I Am Not Anti-War

The Token Libertarian Girl delivered a very heartfelt, emotional, and (in my opinion) completely off base assessment of why she is now anti-war and ashamed of her past support of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and I feel the need to separate my views and denouncement of the current threat of action in Syria from her view. I recognize her right to her own opinion, I just don’t think it’s based in reality.

I’m a robot though. My friends will tell you that I often try to remove emotion from any political opinion I have. Sometimes this pisses them off.

I’m not anti-war. I’m about as “neocon” as it gets, if by neocon you mean someone who is pissed as hell and sees no problem killing off people who are a threat to national security.

I’m anti-dumb-asses getting us involved in wars without thought of consequence or responsibility or any long-term plan.

Both Obama and Bush proved themselves consistently incapable of not being dumb-asses when it comes to planning military action.

Actually, so have our State Department and CIA and every other organization that should be involved in such action.

To tell the truth, I don’t think we’ve been doing a great job on planning this sort of thing since Vietnam.*

If we had a good reason for getting involved in Syria (something national security related, preferably) and a long-term plan of action, with cooperation from other countries (public cooperation please Debbie), and a strategy for dealing with the inevitable blowback from Syria’s allies…then I might consider supporting the action.

But there isn’t a good reason to get involved, especially not in our current economic situation.

We don’t have the money or the resources for a long-term takeover and anything less than that will only end with the next biggest power in the region (the Christian beheading psychos who are fighting Assad) taking over the region. How is that beneficial to anyone?

A “shot across the bow” is still an act of war and one that is likely to spark the powder keg that the Middle East has become and create an even more devastating war which will create a more long-term involvement on the part of our country, both economically and militarily.

So where’s the plan? I wasn’t old enough to ask Bush that when Iraq was going down, but I like to think I would have if I’d been older than 12 at the beginning of that particular war, but I was only 12 and so we’ll never know.

But I’m asking it now and the lack of response is why I’m against this action, not because I’m anti-war.

So don’t ask me, next time a war comes around, to justify my support or lack of support for it based on my opinion on a previous war. That’s not how this works, I don’t have to be “for” war or “against” war in totality. That’s both naive and insulting. Nothing is ever that black and white.

___________________________________

*Which could have been over much faster if the people in charge hadn’t been wimps.

Advertisements

3 Comments

  1. You know I have the highest regard for you, but I don’t think you would have asked those questions when Bush invaded…only because none of us did…we all just assumed we were going to dust off the Germany/Japan/Marshall Plan hand book and adjust it for Iraq…because that was the last time we had tried something like this and it worked out fairly well then. None us could have conceived that Bush would have done this so poorly without a plan (oh liberals might claim they said they warned us about this, but they also warned about the Iraqi army killing all of our people and WWIII being touched off, and this and that…when you’re chicken little and 1 thing out of the 1000 disasters you predicted comes true, you don’t get credit). We just assumed that if Bush understood the moral need to do this that the pragmatics of the task would follow. We were wrong.

    But no one is even remotely dumb enough to think that Obama even understands the moral issues here, let alone has even the most basic grasp of what pragmatics would have to go into actually bring liberty and stability to Syria.

  2. I agree with both of you, especially on Vietnam. If we are going to spend blood and treasure, we’d better be doing it for a damn good reason and intend nothing less than complete victory.

Comments are closed.