The proposed threat of an American attack on Syria brings up more questions than solutions.
Since I’m in the year of mourning for my mother, I content myself with watching just the news on television, mostly BBC, Europe and Bloomberg. So, I’ve been hearing a lot about the United States President Barack Hussein Obama and his attempts to get the support of Congress and foreign countries for his proposed attack.
There are some very serious problems with his plan.
- One, he wants to replace Bashar al-Assad with the opposition, which isn’t in favor of American plans. And they certainly aren’t western and freedom-loving. You can best describe the opposing sides as “the devil and the deep blue sea.”
- Obama is trying to convince the Americans that this attack won’t require any American soldier to land in dangerous Syrian territory. If that’s the case, how does he expect to destroy all of the nerve gas?
- And if he doesn’t totally destroy the nerve gas, what’s the point?
It’s pretty obvious that if the opposition gets into power and has nerve gas, they’d use it, too. I consider it terribly naïve to think that there are such differences between the Syrian sides. Remember what has been going on in Egypt. The world, especially Barack Hussein Obama, enthusiastically celebrated and praised the change of regime and “democratic elections” in which Mohammed Morsi was elected president. He didn’t last very long, because the Egyptian public is volatile. They aren’t the same culture and nature as Americans or even Europeans.
The more I listen to the news, the less I want an attack on Syria. It will only destroy the fragile peace that now exists in the Middle East, and if this area becomes a true war zone, no place, not Europe, America, Africa or Asia will be safe. Is that the legacy Barack Obama wants to leave on this earth, be known as the man who started World War Three?
Visit Shiloh Musings.