Health & Fitness
Even Democrats think Obama's Syria policy is Confused
How does our Syria policy make any sense whatsoever?
Congressman Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.) still “loves” President Barack Obama — but he thinks the White House’s handling of the situation in Syria has been “embarrassing.”
Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.) (Getty Images)
“I love Obama, and you’ll never find a truer Democrat than me, but this whole idea of any president of the United States drawing lines saying that if any country does something, that he considers wrong, that the nation is going to war, it’s unheard of–drawing a red line,” the Democrat congressman said Monday in response to a question about the president’s so-called “red line” on the use of chemical weapons.
“So, of course, it’s embarrassing. I wish it didn’t happen,” he added.
Find out what's happening in Ankenyfor free with the latest updates from Patch.
Secretary of State John Kerry must be “more embarrassed than me” after giving that speech on Friday, the New York Democrat said.
“I couldn’t see anything urgent about” intervening in Syria, he added, “and I’m glad the president reviewed his thinking and he is going to give us time to discuss it.”
Find out what's happening in Ankenyfor free with the latest updates from Patch.
What is our Syria policy? This would seem to sum it up:
-Declare a "red line" that must not be crossed
-Have intelligence on an alleged impending chemical attack but not say or do anything about it
-Declare after the alleged attack that the UN should do something
-Declare that we would still do something if the UN didn't
-Hope that Britain would join us in an attack
-Suddenly defer to Congress when Britain rejected action
What the heck are we doing?
How does an attack on Syria make any sense? What would be our objective? We've said we don't want regime change. We can't stop them from using chemical weapons. We could attack their military, but they're not the one making decisions to use chemical weapons. Plus an attack on the military would only help the al qaeda-affiliated rebels, which would put us in the position of fighting on the same side as al qaeda.
I understand people's desire to do SOMETHING, because the use of chemical weapons is horrific and detestable. But what is the right thing to do? Choosing the lesser of two evils is how we got the mess in Afghanistan.