more likely as in the case of Libya where we didn't know the players and lack any real understanding of how things work we exchanged one bad guy for another? And doesn't that pesky little document called THE CONSTITUTION sort of require us to get a declaration of war from congress before we go throwing cruise missiles against a country who has not attacked us and poses no threat to us? Tell the class here EXACTLY what national securiy threat the regime poses to United States. Have they attacked us? Declared war on us? So you want to play neocon interventionist, world's policeman, white man's burden, all that based exactly on what?
And yes, I get the human tragedy in Syria which is no greater than that in Africa, North Korea, the Central Asian Republics (where we have bases) but also Muburak grossly abused the Egyptian people for 30 years. Did you get this worked up over what he did to those people and demand he be taken out? Didn't think so.
And by the way the incumbent also attended Punahou in Hawaii which is considered a pretty good school there. He didn't spend ALL his time in Indonesia.
TLP| 6.6.12 @ 9:49AM
One at a time, young nathan?
Will getting rid of ONE MAN End all the Carnage?
I guess we won't KNOW, until we try.
Mubarek grossly abused the Egyptian people.
Really?
How many people did he Gun Down in the Streets.
How many Women and Children's THROATS, did he order SLIT?
And, I never said that your Boy spent ALL of his time in Indonesia.
Please do your Homework, and get your FACTS in order, before you put something else on this page, to further advance the Idea, among the rest of us, that you're an IDIOT.
nathan| 6.6.12 @ 10:54AM
According to story on Cavuto over a year ago, Mubarak stole upwards of 60/70 billion dollars and impoverished his country making it one of the five(?) poorest in the world or somewhere in that neighborhood. His human rights record was utterly appalling and tens of thousands of Egyptians were tortured and untold numbers were arrested and never seen again. Muburak was just more subtle about HIS body count.
But equally at least two of the five CAR's have body counts that are as bad or worse than Assad's. Where is your outrage over that? Does the presence of our bases in these countries and their giving "support" for our war on terror mute your outrage and that of others?
But you wouldn't care to show the class the article of the Constitution that authorizes the neocon interventionist action you are proposing here? As I stated Syria has not attacked us, directly or indirectly. The last I looked the Constitution under those circumstances really doesn't authorize cruise missile attacks for "humanitarian" purposes?
Let me remind you all of something here. The Constitution applies to everyone, not just liberals you "conservatives" despise and not just regarding the ACA. It equally applies when you neocon interventionists want to go off on your humanitarian/democracy jihads too.
My reference to Punahou was to suggest he had other influences besides a few years of school in Indonesia.
Name calling? tsk tak.
TLP| 6.6.12 @ 3:11PM
Why don't YOU show everybody, the Article in the Constitution, that allows your Boy, The Muslim, to attack Libya, without even CONSULTING CONGRESS, let alone, get a Declaration of War?
You're starting to be BORING.
Idiot.
Occam's Tool| 6.6.12 @ 6:44PM
Yes, and all his education there didn't teach him the number of US States or how to pronounce Corpsman.
It's the student, not the school, Nathan. If you were Jewish you would understand. Akiva started his schooling at age 40, in a kindergarten.
Bob K| 6.6.12 @ 11:00AM
There is no coherent American foreign Policy in the Near East or Middle East. Nobody is in charge in Washington on anything involving this area of the world. Aged, semi-senile senators like McCain go over there and shoot off their mouths and some dolt in Washington DC gives them publicity.
Here in Syria we are supporting the Muslim brotherhood whose founder was an admirer of Adolph Hitler. Even Israel has a problem with this:
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrar.....rhood.html
You can get a pretty good summary of the history of their actions in Syria in that link.
Russia and China have big problems with our policy in Syria too. See this article from today's Asia Times:
http://atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/NF06Ak01.html
Reid Smith is hiding the real reason behind this support of the Muslim Brotherhood who hate America and Americans.
The neocon's bogeyman, Russia, is hiding in their closet. They don't want to release him but the real reason for all this drum beating to get rid of the Assad Regime is to get rid of the Russian warmwater Naval Base in Tartus, Syria and the neo cons are willing to cut deals with Islamofascists to do it.
C. Vernon Crisler | 6.6.12 @ 11:11AM
Bob K, your comments were interesting until you got to the last paragraph and mentioned "neocons." When will you Paulistas get over your obsessions with "neocons"? (Meaning anyone who disagrees with hyper-libertarian, head-in-the-sand, pacifism.
Bob K| 6.6.12 @ 1:26PM
Oh baloney, Vernon!
I don't support anything Ron Paul supports! And I am nowhere near a libertarian pacifist. They want out of everything.
What I see here in our government policy (or lack of one) regarding Syria is incoherence and incompetence and Reid Smith sure walks and quacks like a neo con while supporting it. And there is obvious major political and media influence behind this drive to unseat the Alawite minority in Syria and replace it, "democratically" of course, with a Sunni majority controlled by the Muslim brotherhood.
Neo Conservatives exist and you know it. Some of them originated from the Trotskyite wing of the Communist party and saw the light and left it others came out of the liberal wing of the Republican party. Their children and supporters founded The Weekly Standard. There is a new generation of them now.
Reid Smith| 6.6.12 @ 2:05PM
Hi Bob, I don't always reply to comments (although I appreciate them), but I'd like to assure you, personally, that I'm about as far from neoconservative as one might be.
If you'll notice, I'm suggesting that intervention in Libya has tied our hands in Syria - which maybe for the best. As I wrote, arming the opposition, tactical air-strikes, etc., are often unwieldy, unhelpful and inflammatory. In my experience, thats not a particularly neo-con line of thinking...
Thank you for your comments, though. Perhaps I needed to clarify.
-R
Bob K| 6.6.12 @ 6:37PM
Thank you for your response Mr. Smith and your clarification. I was incorrect in my characterization of your analysis.
To sum up my response to your article, and perhaps oversimplify it, I feel that this problem which is currently affecting Syria is one where our country would be better of letting well enough alone.
Bob K| 6.6.12 @ 6:41PM
In the last sentence make that better "off."
Occam's Tool| 6.6.12 @ 6:52PM
Bob:
Well, this interventionalist cannot see where the US is better off backing either side. Unfortunately, they are too close to Israel to trinitite them sufficiently, so I guess we will let them kill each other. I've got no problem with mad vermin shooting each other. There is no "good side" here---Al Qaida versus Assad.
TLP| 6.6.12 @ 3:24PM
I disagree. The Muslim has got a Coherent Foreign Policy. He wants to UNILATERALLY DISARM this Country. Run out the Clock on Iran's drive to a Nuclear Weapon. Bend over, and Lube Up, to his Russian ideological Comrades, and hang Israel out to dry, until the Islamists can drive them in to the Sea.
Sounds like a Plan, to me.
The Russian Navel Base in Tartus?
What about the THOUSANDS MURDERED by this Blood Soaked SCUMBAG, in Damascus.
Obviously, those Men, Women, and Children, being Slaughtered in the streets, mean nothing to you.
Why am I not surprised?
Occam's Tool| 6.6.12 @ 6:59PM
Bob: no one likes seeing Islamic third world primitive tribalist countries (Are there any other kinds of Islamic country?) beaten to the bloody pulp they deserve to be beaten to than I do. As Reid, Jackboot Jack, and others have noted, I am a bloodthirsty, genocidal maniac. :-)
But I don't see where intervening here is better than letting my enemies kill each other. Never interfere with an opponent making a fatal mistake. I believe in Islamic nation destroying, not building. When they are beaten like the Japanese in WWII were (and I believe that is what it will take, I hold no hopes for "easy victory") then we can consider "nation building." But not while they are baby beheading savages. For them the knout, the whip, the fist, the bullet.
Who Knows?| 6.6.12 @ 11:55AM
“So why not Syria? Why has an apparent success in Libya -- as defined by the protection of "civilians" in Benghazi, the ouster of Gaddafi, and the evasion of an expensive quagmire -- not intensified our commitment to protect innocent noncombatants in Homs and Houla?”
Come on, Reid, why waste words---the reason “”why not Syria?” is OBAMA.
TLP| 6.6.12 @ 5:37PM
Indeed.
Hamas' "Deliveror's" is never gonna do ANYTHING against a committed enemy of Israel.
It's just that simple.
Wake Up!
C Smith | 6.7.12 @ 2:22AM
2Ki 8:9 So Hazael went to meet him, and took a present with him, even of every good thing of Damascus, forty camels' burden, and came and stood before him, and said, Thy son Benhadad king of Syria hath sent me to thee, saying, Shall I recover of this disease?
2Ki 8:10 And Elisha said unto him, Go, say unto him, Thou mayest certainly recover: howbeit the LORD hath shewed me that he shall surely die.
2Ki 8:11 And he settled his countenance stedfastly, until he was ashamed: and the man of God wept.
2Ki 8:12 And Hazael said, Why weepeth my lord? And he answered, Because I know the evil that thou wilt do unto the children of Israel: their strong holds wilt thou set on fire, and their young men wilt thou slay with the sword, and wilt dash their children, and rip up their women with child.
2Ki 8:13 And Hazael said, But what, is thy servant a dog, that he should do this great thing? And Elisha answered, The LORD hath shewed me that thou shalt be king over Syria.
2Ki 8:14 So he departed from Elisha, and came to his master; who said to him, What said Elisha to thee? And he answered, He told me that thou shouldest surely recover.
2Ki 8:15 And it came to pass on the morrow, that he took a thick cloth, and dipped it in water, and spread it on his face, so that he died: and Hazael reigned in his stead.
Who Knows?| 6.6.12 @ 12:11PM
Maybe humanity is enjoying the flowering of myriad examples of “either-or”.
Civilized, or not = barbarism.
Individual freedom, or not = slavery..
Rule of law, or not = rule of men.
Free markets, or not = state enterprises, crony capitalism, socialism, etc.
For a 2012 example, take the American membership in the corrupt UN.
If ever a case existed wherein weighing the costs verses the benefits emphatically yelled, “LEAVE”, as an either-or clear cut decision, this is it. Maybe someday, things will get so bad in all the rotten “states”, which will infect the UN even further, that America will, with relieved disgust, exit the UN.
Recognizing the true glory of the idea of the UN, and the realization that the USA is the “guiding light of freedom” unique among all nations, she should endeavor to create a special “club”, by invitation only. Using something like that Freedom Index published annually, just ask kindred CIVILIZED countries if they’d like to “friend” us.
It would be such a hoot to NOT ask China, or Russia!
John786| 6.6.12 @ 1:40PM
The use of latin ' jus ad bellum': the irony (: difficult concept for Americans). The Romans only ever practiced just Genocide.
Occam's Tool| 6.6.12 @ 6:49PM
786: Uh, no they didn't. They adapted their force to the needs of the situation. Hence the treatment of German tribes and hostages.
The Romans were always, after Augustus, aware of the limits of their power.
John786| 6.6.12 @ 7:19PM
Roman history: conquer, enslave, exterminate. Not much calibration. Shame Hanibal couldn't quite deliver the coup de grace.The desert Arabs showed them!
Dave Williams| 6.6.12 @ 2:58PM
Muslims killing muslims.....sorry, I just don't see the problem here.
Mistral| 6.6.12 @ 3:02PM
The basic problem for the anti-Syrian lobby is that what follows is the consequence of encouraging armed rebellion insted of quiet diplomay favouring gradualist chnages towards more political liberty. However, the western ideas of voting democracies will never be fully accepted in their integrity in the Middle East. One can only envisage increasing tension, violence and long term political instability. My guess is this is what the western powers would like underneath the flowery rhetoric about liberty, eqiuality and fraternity. Divide and rule is a time-honoured system of governance.
TLP| 6.6.12 @ 3:28PM
It must be nice to be so stupid.
Is it?
Is it nice to be as stupid, as you are?
Ignorance is bliss.
Apparently, so is being a Dumb@ss.
Brooksifier | 6.6.12 @ 5:18PM
Read below:
the Rove-Cheney administration was a FAILURE in foreign affairs.
TLP| 6.6.12 @ 5:23PM
Great.
Another Idiot.
Just what this site needs.
William R| 6.6.12 @ 7:04PM
Bush Rove and Cheney were not only a disaster for the GOP but the country too. Obma is President because Bush surrounded himself with radical NeoCons in his first term
Brooksifier | 6.6.12 @ 5:16PM
"One can only envisage increasing tension, violence and long term political instability. My guess is this is what the western powers would like underneath the flowery rhetoric about liberty, eqiuality and fraternity. Divide and rule is a time-honoured system of governance."
It is true, Rightists in America will do anything for power- they proved that with the Rove-Cheney interregnum.
TLP| 6.6.12 @ 5:24PM
Like I said.
Another idot.
Mistral| 6.7.12 @ 3:16PM
My guess is leftists like this too! The right certainly does not have a monopoly on it - this is a leftist position.
marque lunettes de soleil | 6.7.12 @ 4:00AM
nstead, the Syrian premier has channeled his inner-ostrich and elected to disavow or disagree with accusations against him. On Tuesday, President Assad expelled diplomats from Turkey and 10 Western countries -- including the U.S. and the U.K. -- in response to their respective decision to eject Syrian envoys after the Houla massacre. Such is his sense of reciprocity.
Marie| 6.7.12 @ 5:53PM
Obama blew his "I'm not telling congress that I am taking military action" load in Libya. If he tries it in Syria, he's going to get cooked. Given the current mood in congress about Obama, he won't be getting away with much more of his BS.