I have nothing but compassion for the Syrian people, but do not want the U.S. to engage in military intervention. I do not think violence is ever the answer, although I certainly do not claim to understand the situation enough to have a viable answer.
I understand this, though: I do not for a minute believe that there is truly a "new isolationist wing of the Republican Party". I will accept the Paul family as sincere (in this point) when they speak against military intervention in conflicts in other countries, but these other Republicans? Not for a minute do I believe that this is either philosophical or situational for them. It is about one thing only: contradicting the President. I disagree extremely with the president over military intervention and am totally disgusted by how militaristic he has become, but these Republicans would contradict him if he said that Hitler was a mad man.
I almost choked the other day, before Russia's diplomacy, when I heard a Republican legislator say on the radio that there were not just two choices - military action or doing nothing - but that Assad should be tried in the International Criminal Court at the Hague. I totally agree and I wish I thought the Republicans really believed in such measures, but I certainly do not.
I hope Russia's diplomacy works.
No comments:
Post a Comment