This is Why You Don’t Cry Wolfowitz

I’m watching John Kerry talk about tiny bodies in white shrouds and human hair and blood drenched in Sarin. I’m thinking of Condoleezza Rice testifying about mushroom clouds and yellowcake uranium. I’m remembering Paul Wolfowitz assuring Congress that Iraq oil revenues would more than pay for the war which would only last six months at most; I’m recalling Rumsfeld and Cheney and Halliburton contracts. I’m picturing Hans Blix saying there are no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. I’m unraveling the long threads of years that followed and am sickened by the sheer number of mutilated corpses that spill out.

There is no question that the Assad regime has used Sarin gas in  a civilian neighborhood. There is no question that the international community has long considered such an act to be unacceptable and demanding intervention against the criminals who perpetrate such an act. The entire justification for the 2003 invasion of Iraq was predicated on the notion that Saddam Hussein possessed these weapons (of course, he had used them in the past but had been given a pass on this as the US had provided him with the weapons and intel on how best to use them.). Yet here we are, without even the UK willing to take part in enforcing the standards of civilization. If I’ve said it once, I’ve said it a thousand times; history doesn’t repeat, it rhymes. This is not Serbia in 1914 or the annexation of Austria in 1938 but that does not mean that this crisis stands unconnected in history; if we do not have the will to enforce justice today because of yesterday’s mistakes, the blame for inaction still lies upon us.

2 Responses to “This is Why You Don’t Cry Wolfowitz”

  1. Don’t know, dude–not this time. I have Syrian students sent over here by their parents so they’d be safe. The situation is more complicated than that. None of them care for Assad–in fact, to a person they detest him–but some of the rebel groups (which include al-Quaeda) are not so great either. I’m talking them into not going back, like, at all. If the missile strikes are, as I believe, meant to destroy those chemical weapons depots so neither Assad nor al Quaeda can use them, then I’m all for that. Boots on the ground in such a densely-packed nation, however, would be an immense mess.

  2. I absolutely understand and agree that it is a very complicated situation. I don’t think American boots on the ground are needed but American leadership in this matter is absolutely crucial; it is not merely a moral imperative but vital to American and Western interests to intervene. It is baffling to me that American conservatives would embrace Putin simply because they perceive that they might be able to make Obama look bad; the stakes are much higher than domestic political arguments.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: