It would be a shame not to weigh in on the much-rumored coming war with Syria.
John has written about the problem of “yes he’s a murderer, but…” I want to wade into a different angle. What’s the U.S. national interest in going in?
At less than a minute in:
Question: Should [Obama] go to Congress for … permission, basically?
Grayson: I don’t think that’s the more important question. The more important questions is, is this the right decision on the merits? And it’s not.
And at 7:28 Grayson explains why he thinks evidence that Syria’s Assad used gas in the attacks is “genuinely ambiguous.” He makes an interesting case. There’s a reason that it takes months of on-the-ground investigation to genuinely verify such claims.
Listen to the rest; it’s a sensible discussion of U.S. strategic interests in Syria, support for a war in Syria, whether Obama got snookered (by Obama) into writing a verbal check the Air Force can’t cash, and the roll of the U.S. as “the world’s policeman.”
Me, I have trouble with that last one too. If we can appoint ourselves as the world’s cop, so can anyone else, ’cause fair is fair, right? It’s a right that everyone has or no one has. And if everyone has it, watch out.
Presuming that the U.S. is the only one with the right to play cop has roots in American Exceptionalism, and trust me, folks — At this point, America’s exceptional only in our own starry eyes.
To follow or send links: @Gaius_Publius