Tuesday, September 03, 2013
While John McCain Thirsts For Syrian Blood, Sarah Palin Throws Up A Caution Flag On Intervention In Syria
The former Republican Presidential tag team of 2008 couldn't be farther apart politically than on the question of American intervention in Syria. While John McCain literally thirsts for Syrian blood, his former tag team partner Sarah Palin threw up a caution flag this past weekend, concluding that only Allah has the wisdom to sort it out. Worse yet, House Speaker John "Bonehead" Boehner has now joined the war orgy against Syria.
Palin shared her opinion about Syria on her Facebook page and on Conservatives4Palin, posing some legitimate questions:
(1). Is President Obama sure which side is doing what, what the ultimate end game is, or even whose side we should be on?
(2). Why is so important to intervene now after over 1,000 Syrians were killed by chemical weapons when it wasn't important to intervene when over 100,000 Syrians were slaughtered by other means?
(3). How can a telegraphed air strike on Syria deter them from using chemical weapons when our invasion of Iraq wasn’t enough of a deterrent to stop evil men from using chemical weapons on their own people?
(4). What vital American interests are at stake there today amidst yet another centuries-old internal struggle between violent radical Islamists and a murderous dictatorial regime?
And another question I would ask -- just what did the Syrians do to us that warrants American aggression against them? The same thing the Serbians did to us in 1999 -- ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! Why are we attacking countries that haven't attacked us?
Sarah Palin concludes that if we are dangerously uncertain of the outcome and are led into war by a Commander-in-chief who can’t recognize that this conflict is pitting Islamic extremists against an authoritarian regime with both sides shouting “Allah Akbar” at each other, then let Allah sort it out. Furthermore, an American attack on Syria at this point would violate the Palin Doctrine, reiterated on Conservatives4Palin:
(1). Commit our forces only when clear and vital American interests are at stake. No vital American interests are at stake here; President Assad is merely defending his country against an insurgency the same way we contested Confederate secession from 1861-65.
(2). When we fight, fight to win. The purpose of our military is to fight and win America's wars, not to engage in nation-building, peace-keeping, or wiping babies' asses. When we commit, use overwhelming force such as we did in Desert Storm.
(3). Have clearly defined goals and objectives before sending troops into harm’s way. Just what the fuck does Obama want to do in Syria, anyway?
(4). American soldiers must never be put under foreign command. Specialist Michael New sacrificed his military career and got a dishonorable discharge in defense of this principle.
(5). Sending in our armed forces should be the last resort. We do not own the world; we cannot remedy every single injustice. People may come to "democracy" at gunpoint, but they won't stay there at gunpoint. Some might say that when you have them by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow, but whither goeth their hearts and minds when you release the grip on their balls?