Why We’re Still Not Intervening In Syria
The Article: Why We’re Still Not Intervening in Syria by Michael Hirsch in The Atlantic.
The Text: Bashar al-Assad is, finally, having a very good week.
The latest allegations of chemical-weapons use against the Syrian dictator don’t matter nearly as much as other dramatic developments–in particular, the United States’ willingness to stand aside while Assad’s autocratic brethren in the Egyptian junta cold-bloodedly killed some one thousand protesters, supported by the Saudis and Gulf states.
And this week, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Martin Dempsey, finally said plainly what Obama administration officials have been thinking privately since June, the last time Washington said its “red line” had been crossed and pledged military aid to the Syrian rebels–then did nothing. In a letter to Rep. Eliot Engel, D-N.Y., Dempsey said flatly that U.S. aid to the rebels know would just end up arming radical, possibly al-Qaida-linked groups. And Obama wasn’t going to allow that to happen.