Stay Home and Far Away From Syria

August 29, 2013 - 3:44 AM

Presently there is no vital U.S. security reason for us to get involved in a war with Syria. Before sending our boys and depleting our treasury once again, there should be a vital U.S. necessity and a result that redounds to our benefit.

When we fought communism, we could be assured that its democratic, pro-western replacement would make the world safer and benefit us. Not so here. The Assads will be replaced by anti-American Islamists whose victory will embolden them to try to harm us even further.

During World War II, we knew that if we could rid Germany of the Nazis and Japan of the sun-god regime, we would find in its place a people friendly to the U.S. For these societies had many institutions in common with enlightened, civilized thought. Not so in many of the Islamic countries, where their outlook views Christianity as something to be conquered, not befriended and appreciated.

As to the morality: Had we saved the Jews in WWII, which Roosevelt had no interest in doing, the rescued Jews would not have, then, set up concentration camps against the conquered Germans. But here, as we see in all these Islamic situations, those we help will eventually be barbaric and brutal to those previously in power. The same barbarism will exist, just with a different set of targets.

Besides, there is something  immoral in continually using American boys to die for others, as if American life is readily dispensable--- especially for those who hate our way of life. In the category of morality, protecting one's own must take precedence over the universal and theoretical. First take care of your family. Americans can't be used as canon-fodder for never-ending Islamic, self-made problems.

As to morality: Where have Obama and Cameron been throughout the years of willful and comprehensive raping, killing, and genocide against Christians throughout Africa at the hands of Islam. No, this is very selective morality, simply a phony display of easy "courage" by leaders who have no courage when it comes to the real things, such as the wholesale degradation of Christians by Muslims and the nuclear threat from Iran.

Since 1990, this country has been obsessed in sending its young men and women into combat to help Muslims or using our treasury toward that end: Bush Sr. in Kuwait; Clinton in Bosnia; Bush Jr. in Iraq and Afghanistan; and now Obama. Unlike the Marshall plan and WWII where Europeans appreciated what we did, the Muslim population uses our help as a pretext and justification for terrorizing us--calling us intruders into their "holy soil".

I don't understand this obsession in the West to always rescue Islamic societies from their own internecine warfare and violent activities. There are certainly many Islamic countries -- Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Dubai, Kuwait, the Emirates-- that could shoulder the financial and military responsibility of helping their own. Why does the "infidel" have to sacrifice his sons and daughters and incur everlasting debt. Perhaps that is what it means to be a dhimmi.

You know, ever since Vietnam the political Left has loudly railed against America going to war for her own U.S. interests. They label us imperialist and they loath the military. The only time they countenance our military is when it is used not in behalf of our interests but for "moral crusades" of their choosing. When the Left is for military action, in the name of "morality", I know, then, there is not a vital U.S. interest. It's only about feel-goodism, with no personal downside for them.

Forty years ago, Richard Nixon was able to move the Islamic world from the Soviet orbit into ours. Obama has reversed that, and through his policies has made Russia, once again, their host and manager. He is either an incompetent in a job way beyond his ability or a master-mind for American downfall and disgrace.