Don't get me wrong. The killing of a countries own civilians in a civil war is heinous and a tragedy. The use of Chemical Weapons, or any WMD, is heinous and should not be tolerated. What I don't understand is why is it always our problem to solve? There is a growing coalition of Nations who want Syria, and more importantly Assad, punished. I want him punished, but we aren't allowed to put a Cruise Missile through his window at 3am so what do we do? I say nothing, why? This is why. More after the break.
Our country is $16 trillion in debt, much of which is from 2 wars. In case you forgot we fought an extremely expensive war in Iraq for no reason. No, there wasn't a reason, we never found the Weapons of Mass Destruction we went to war over. We are still fighting an expensive war in Afghanistan and around the world against Al Qaeda.
Oops, did I say Al Qaeda? That's right Al Qaeda the terrorist group who attacked us on September 11 2001. One of the groups who is against the Assad regime in Syria. So fighting Assad would put us on the same side as Al Qaeda.
"Military operations are expensive. Each Cruise Missile costs about $1.1 Million dollars. Not to mention Army General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, estimated in a letter to the Senate in July that a military intervention deep inside Syria would require hundreds of warplanes, ships and submarines and that the costs would be in the billions." source.
You can argue that the ships, missiles, and salaries of the soldiers are already paid for. But you have to fuel the ships for their long hauls, replace munitions that are used with new ones, and pay for any injuries to personnel, or repairs for damaged material. So, yes the Cruise Missiles being launched are paid for already but their replacements will need to be bought. Ever heard of inflation? Guess what, those new Cruise Missiles will cost MORE than the ones being launched.
If countries like Turkey, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and other countries want US intervention in Syria then they should pay for it. The US is not the Worlds Police Force, and it shouldn't be. Syria poses no direct threat to the US and going after them would put us on the same side as groups be openly oppose. If we are going to take action in Syria then here is what I say needs to happen.
1. The US should have to pay for less than 80% of the cost of any military operation(s) in Syria.
2. The Obama administration needs to publicly and fully address how they will deal with strikes in Syria aiding our enemies, especially Al Qaeda.
3. The Obama administration needs to publicly and fully address what their end game is in Syria.
4. The Arab League should reward the people of the US for leading this Police operation, namely the Oil Cartels need to sell Oil to the United States at a heavily discounted rate.
Number 4 probably raised a few eye brows. Here is my reasoning. The people of the US have zero benefit for going into Syria militarily. None whatsoever. If the International community wants the people of the US to support this action through our Congress members, through military service, the burden of furthered US National debt, and the loss of military service members (known to you an I as our family and friends) than we should be rewarded too. That is my justification for item number 4. The US government and Corporations should not be the only members of the United States who are rewarded for Military Action, the regular people all across this nation should reap the rewards as well. 21st century or not there are always spoils of war.
I understand that the United States military is the best suited for performing World Wide police actions and humanitarian efforts. I understand that we can do things the majority of the World can't militarily and we can do it better. That does not mean we have to or are morally obligated to do it for free. If you want the US to be the world's police force than we need to be paid to do it. Pure and simple; there is no such thing as a free lunch.
Some links I read prior to writing:
http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/30/world/europe/syria-civil-war
http://world.time.com/2013/08/30/for-turkey-planned-u-s-missile-strikes-on-syria-not-good-enough/
http://gma.yahoo.com/5-possible-repercussions-u-military-strike-syria-130910680--abc-news-topstories.html
http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/29/world/europe/syria-civil-war/
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/02/obama-faces-renewed-international-opposition-on-syria-while-trying-to-win-us/
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/09/john-kerry-to-democrats-munich-moment-96165.html?hp=t1_3
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/09/01/201002/obamas-proposal-seeks-broad-war.html#.UiTV6z8k-Cg
No comments:
Post a Comment