Obama's "Shot Across the Bow" Would Make Him a Laughing Stock
The US is claiming that the Syrian government has killed well over 1,000 people with the use of chemical weapons, and that this represents a threat to US national security.
In response, Obama proposes to send a "shot across the bow," and perhaps a "limited and narrow" military action, but certainly not a "major operation." The details of this plan were provided to the world and the Syrian government days ago, and of course in response, the Syrian government has redeployed its assets, thereby minimizing any real military impact the strikes could have.
When the non-"major operation" concludes, the Syrian government will still exist, and the Syrian civil war will continue. Syria will still possess its arsenal of weaponry, and will be further replenished by its allies Russia and Iran.
Presuming that Assad survived an attack - which is not critical for the Syrian government to continue operating - he would appear on television and continue on as before. If it's true that the Syrian government used chemical weapons, perhaps it would restrain them from using them again and stick to other just-as-deadly weapons, but perhaps not, sensing that the US will go no further than a "shot across the bow" in the case of additional use of chemical weapons.
This "limited action" would make the United States and its leader look very weak, and rightly so. And it would potentially politically consolidate the Syrian government's position, since it could rally nationalist sentiment. Inevitably, there would be more than a handful of civilian deaths for which the US action would be responsible. And, by having no UN or even NATO approval, there is no one else owning the results of this other than Barack Obama.
= new reply since forum marked as read
damn near every issue that gets discussed here.
