Syria - Killing Innocents with Weapons of Mass Destruction

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." Edmund Burke (1729-97)
Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) were non-existent when President George Bush made the decision to invade Iraq on March 1, 2003.   We now know, those Weapons of Mass Destruction didn't exist.

Meanwhile, as a result of American intervention in Iraq, thousands of people were killed, including American military and Iraqi civilians, in Operation Iraqi Freedom. 

Today, the world has evidence of genocide committed in Syria with President Bashar-al-Assad using the evil terror of deadly gas to murder his country's citizens; but the world seems to be in a state of paralysis about how to respond.  This makes no  sense. If Assad is allowed to kill his own people because he wants to murder future opposition, then all dissenting groups in other countries will be at risk for similar retribution.  Maybe, President Obama should have claimed, as President Bush did, that Assad harbors Weapons of Mass Destruction.  After all, what are gas killing weapons? Deadly weapons that kill innocent people with noxious gas are, in fact, weapons of mass destruction.  

President Obama decided to take the issue of how to respond to the Syrian genocide to the US Congress, for a vote.  He'll seek a Congressional vote before moving forward with an assault against the Assad regime.  If the Congress votes down any military action, the consequences of inaction will be theirs to bear. 

Almost as soon as President Obama announced his decision to procrastinate, the Syrian Government began yet another offensive against rebels.  More Christians will die as a result.

Let me get this right:  Americans invaded Iraq because Hussein was supposed to harbor Weapons of Mass Destruction - except he didn't.  But, America balk rather than retaliate against Assad because he killed thousands of his own people, in the face of President Obama's threat of retaliation.  There was no evidence of the former and plenty of brutal evidence to support the later.  

America invaded Iraq with no evidence; but we're in a delay pattern with Syria, in spite of evidence.

Nevertheless, a reasonable reticent response is understandable.   American intervention in the Middle East has had an overall negative impact. In fact, the Middle East has been in a tailspin ever since 1991, when President George Herbert Walker Bush decided to invade Iraq in Operation Dessert Storm, because Saddam Hussein had invaded the sovereign nation of Kuwait.  

Bush, remembering the lessons of Vietnam, sought public support before the Gulf War. Although there were scant opponents of the conflict, the vast majority of Americans and a narrow majority of the Congress supported the President's actions. When all the forces were in place, the United States issued an ultimatum to Saddam Hussein: leave Kuwait by January 15,1991 or face a full attack by the multinational force.

But, President Bush 1st didn't finish the job after the successful multinational  invasion led by General Norman Schwarzkopf, Jr.

Although Schwarzkopf led a brilliant effort, Saddam Hussein remained in charge of Iraq.  

After the war, Saddam Hussein executed a reign terror against the Iraqi groups that assisted the multinationals. The unfinished business after the Gulf War became complicated over time, but ultimately led to the Second Iraq War.  This second invasion was based upon a false premise that Hussein harbored Weapons of Mass Destruction. Tragically, in the aftermath of both wars, the country of Iraq has since broken into civil unrest.

In other words, American intervention in Iraq has not advanced the nation one iota.  

Intervention in Syria will presumably create the same dismal outcome.

But, Syrian President Assad is getting away with genocide; he's murdering his people, including hundreds of children, using Weapons of Mass Destruction!  

Inevitably, civil wars and religious carnage in the Middle East will lead to a confrontation of Apocalyptic proportions. Unspeakable nuclear options are certainly another horrendous threat. The world can't continue to ignore growing instability in the Middle East.  

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." Edmund Burke (1729-97)

President Obama told Americans today that he will take action against the Syrian Government - “We cannot and must not turn a blind eye to what happened in Damascus,” Obama said during an address at the Rose Garden. “This has implications beyond chemical warfare," he said.

Unfortunately, the implications he spoke of will create more carnage, as Assad sees he's getting away with murder.  It's likely he'll destroy his opposition, most of them Christians, before our gridlocked US Congress reconvenes on September 9th.  

Assad will use more Weapons of Mass Destruction in the process.

Maybe, President Obama's Rose Garden statement today should have included President Bush, the President who used WMD as the premise for the Iraq invasion, standing with Vice President Biden.

So, we've finally found a valid reason to attack a sovereign country, but the weapons of mass destruction we sought in Iraq are being used to kill innocent people in Syria.  Typically, our US Congress will do about as much to help Syrian rebels as they do about immigration reform - ie nothing.

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." Edmund Burke (1729-97)

Although Americans have every reason to be averse to any wars, the Assad "in you face" actions to deliberately violate international law must be punished.  Syrian people must rise up to initiate a regime change before the entire Middle East turns into the fulfillment of Apocalyptic prophecy; and the weapons of mass destruction used will be more than the world can continue to ignore.