The Wa Po editorial board thinks we should also be blanketing Syria with freedom bombs and Nobel Peace Drones (after some passionate denunciations, of course!):
Like people across the Middle East, the protesters in Syria say that they are seeking the establishment of a democratic system. A statement issued by organizers of the protests Friday called for an end to torture and killings by security forces; the release of all political prisoners; an investigation into the deaths of those killed so far; and reform of the constitution, including a limit on presidential terms. The mass demonstrations on Good Friday were called to show that the cause is neither Islamic nor sectarian.
Yet the Obama administration has effectively sided with the regime against the protesters. Rather than repudiate Mr. Assad and take tangible steps to weaken his regime, it has proposed, with increasing implausibility, that his government “implement meaningful reforms,” as the president’s latest statement put it. As The Post’s Karen DeYoung and Scott Wilson reported Friday, the administration, which made the “engagement” of Syria a key part of its Middle East policy, still clings to the belief that Mr. Assad could be part of a Middle East peace process; and it would rather not trade “a known quantity in Assad for an unknown future.”
As a practical matter, these considerations are misguided. Even if his massacres allow him to survive in power, Mr. Assad will hardly be a credible partner for Israel. And no matter what happens, Syria will not return to the police-state stability it has known during the past several decades.
As a moral matter, the stance of the United States is shameful. To stand by passively while hundreds of people seeking freedom are gunned down by their government makes a mockery of the U.S. commitment to human rights. In recent months President Obama has pledged repeatedly that he would support the aspiration of Arabs for greater freedom. In Syria, he has not kept his word.
You know what else makes a mockery of the U.S. commitment to Human Rights? Hiring torture advocates and apologists as your columnists.
But beyond that, what do they want us to do? Any US involvement will be used by the regime to portray the internal protests as outside agitation, and more than likely will be called the US acting for Israel.
Danny
There’s no reason to call Thiessen a Torture Appologist. Torture Supporter is the proper label, since he supports torture (officially state sponsored torture in the US, no less).
Fair & Simple
cleek
torture advocate!
johnsmith1882
Is there a war these people won’t shill for?
Alex S.
Syria was meant to be Cheney’s next target. The plans are still in the drawer.
existential fish
As much flak as liberal interventionalists get, there’s none I know of (or even close to it) that favor any military action in Syria. (Or Bahrain)
Remember that the next time we’re told that Samantha Power is Bill Kristol with a vagina.
Hermione Granger-Weasley
its not going to happen. Syria shares a fucking border with Israel. The first sign of American intervention is going to result in Bashar lobbing a few rockets on the zzzzraelis to draw them into the fight. Like a stick in a beehive. The israelinazis are just dyin to mix it up with Iran before the American electorate sluffs them off and this would be the perfect excuse.
I dont think Humanitarian Imperalism Doctrine allows for starting WWIII.
Bill Murray
The killing clowns, the blood money men
Are shooting those Washington bullets again
loretta
To be cynical, it’s clear the oppressive dictator they have in Syria right now is the one the US likes and can rely on. Eventually, they will double-cross him as well.
More importantly thann the hypocrisy/double-standard, selective standard, what have you, is the strategy behind Egypt and Libya. The bottom lines: Israel, oil, gold.
kdaug
Jesus, haven’t we sold enough weapons to the House of Saud to let them take care of it?
Starting to understand why the founders despised a standing army and what Ike’s MIC warning was about yet?
Four wars, and tax cuts. This is how empires die.
Corner Stone
Isn’t the question really, why not Syria?
James E. Powell
And there are many loud and influential people who insist that this is exactly what U.S. policy must be.
kdaug
Let the regional actors play if they want.
Harkening back to your earlier post Cole, I’m gettin’ real damn sick and tired (and broke) with all these folks picking fights and expecting us to back them up with our blood and treasure.
Fuck ’em. They want to go dance, they can do it on their own. Nations don’t have friends, they have interests. And I don’t give a fuck about what happens in Syria.
Stillwater
@cleek: torture advocate!
Nice catch.
The Dangerman
It’s basically Obama Derangement Syndrome.
Recall those on the Right that were excoriating Obama before we had a No Fly Zone and then flipped when there was one? Same with non-action in Syria.
Lather, rinse, repeat.
Amir_Khalid
Aside from the risk of diplomatic blowback for the US, there’s also an argument against the US intervening directly in Syria which is the same as for it not intervening directly in Egypt or Libya: if the old regime’s opponents want a victory they can call their own, it’s up them to own the fight, to get their act together and win it. Direct intervention would be as bad an idea in Syria as in Egypt or Libya.
I guess I could see a case for the UN Security council to authorize military intervention to protect Syrian civilians, but NATO is already stretched embarrassingly thin by its intervention in Libya. It doesn’t look like they could take on another mission in Syria. Unless someone else offers to do it — Russia? China? Neither looks likely to volunteer, and I doubt the Arab league has the balls to do it — I don’t see that happening either.
Omnes Omnibus
Neocon editorial page is neocon.
JGabriel
John Cole:
This is exactly right. There is little we can do in Syria with any credibility, especially since the Bush administration blew whatever reputation we still had as an impartial negotiator regarding Israel.
.
DFS
The funny part here is that even if we did help push out the current regime in Syria, the replacement likely wouldn’t be any more or less friendly to Israel. They’re still going to want their turf in the Golan Heights back.
Punchy
OT: Johnny, yo Penz are getting crizz’ushed….
existential fish
@kdaug:
Syria’s closer to Iran, not the Saudis. Not sure the Saudis have much influence or ability to project power there.
Bob Loblaw
@Corner Stone:
Because it would be difficult militarily, regionally destabilizing, and besides, we have no leverage or credibility with the Syrian people.
So it’s like Iran, basically. Not Egypt or Libya. The regime can rack up as many casualties, even thousands of them, if they so choose and the liberal interventionists will have no practical recourse.
kdaug
@The Dangerman:
The most brazen, to me, was “Deficits don’t matter” to “My God, what about the debt!?” Fortnight, tops.
Bill H.
Well you don’t need to worry. Obama was saying that Mubarek should “institute meaningful reforms” for some time before he started saying that he should “step down because he had lost the consent of the governed.” (Or the consent of the United States, which one was not clear.)
He was saying that Gadaffi should “institute meaningful reforms” for some time before he started saying that he should “step down because he had lost the consent of the governed,” and then started the “freedom bombing” of him, followed by the “Nobel peace drones.”
So there is a pattern here, and if he’s saying that Assad should “institute meaningful reforms” then Assad is toast.
Villago Delenda Est
None of you oppressed women in Saudi Arabia should get any ideas about this human rights and freedom shit, though.
salacious crumb
well y’all hold your horses….
dont for a moment think we are completely hands off on this Syria thing..sure we dont have drones and bombers hitting Bashar, but Israel has always played the Palestinian peace process card deftly…”you want us to delay building a settlement for one week?… ok fine, we wanna see Bashar bought down, or scare him enough to know he shouldnt be supporting Hezbollah.”
We probably are already funding anti Bashar protests either through CIA or NGO posing as humanitarian missions..Im not saying the opposition isnt homegrown, but we are definitely interfering by adding fuel to the fire….
Bashar is no Hosni Mubarak…every from Saudis to Israelis wanna see him go down
Southern Beale
Totally unrelated but just … damn.
Asshole Republican state senator from Michigan has a brilliant idea to close the state’s budget gap:
srv
Syria was always a primary target for old neocons once peace with Egypt had been made. The day Pan Am 103 fell, it was bomb Syria all the time in Newsweek, WP and the NYT. The adventures in Lebanon required Uncle Sam to get involved, but the preceding admin had gotten their asses kicked there and then Iran contra. Say what you will about ole Casper, but he never wanted anything to do with Syria or arms-for-hostages.
Alas, Saddam’s expedition into Kuwait required Syria to be on the team, so a new bad guy had to be found for Pan Am 103.
kdaug
@existential fish:
I know, but the Saudis are closer to us. If there’s momentum here to do something, let them handle it.
Sunni / Shia war? Could be. But we sure as shit don’t need our hands dirty.
The place is in chaos. They’re going to have to figure it out for themselves.
Any sign of Western intervention will prove de-legitimizing in the long run.
Have we learned nothing yet?
(ETA: Yeah I know our hands are dirty already. Everywhere. That’s why we’re broke.)
lacp
Send John McCain to Damascus!
handy
It’s really all about bombs asploding and guns aratatatatting for these guys, ain’t it?
Linnaeus
@Southern Beale:
Wish I could say I was surprised. The area in Michigan that guy represents is part of Wingnut Central there.
Corner Stone
Isn’t the question really, why not China?
Maude
@kdaug:
Prez McCain would have diverted US troops from Iran into Syria right away. The troops would have been in Georgia before Iran.
Not all countries in the Mid East are the same, but the pundits are so craven, they don’t know that.
They keep pushing this garbage and never stop.
Maybe they think this is like the Cold War and the Soviets are now the Mid East and we have to conquer them.
We need a garbage disposal like on in a kitchen sink for these idiots that spout off on US foreign policy.
This has been the polite version.
Cacti
The Kaplan Post does illustrate one of the chief weaknesses of “humanitarian” militarism…
“If we drop love bombs on (fill in country), then why not (fill in country)?”
Yutsano
And now, I stay in the boat and munch popcorn.
danimal
@lacp: Will President McCain visit for photo ops with Assad or with the leadership of the opposition?
Trick question, it’s both, if Libya is any indicator.
hrprogressive
The sooner these assbags realize we literally cannot bomb or intervene in every single Middle Eastern country that starts shit with its own people, the better.
I’m all for kicking ass in the name of freedom, but I’m talking like, WWII style war. Not Operation “Yet Another Sand Pile Needs More Carpet Bombing”.
Montysano
Obviously, an intervention in Syria would pay for itself.
PeakVT
Fuck the fucking Washington Post.
I forget where a I saw this, but somebody pointed out the other day that 35,000 people have been killed in the drug war in Mexico in the past 6 years. Thirty. Five. Thousand. For any neocon reading at home, preventing Mexico from descending into chaos is something that is a vital national interest. The fates of the dictators of Libya and Syria are not.
joeyess
So, let me get this straight: The WaPo editorial board is now in favor of a forever war everywhere. Am I reading this right? Who’s gonna pay for these excursions? Certainly not the Galtian Overlords that WaPo is so interested in protecting from tax increases.
joeyess
@hrprogressive:
I am not in any way interested in anything that resembles WWII.
MattR
@Hermione Granger-Weasley:
Stay classy m_c.
Bob Loblaw
@Yutsano:
That’s probably because you’re a one-note dumbass. Not unlike the Joe Beeses of the world you get so much enjoyment out of watching with your popcorn.
I’m not sure who numbers more these days, the trolls or the troll thread patrol? “Troll post! Troll post! Cole is trolling us again! I’m going to make sure everyone is aware that I’m aware while I talk about boats and popcorn for the eleven millionth time.” I guess Cole just can’t win when it comes to anything international themed. Even when it has nothing to do with a certain president whatsoever (and in fact, is actually explicitly anti-Republican and anti-neocon instead! omgwtf). His commenters can’t handle it. Stick to domestic stuff.
Corner Stone
Isn’t the question really, why not Mexico?
Holly McLachlan
@PeakVT:
Thanks. Keep in mind however, that the “intellectual” elite at the WaPo aren’t likely to consider Mexico important enough to ever focus on it. Cabo is where they go to relax and feel “green” while watching whales…. its unconnected to a nation of 90 million striving people, the world’s largest Latin country, that is on the verge of anarchy. That has significant natural resources, despite its declining oil reserves………Remember: Important brown people live near Jerusalem, not in 20 million strong Mexico City.
Stillwater
@Corner Stone: Isn’t the question really, why not Mexico?
You Texans just can’t let that go, can you?
J. Michael Neal
@Punchy:
Couldn’t happen to a
nicerdirtier team.Yutsano
@Bob Loblaw: Lighten up Francis. Maybe I do indeed have an opinion of a US intervention in Syria THAT AS OF RIGHT NOW IS NOT HAPPENING AND HAS HAD NO MOVEMENT TOWARDS OCCURRING that is just electrons on teh Intertubes since my opinion will change very little. And if you want to set standards for a blog, make your own damn one. Me personally I’m gonna just keep keepin’ on as usual since I’m certainly not modifying my behavior just to please a fartknocker like you.
handy
@Montysano:
We’ll be greeted as liberators! Ponies fer all!
TG Chicago
Larison on bombing people into democracy.
Short version: When the US starts bombing a country — even ostensibly in support of a particular faction — the entire country tends to unite in opposition to the bombing.
Not exactly Tomahawk rocket science. But somehow folks in the Village keep thinking that if we bomb them gently enough, they’ll thank us for it.
polyorchnid octopunch
@Corner Stone: I dunno if you noticed or not, but none of the people that those oh-so-courageous send-other-people’s-children to fight advocates are ever on record of picking on someone that maybe could lay an actual hurting on the US. That might actually be risky to them and their interests personally. Can’t have that.
Just Some Fuckhead
The only thing we have to war is war itself.
maya
Shouldn’t we be listening to what Rick Santorum has to say about going into Syria? That’s where all Saddam’s WMDs are being kept ain’t it?
Commenting at Ballon Juice since 1937
Wasn’t that bridge crossed in Czechoslovakia in 1968?
maya
@polyorchnid octopunch: It’s called the Powell Doctrine. Which he more or less borrowed from U S Grant. Which he got from Hannibal. Anything else would require the CIA to perform Reaganesque guerilla ops, like Powell did in Haiti. The circle is unbroken. Glory to the circle.
polyorchnid octopunch
@MattR: I dunno Matt; I suspect that if you’re an Arab, you’re probably thinking that. It always looks different when you’re the one on the bottom looking up… and it’s not like the policy’s not explicitly racially based.
J. Michael Neal
@Commenting at Ballon Juice since 1937:
Hungary 1956? Poland (and Czechoslovakia and Hungary and others) 1945? Ukraine 1917? Transvaal 1899 (and ain’t this one complicated)? China 1898? Sudan 1881? India 1857? Germany 1848? Haiti 1791?
The United States was practically founded upon the idea of standing by passively while hundreds of people seeking freedom are gunned down by their government.
Yutsano
@Just Some Fuckhead: That was deep, man. Real deep.
Just Some Fuckhead
@Yutsano:
Right? That totally occurred to me out of the blue while I was exfoliating my pores and I was like zomg, I’m a fucking genius!
mk387
Get ready for our lovely Congress to demagogue this issue with Syria to death.
Once again, the MSM will let Congress of the hook here.
If it really is in the U.S. best interest to intervene in Syria, nothing is stopping Congress from passing a resolution to AUTHORIZE FORCE.
Instead, no doubt, Syria will become just another political football with which to score points against the admin.
Hermione Granger-Weasley
@MattR: fuck you.
Is it your day to be the Hall Monitor?
Yutsano
@Just Some Fuckhead: You should keep a note pad next to you at all times. You could have a sonnet pop into your brain while stuck in traffic but by the time you got to work it would be gone.
El Cid
Of course, you never exactly know these days, but just because there’s a lot of calls to bomb and drone bomb Syria doesn’t mean that such calls are either new or likely to lead to those actions.
J. Michael Neal
How come it’s never my turn to be Hall Monitor?
El Cid
It’s not Syria, but this is an impressive development in Yemen:
Just not looking good for the uniform bloc of aging tyrants and other such throughout the Mid-East and North Africa.
Yutsano
@J. Michael Neal: It’s not as romantic as it sounds. But I hear the ombudsman position has a vacancy.
J. Michael Neal
@Yutsano: Yeah, but I want to be the one that gets to exercise petty power, not the one that makes excuses for petty power.
OzoneR
@J. Michael Neal:
well we wouldn’t want to do anything to risk accidentally killing them, now would we?
cynn
@Southern Beale: You don’t need to escalate the issue. Thrift stores are great. If you’re referring to his attitude, OK then.
Fred
Another pre-emptive concern troll post against Obama by J Cole. What a shocker…(roll eyes).
Maybe we should ask Greenwald to talk to Gov Johnson about what we should do (roll eyes in cartoon fashion)
AAA Bonds
You put your finger square on it, Mr. Cole.
We repeatedly show open contempt for UN resolutions and international law regarding human rights. We pursue foreign and domestic policy based on a bizarre legal doctrine that defines our actions as de facto 100% observant of these resolutions and exempt from all oversight regarding them.
At the same time, we claim UN resolutions and international law as justification for our military actions whether or not what we do follows the letter or spirit of those resolutions – this was true during the Bush years as well, although the supposed humanitarian-liberals behind our current wars of choice would like us to forget all of that.
The result is that no one, not even Americans, actually believes that the United States is interested in defending human rights.
This is a real shift in how we are perceived globally, pace leftist cynics. We continue to erode our own standing in the world, using up our global political capital far, far faster than we gain it (through sympathy, as with 9/11, or thawed relations, as with the 2008 presidential election).
I believe the worst part, though, is that we continue to destroy trust in our government among Americans. Personally, I believe public trust in the government is far lower than even the most dismal poll responses would indicate. Trust in the government in America now means trust that it will lie to us in a wise and responsible way.
AAA Bonds
@El Cid:
If anyone’s casting about for potential positives we can attribute to the Obama administration in the Middle East, this is probably one of them. It’s not in the interests of Yemen or the United States to reveal the pressure that was placed on Yemen’s president to step down, but I think it would have had to involve work by the Obama administration behind the scenes, considering America’s current air war waged within Yemen with the aid of that country’s government.
I also doubt that bombing Libya had much at all to do with it, just to head off some neo-conservative fantasies that might arise from misuse of this line of thinking. The chances of us attacking Yemen’s current government are zero, after all.
Best guess? This likely involved a polite indication that we would not use our resources to support the weak, impoverished government against anyone other than our preexisting targets there, and that we did not need the regime to support our air strikes, which we previously sought (and failed) to conceal as Yemeni actions, with Ali Abdullah Saleh’s aid.
Decades of previous foreign policy worked to give the impression that we would dedicate the military resources we had in Yemen to ensure the current government’s hold on power. Throwing this into doubt would go a long way toward forcing Ali Abdullah Saleh to depart (if that is what happened).
Obviously, we do not yet know what the new Yemeni government will look like. I have every hope that it will be an improvement over the current one, though. And I sympathize with the tough choice between holding despotic leaders accountable and giving them opportunities to just get the hell out and stop making everyone’s lives miserable.
AAA Bonds
@joeyess:
That doesn’t really set them apart from our leaders in either party – the difference between them and our government is that the Post editorial board isn’t actually responsible for waging Forever War.
It certainly makes it more difficult for citizens to change things, though. With populations arrayed against leaders in France, the UK, and the USA on the issue of Forever War, we are all finding that ways to bring our elites to heel are rapidly vanishing.
(By the way, I’m stealing that term.)
DPirate
More bombing to jumpstart the economy! Israel needs Lebensraum!
EDIT: Eh, guess I have to point out: Not really…
bob h
Obama has condemned the Syria slaughter pretty forcefully. Until we see how Libya plays out, I don’t think we can do more.
THE
No reason to intervene in Syria. Not much oil.
386 000 bbl/day only.