Do you remember this statement and who said it?
"To brush aside America's responsibility as a leader and – more profoundly – our responsibilities to our fellow human beings under such circumstances would have been a betrayal of who we are. Some nations may be able to turn a blind eye to atrocities in other countries. The United States of America is different. And as president, I refused to wait for the images of slaughter and mass graves before taking action."
If you guessed George Bush just prior to the invasion of Iraq, you are wrong. If you guessed Bill Clinton after launching the NATO campaign against Serbia, you also are wrong. Indeed, the correct answer is that this is the statement of president Obama upon the commencement of American bombing of the forces of Gaddafi in Libya. The Gaddafi forces were threatening to overrun Benghazi and were killings civilians on the outskirts of that city when US forces began the attack.
Now consider this statement of a "senior administration official" in today's New York Times:
“How can we attack another country unless it’s in self-defense and with no Security Council resolution? If [Assad] drops sarin on his own people, what’s that got to do with us?”
Just once, I would like to see the media discuss the difference between Libya and Syria in a rational way. It is impossible to justify military action the way Obama did in Libya only to then sit idly by and watch Syria burn to the ground. Obama is not waiting for images of slaughter and mass graves before taking action; he is waiting for image after image after image and thousands of graves, and then he is not taking action. So far, the only real action from Obama has been "to keep all options on the table." At some point, one of those options has to come off the table and go into use.
Obama's Syria policy is a disgrace!
"To brush aside America's responsibility as a leader and – more profoundly – our responsibilities to our fellow human beings under such circumstances would have been a betrayal of who we are. Some nations may be able to turn a blind eye to atrocities in other countries. The United States of America is different. And as president, I refused to wait for the images of slaughter and mass graves before taking action."
If you guessed George Bush just prior to the invasion of Iraq, you are wrong. If you guessed Bill Clinton after launching the NATO campaign against Serbia, you also are wrong. Indeed, the correct answer is that this is the statement of president Obama upon the commencement of American bombing of the forces of Gaddafi in Libya. The Gaddafi forces were threatening to overrun Benghazi and were killings civilians on the outskirts of that city when US forces began the attack.
Now consider this statement of a "senior administration official" in today's New York Times:
“How can we attack another country unless it’s in self-defense and with no Security Council resolution? If [Assad] drops sarin on his own people, what’s that got to do with us?”
Just once, I would like to see the media discuss the difference between Libya and Syria in a rational way. It is impossible to justify military action the way Obama did in Libya only to then sit idly by and watch Syria burn to the ground. Obama is not waiting for images of slaughter and mass graves before taking action; he is waiting for image after image after image and thousands of graves, and then he is not taking action. So far, the only real action from Obama has been "to keep all options on the table." At some point, one of those options has to come off the table and go into use.
Obama's Syria policy is a disgrace!
No comments:
Post a Comment