Because someone has to remind America that chemical warfare is a bad thing by any standard of morality and historical norms, and doing nothing is unacceptable, President Obama will be giving interviews tomorrow with several news networks followed up by a national address Tuesday to make the case that limited, conventional airstrikes targeting Assad’s ability to use chemical weapons on his own citizens would be in the long-term interest of the international community.
Meanwhile, David Gregory and Mark Halperin don’t believe the president can close the deal, and are totally concerned that a no-vote in congress would be ‘a huge blow’ to Obama’s credibility and standing in the world.
Senator Rand Paul basically said today in an interview with Chris Wallace on Fox Sunday that the Obama administration hasn’t convinced him that they have any idea what’s going on in the world, or how this will all turn out, and then proceeded to explain his own ideas on how this will all turn out by replacing the Obama administration’s assertions with his own, predicting a scenario where Assad becomes more emboldened(more emboldened than using chemical weapons?)and that the stockpiles of sarin gas– which is illegal according to the Chemical Weapons Convention of 1993– would ‘move about the country’ and fall into the hands of Hezbollah. This, to Sen. Rand Paul, is the more likely scenario. He then accused the Obama administration of not caring about Benghazi and concern-trolled the idea of impeachment and another filibuster over this. Rand Paul also seems to think that whomever did this “deserves death,” while also suggesting that Russia and China should be the final arbiters of what is justifiable intervention in Syria. He’s so adorable.
But this sort of prediction game is pretty popular with people who seem to think that they know how all of this will turn out, and it’s the Obama administration that just doesn’t get it.
Iraqnophobia!
And, like a bizarre episode of dueling propaganda, Bashar al-Assad has given an interview with Charlie Rose which will air around the same time the president is making his case Monday.
But getting back to the president’s case for intervention. What you will likely not hear in the next couple of days is that not acting will result in ‘mushroom clouds’ from imaginary WMDs, or that we’re sending 200,000 troops into the meat grinder because the president’s closest advisers quietly believe ‘a new Pearl Harbor‘ would be in the best interests of our long-term goals and really get things going. Joe Biden will not be laughing off the funneling of no-bid contracts to Halliburton. You will not be called unAmerican for siding with the terrorists, but you will be reminded that America has an obligation to intervene to prevent the further use of chemical warfare on the Syrian people.
You won’t hear any grand declarations suggesting we must send chemical weapons to the Assad regime like the Reagan administration did in plain view when they supplied the chemical weapons that Saddam Hussein used to kill Iranians and the Kurds in the 80′s and 90′s.
You won’t hear the president insinuate that the British parliament’s recent vote to abstain could have been less than sincere, and may have been due to revelations that they okayed the sale of the sodium fluoride, which is used to produce sarin gas, to Syrian interests.
Most importantly, you will hear the voice of reason. The voice of the only adult in the room making a solemn case for humanity’s compass, “credibility” be damned.
I only hope we, as a country, can handle it like adults.