Friday, June 14, 2013

U.S., citing use of chemical weapons by Syria, to provide direct military support to rebels

From the Washington Post:

The United States has concluded that the Syrian government used chemical weapons in its fight against opposition forces, and President Obama has authorized direct U.S. military support to the rebels, the White House said Thursday.

“The president has said that the use of chemical weapons would change his calculus, and it has,” said Benjamin J. Rhodes, Obama’s deputy national security adviser. Rhodes said U.S. intelligence had determined with “high certainty” that Syrian government forces have “used chemical weapons, including the nerve agent sarin, on a small scale against the opposition multiple times in the last year.”

More here.

Well, I suppose that "chemical weapons" serves as a useful version of the sinking of the Maine, or the sinking of the Lusitania, or the Gulf of Tonkin incident, or Saddam's WMD, whatever.  This is a really bad idea.  The rebels seem to be just as brutal and bloodthirsty as Assad's regime, right down to using chemical weapons, too.  Yes, lots of innocent people are being killed, but there is no good solution here, no way to force a situation such that people are not being killed.  Involving ourselves in a civil war where both sides hate us is the height of stupidity.  It will come back to haunt us.  Definitely.  We have absolutely nothing to gain from intervention, and a whole hell of a lot to lose.

Why the hell do our elites love going to war so much?  They're sick, stupid people.  And they run our nation.