Speak Out: An attack on Syria will not benefit the American people
by our readers
Sep 05, 2013 | 1546 views |  0 comments | 13 13 recommendations | email to a friend | print
For a man who just lauded the legacy of Martin Luther King Jr., President Obama seems to know nothing about that legacy. Dr. King opposed the Vietnam War, and I have no doubt he would oppose an attack on Syria.

Like all wars, the war in Syria is tragic, but it is the Syrians’ war, not ours. The American people have no vital interest there. Let the Syrians sort out their own affairs. Supporting the opponents of the Assad government with weapons and military interventions merely prolongs and escalates the misery, lending aid to the same jihadists that spawned Osama bin Laden and whose plans for Syria include genocide and the creation of an Islamic state. In addition, Obama has no constitutional authority to engage this country in war without congressional approval.

How would a small-scale chemical attack on a Damascus suburb benefit the Assad government, which has been warned that such an act would invite foreign intervention? The biggest beneficiary of U.S. intervention would be the insurgents, so a more logical assumption would be that the rebels themselves launched the attack as a false flag operation to prompt an intervention.

I do not support attacking Syria. At a time when Obama and congressional penny pinchers are cutting social safety-net spending for older people, sick people, poor people and children, he proposes that we spend the money instead to kill Syrian civilians. An attack on the Syrian military will benefit corporate war profiteers, Islamic jihadists and Israeli Likudniks, but not the American people. As always they will be left to pay the bill.

Dan Hayes
Comments must be made through Facebook
No personal attacks
No name-calling
No offensive language
Comments must stay on topic
No infringement of copyrighted material

Friends to Follow

Today's Events

event calendar

post a new event

Saturday, April 19, 2014