Left quietly decides war may not be so bad after all--if it's an Obama policy
One of the touchstones and rallying points of the Left is that war is *never* a reasonable act.
At least they're against all wars that Republican presidents think are called for. But just as "some animals are more equal than others," apparently the Left thinks war is sometimes a good idea--as long as it's being pushed by a Democrat.
Case in point: Obama ordered the U.S. Air Force to bomb Libya--in violation of the War Powers Act-- and the Left didn't say boo about it. Reason, apparently, was that the Left thought (as did most people) that ousting Kadaffi was a good thing. So if it took a little "kinetic action" (to use the outrageous euphemism the State Department actually used) to bring it off, well....
And now the Nobel peace prize winner has started arming the rebels in Syria. And for the record, the rebels include Islamic fundamentalists--who hate us.
Let's review: There's no argument that Syria's leader (Bashir Assad) is a dictator. And there's every reason to cheer his overthrow. But using the former reasoning of the Left, Syrians unhappy with their government should never have started a shooting war against the Assad regime, but should instead have tried to vote him out (really think that would work, Sparky?) or just silently done the civil-disobedience thing and been thrown in prison.
But of course the Left is nothing if not morally and ethically flexible, so suddenly the Left has reversed its long-professed position and approved the Obama administration's giving weapons to the rebels--thus racheting up the Syrian war to even deadlier levels.
Although I think it's beyond stupid to arm people who hate us, I agree that sometimes the only way to stop a dictator who's brutally oppressing his own people and refusing to hold honest elections is to start a war to force him out at gunpoint.
Wow, why does that sound familiar? Oh, that's right: Saddam Hussein in Iraq. But forcing Saddam out by armed means was eeeevil, because....because...because...BOOOSH! The nasty U.S. was gonna steal their oil! And of course it's just WRONG for the U.S. to intervene in the affairs of...uh, wait....
So as noted above, while I think Obama's buying a TON of trouble by giving weapons to Islamic fanatics, I'm delighted to see the Left implicitly abandon their objections to war as a means of accomplishing things that need to be done and can't be by any other means.
Welcome to the adult world, y'all. Enjoy your stay, cuz I'm pretty sure it's only temporary.
At least they're against all wars that Republican presidents think are called for. But just as "some animals are more equal than others," apparently the Left thinks war is sometimes a good idea--as long as it's being pushed by a Democrat.
Case in point: Obama ordered the U.S. Air Force to bomb Libya--in violation of the War Powers Act-- and the Left didn't say boo about it. Reason, apparently, was that the Left thought (as did most people) that ousting Kadaffi was a good thing. So if it took a little "kinetic action" (to use the outrageous euphemism the State Department actually used) to bring it off, well....
And now the Nobel peace prize winner has started arming the rebels in Syria. And for the record, the rebels include Islamic fundamentalists--who hate us.
Let's review: There's no argument that Syria's leader (Bashir Assad) is a dictator. And there's every reason to cheer his overthrow. But using the former reasoning of the Left, Syrians unhappy with their government should never have started a shooting war against the Assad regime, but should instead have tried to vote him out (really think that would work, Sparky?) or just silently done the civil-disobedience thing and been thrown in prison.
But of course the Left is nothing if not morally and ethically flexible, so suddenly the Left has reversed its long-professed position and approved the Obama administration's giving weapons to the rebels--thus racheting up the Syrian war to even deadlier levels.
Although I think it's beyond stupid to arm people who hate us, I agree that sometimes the only way to stop a dictator who's brutally oppressing his own people and refusing to hold honest elections is to start a war to force him out at gunpoint.
Wow, why does that sound familiar? Oh, that's right: Saddam Hussein in Iraq. But forcing Saddam out by armed means was eeeevil, because....because...because...BOOOSH! The nasty U.S. was gonna steal their oil! And of course it's just WRONG for the U.S. to intervene in the affairs of...uh, wait....
So as noted above, while I think Obama's buying a TON of trouble by giving weapons to Islamic fanatics, I'm delighted to see the Left implicitly abandon their objections to war as a means of accomplishing things that need to be done and can't be by any other means.
Welcome to the adult world, y'all. Enjoy your stay, cuz I'm pretty sure it's only temporary.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home