Motley Moose – Archive

Since 2008 – Progress Through Politics

Be Careful What You Wish For…

About an hour after the vote which defeats the proposed Authorisation for Use of Military Force in response to the chemical weapons attack in Syria we will probably begin to realise that the world as we know it has been irrevocably changed; and probably not for the better.

The inevitable decline of American power precipitated by the disastrous Bush administration will enter its terminal phase as the American public withdraws into an insular shell of isolationism and denial of collective responsibility in spite of having enjoyed for decades the relative security and prosperity that engaged American power has provided.

The performance of the American Left since 21 August has been an utter embarrassment; exposing the vaunted activist Internet as little more than a breeding place for fatuous conspiracy theories, misdirection, unreasonable and stubborn scepticism, selfishness, wilful ignorance and misplaced moral outrage. A complete and utter shambles. Shameful.

Courageous activists and diplomats campaigned for decades to implement the hard-won provisions of an almost unanimous prohibition of chemical weapons only to have it thoughtlessly repudiated with the ridiculous argument that ‘people are just as dead’ by other means. Or compared incessantly, in ignorance of what nerve agents are capable of or intended to do, to the use of white phosphorous at Fallujah. All in support of a knee-jerk response to a proposed military action in the face of a truly inhumane war crime.

Nowhere has anyone written an expose of Russian complicity in the regime’s chemical weapons program nor provision of their strategic delivery system. Nobody has pointed out that European corporations supplied essential technology directly to Syria’s nerve agent program or that their leadership is diplomatically neutered by dependence on Russian natural gas. No campaign has begun to expose Putin’s Russia and China as enablers of this crime or question their motives; no boycotts declared or protests at the Russian embassy announced. There have been no declarations of support for a determined effort to track the perpetrators down to the ends of the Earth like Nazi war criminals.

No, nothing but criticism for a Democratic president and administration trying to thread the needle of the nation’s interests and long-term security within the realm of what is politically achievable domestically and internationally; a headwind of open antagonism, churlish dishonesty and outright deceit which the Left cheer-leads incessantly.

Opposition to military force is not unreasonable but there are few with the courage to look at the scores of horrible videos of dead and dying civilians and admit they simply choose to do nothing. No, it was faked or a ‘false flag;’ a hundred prevaricating arguments arise in the face of common sense and significant evidence because of the moral cowardice not to simply say, “It’s none of our business and we don’t care.” But apparently we don’t. So be it; but let there be no dissembling after the fact on the inevitable consequences.  


95 comments

  1. The vote has created some strange bedfellows and certainly the motives of many are questionable. I am pretty sure that many of those who will vote no are not anti-war but anti-Obama.

    Are there any diplomatic solutions, Shaun, or has the Russian support of Assad made that impossible?

  2. Mets102

    and those that believe there are, whether they are for, or against, intervention, are absolute fools.

    Intervention opens up a whole can of worms that is messy and can lead to expanded war.  On the other hand, non-intervention sanctions the use of chemical weapons.

    I’m beginning to think the limited resolution, which would be designed to attack chemical weapons facilities and provide sufficient deterrent to Assad to prevent him from such behavior in the future, might be the least worst of the answers.

  3. The Bush Burden

            Until the Syrian crises came to a head, we had yet to see just how much the Bush fiasco in Iraq would sway world opinion. We know now that his war will haunt the globe for decades to come. Future presidents who were in diapers when the United States said with doubtless authority that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction will face critics quoting Bush, Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney with never-again scorn.

             

  4. Nurse Kelley

    Query: Is there a way to punish the Assad regime without killing civilians? The gassed children haunt me; I don’t want more children to die.

  5. princesspat

    President (then candidate) Obama was in silhouette on the ramp to his plane, looking starkly and completely alone. I don’t know what the answer Syria’s actions should be, but I do know that President Obama is attempting to lead the national and international conversation in a wise, honest and moral way, and he seems once again singularly alone.

    Thank you for writing tonight. This is the discussion the country should be having.

  6. jlms qkw

    because we only agree for all the wrong and opposite reasons.  like kelley said, what can we do to punish assad without harming even more civilians?

    have we-all really exhausted all the diplo and trade routes?  can we punish the weapons manufacturers and deliverers?  

    the FSA is making Afghanistan’s northern alliance look organized.  

    i am leaning more and more toward pacifism in general.  the military/industrial complex will benefit from a strike.  putin will benefit from a strike, or not.  

  7. virginislandsguy

    and Pres. Obama acceding to no military action would not be a harbinger of American decline. Perhaps a pause for reflection, time for the international community to step up to the plate, and, after staring into the abyss, American power players and institutions getting their act together, would result in a reasoned debate and passage of a new AUMF.

    My own take of Putin’s actions is that he is trying to arrest the decline of Russia in all spheres, not trying to restore them to superpower status.

    One thing I am sure of, if the Left succeeds in defeating the AUMF, they will, as usual, overplay their hand going forward. I’ve got a feeling I’m going to spend way less time at that other blog.

  8. Reaper0bot0

    I cannot abide the use of chemical weapons against civilians.  I also think that many of the anti-war folks here on the left side of the aisle are stuck in 2002/2003.  This isn’t Iraq.

    I, uh, kind of started a bit of a fight over at DailyKos.  I saw a lot of dumb and angry posting and I decided to share my thoughts.

    http://www.dailykos.com/story/

    For the record, sorry I post here so rarely.  I’m fond of the Moose.  I just only seem to want to blog, to feel compelled to do it, when I’m angry.  Anyway, good to see the Moose marches on.

  9. DeniseVelez

    The performance of the American Left since 21 August has been an utter embarrassment; exposing the vaunted activist Internet as little more than a breeding place for fatuous conspiracy theories, misdirection, unreasonable and stubborn scepticism, selfishness, wilful ignorance and misplaced moral outrage. A complete and utter shambles. Shameful.

    I agree, but with a proviso – there are people on the left, who are hard at work doing movement building, fighting for change in places like North Carolina, Texas, Wisconsin..New York…who are not engaged in the puerile stuff I’ve seen all over certain segments of the blogosphere.

    Don’t write us all off.

     

  10. I have been in an almost white hot rage, I can’t write.

    See when Saddam gassed the Iranians I was a liberal, one of the few the proud that didn’t get cowed by peace through strength who didn’t look around for something else to call myself, and I was ashamed to the bottom of my soul.  Half the reason I went into life long battle against the GOP is I saw real time the open hypocrisy of a man who cynically used American hate of Iranians after the crisis to justify allowing the use of Raid on people.  

    World’s policeman?  Thankless job, but you know what moral fair lawful policing yields?  Safe neighborhoods.

    Let me share Alan Grayson

    That’s right the “progressive” choice wants Allah to sort them out just like Palin.

    I would cross the street before I stood with him or anyone with him.  Coalition my ass, I will never stand with that.

  11. kishik

    I pretty much agree with all you’ve written.

    I don’t know what has caused all of this myopia.  It takes more to plan for the distant future and I do think that most nations are looking for long standing solutions.

  12. vcetc

    The performance of the American Left since 21 August has been an utter embarrassment; exposing the vaunted activist Internet as little more than a breeding place for fatuous conspiracy theories, misdirection, unreasonable and stubborn scepticism, selfishness, wilful ignorance and misplaced moral outrage. A complete and utter shambles. Shameful.

    Exactly!

  13. Shaun Appleby

    The argument that chemical weapons are ineffective battlefield weapons or that they are no different from conventional weapons has been heard a lot lately:


    A tyrant willing to use chemical weapons in range of civilians is probably willing to kill civilians directly – and in that case, conventional weapons are perfectly effective.

    Ezra Klein – Why Do We Even Care About Syria’s Chemical Weapons? Bloomberg 5 Sep 13

    This completely misses an important point; chemical weapons like sarin have an extremely high lethality. The payload of a single intermediate range ballistic missile could plausibly carry tens of thousands of lethal doses into a distant population centre. I fail to understand why this point is overlooked; it seems wilful and disingenuous. I don’t see this omission being made in Israel where the gas masks are being distributed.

  14. creamer

    I understand all the arguments being made for a punitive strike. I even agree with many of them. That being said, my gut reaction wrestle’s with anger and revulsion of what is Syria, versus the world watching us dropping bombs and killing people. Many of those dead will be those that where just born in the wrong place at the wrong time.

      I’m hoping the vote might allow a way out. Would Putin allow a security council vote in exchange for no bombs and an Assad assurance of no more chemicals?

  15. creamer

    MOSCOW – Russia proposed on Monday that Syria hand over its chemical weapons to international control in an attempt to avert a U.S. military attack.

    Sergei Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister, told reporters that he had conveyed the idea to Syria at talks in Moscow and expected “a quick and, I hope, a positive answer.” Syria publicly welcomed the idea, but a senior White House official told NBC News that it was no more than a delay tactic.

    I would look for every opportunity to not launch.

Comments are closed.