A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet
Maybe its me. Maybe I'm just getting old. But it seems to me that the current occupant of the Oval Office is trying too cussed hard to show his "warrior" colors.
It seems every time we turn around these days there is another report on how Obama is killing US enemies. There is something just plain unseemly about all the media attention focused on the Commander-in-Chief's war fighting activities.
OK. This ain't my first rodeo. I understand there is a political campaign on and I also understand that the American people are loath to swap horses in the middle of the stream -- especially if that stream happens to be a war.
I further understand that Obama's campaign people are heavy-handed and are playing to the lowest common denominator in their expected electorate at the polls in November and, I suppose, the President "making war" is the way they have chosen to impress that particular set of American voters.
But, I must tell you, that for the remainder of us who pay the freight (in treasure and blood) for the military adventures of the President, we are anything but impressed!
Do not misunderstand me. I am all for eradicating America's enemies. I am all for protecting the nation -- whatever it takes. But, you see, I have a bit of a problem with the President interjecting American military forces into a fight that is NOT OURS and aiding a people who are our sworn enemy -- and will remain our sworn enemy -- even if we assist them gain victory over their current dictator.
I have to ask: Where is the threat to the national security of the United States if the Syrians beat themselves to a pulp? Also, where is the threat to America's interests in Syria?
One of the oldest military tactics in the books is to sew discord amongst your enemies and stand back and watch as they tear themselves to pieces -- all the while reducing the threat to you.
I am beginning to think that my old antiquated ideas of waging war are extremely out of step with the way the US wages war today. There's a obvious problem, though. See, using the old tactics of warfare, the US won its wars! Heck, we haven't actually WON a war since World War Two! With that in mind, consider the lives and material we have spent in waging useless wars on useless geography occupied by people who insist on living as they did in the twelfth century.
And another thing: Does it bother anyone that all these recent wars have been in Islamic countries while our Commander-in-Chief refuses to work with the only country in that region of the world with a fondness for America -- Israel? One has to ask -- what's going on here?
Many conservative writers have pointed to our President's obvious favor toward Islamic regimes and his disfavor of Israel. One must wonder if the President is a secret adherent to Islam himself. It's a legitimate question. After all, his father was Islamic.
Consider all of the above and then consider this report from Debkafile: "US President Barack Obama has ordered the US Navy and Air Force to accelerate preparations for a limited air offensive against the Assad regime and the imposition of no-fly zones over Syria, debkafile reports. Their mission will be to knock out Assad’s central regime and military command centers so as to shake regime stability and restrict Syrian army and air force activity for subduing rebel action and wreaking violence on civilian populations." SOURCE: http://debka.com/article/22073/Obama-speeds-up-limited-air-strike-no-fly-zones-preparations-for-Syria
I have but one question: WHY?
So we know that Russia is sending attack helicopters to Assad, which will, no doubt, be used against the Syrian rebels (and just as likely against Syrian civilians), and now, the US is going to spread a no-fly zone over, at least, a part of Syria within which those choppers will be shot down the moment they leave the ground.
We have known for months that Russia has troops on the ground in Syria assisting Assad's military. And we SUSPECT the US has, uh, "advisers" working with the rebels. One has only to consider recent press reports from Syria in which the reporter(s) wonder how the rebels seem to have suddenly become much more sophisticated in their battle tactics and war fighting organization. And we haven't even mentioned the small arms the US is making available to the rebels through mutual allies. (Of course, the US denies this -- but of course!)
What we have in Syria is quickly shaping up to be an old fashioned "proxy war" between the US and Russia just like in the "good ole days" of the Cold War.
I would point out to the President that our enemies are knocking each other off. I would respectfully inquire as to WHY we are intervening when there is no advantage (at least none that is obvious) in it for the US.
Proxy wars are expensive -- and experience tells us they just do not turn out well when played out on a public battlefield -- such as Syria.
Sorry. I just do not see an advantage for America to become involved in the Syrian mess. (Yes, I DO understand that running Assad out of Syria would be akin to a slap in the face to Iran. But -- will it be worth the cost to America? I am far from convinced that is will be.)
Look. The US military is tired. We need to rebuild and rearm for the next war, which is just around the corner. I refer, of course, to the coming war with Iran. You can be certain war with Iran IS in the offing. If the US or Israel does not begin the hostilities, rest assured, Iran will.
Forgive the ramblings of a puzzled man here, but, I don't see it. It has become ever more clear as each day passes that the Obama regime has no interest in stopping Iran's nuclear ambition. NONE. Oh, they make all the right noises, and subtle threats, but I am convinced -- it is all hyperbole. Nothing to it. If Iran is attacked -- that attack will have to come from Israel.
Having said the above, I must wonder if creating more trouble on Israel's northern border is also another tactic of the Obama regime to increase pressure on Israel (at home) in an effort to divert Israel's attention away from an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities?
I am satisfied that our illustrious President is already preparing for Americans to learn to live with a nuclear armed Iran much as we do with North Korea.
There are two problems that I see with that format: First -- the Persians are not Koreans. Two -- The Persians ARE Islamic. So far as I know, the North Koreans have no religious dictate that they must conquer the world for their religion. On the other hand, the Iranians/Persians DO! Did the President's minions miss this crucial fact, somehow? I mean, this is HUGE. But then, the Obama machine will never be accused of being a well-oiled functioning foreign policy contraption. It just seems to lurch from one crisis to another, never quite taking care of the former crisis along the way. Pitiful, really.
Whatever Obama's motives for entering the Syrian conflict we can only be sure of one thing. There is something Obama believes can be gained for him, for his campaign, and/or for the socialist agenda, which he now leads in America today. Its all about Obama. One must never forget that. That is the thread of commonality that runs through everything coming out of the White House these days. If those of us who daily try to figure out the "ways of Obama" ever lose our tenuous grasp on that tiny little thread we'll need a compass AND a sextant to find our way through that labyrinth!
When one surveys the vast landscape of wreckage left in the wake of the first term of Obama, one must truly hope the next president will be a grown-up and will bring with him a cadre of adults capable of actually handling their duties. America has had enough of "political hacks" holding down important and powerful positions in the nation's government.
Oh, I will add one thought: Isn't it about time we had some actual WARRIORS in charge of the US military instead of brass-button politicians? The blood of our fighting men and women is just too precious to be wasted on the alter of politics. Something for Mr. Romney to think about.
J. D. Longstreet