By DAVID J BEILSTEIN
CONTEMPORARY EVENTS, as it were, in Syria continue to press upon the American consciousness, albeit through the friction and fog of a war that appears, it seems, ever more likely.
In a word, it would appear – following the suspected use of chemical weapons on Syrian rebels – war is becoming more inevitable with Basher el-Assad’s regime.
The violent mismanagement of American war-power (throughout the last ten years) has created a political vacuum in which the American people do not want more war, and thus, the political capital to wage war has been eroded enough that fighting modern war raises the question whether a conflict can be won quickly, and severely?
Such emotions could be called war fatigue. But it seems there is somewhat of the crying wolf notion going on too, which upon reflection, has germinated into our national dialogue and fomented distrust of our national security purposes.
Let us speculate this, shall we: what if the wise position is to go to war with Syria? Too bad, because the political and material capital to win such a war is slim to non-existence.
Much has been said on Libertarian Monks appears as polemical bombs detonated in Republican mailboxes. And perhaps it can be said the anti-war Democratic left did not help matters when it waged an anti-war campaign against the Bush administration’s efforts to abolish radical Islam’s declaration of war on the United States by the destruction of over three-thousand lives on 9/11.
Such a politics-before-principal posture cannot go without blame – nor should it be the means by which libertarians and paleocons argue against America-as-global-cop in the world reside.
The paleo-conservative and libertarian can in one crisp, tightly thrown combination condemn “making the world safe for democracy” military adventurism while at the same realizing the anti-war left and her reasoning is both without submission to the nature of people and nations – and simultaneously, detrimental to national security vital to United States sovereignty.
National Security concerns – those things vital to American interests are exactly what the U.S. Constitution first directs the duties of the Federal Government to preserve and protect.
Be it said, the Bush administration made matters difficult by bungling two easily winnable wars, because, rather than seeking to destroy an enemy, it sought to sanctify and nation-build a particular people without cultural/religious/politico predispositions which give rise to free, democratic republican, societies.
Such gave us the war in Afghanistan – a war we cannot call a success, and after that, and worse, the war in Iraq – which current events inform insightful people, also cannot be called a success.
Fast forward to the Presidential election of 2012. One where Republicans, as it were, with Mitt Romney at the front of the pack, doubled-down on the exact same kind of military interventionism which spawned two wars the American people were already averse to, especially with Republicans leading it.
And so, the American people – nervous of American strength as articulated by Republicans, chose Pres. Obama for another term – a President whom enraptured with a complete lack of foreign policy know-how; with a serious lack of submission to reality – has prepared the soil now fomenting war in Syria.
No good options await us.
Now, war marches ever closer – like a fire consuming surrounding forests, flickering into darkened skies.