1 readers online now  |  69 million page views

Mixed Messaging of Confronting/Not Confronting National Security Issues

Reader comment on item: No to Bombing Syria

Submitted by M Tovey (United States), Apr 10, 2017 at 19:25

Question: Does America matter anymore?
After more than seven years of 'sequestering the American Military presence around the world, does America have any more duty to be the pre-eminent world 'police force'; or not?
The lawyers' and academicians' answer; apparently it depends.
Some think that when chemical weapons (of whatever nature) are deployed, some line is crossed in accomplishing that which war is supposed to accomplish - defeat of the enemy, both of mind and will. All that materiel determines is the means.
Not hard to face; America has enemies; has had enemies from even before the colonies form their second version of government; by the Constitution and Bill of Rights. What did that accomplish in the face of the enemies? The newly established nation showed it had the determination to defend itself from all comers, foreign and domestic.
Innate to that, though, was internally there was still dissatisfaction-the American Civil War proved that and such internal thinking is still innate to this day. Were it not so, the crumbling institutional educational structure provides more than adequate proof to that end. The first and second World Wars took this determination to the ends of the earth as powers of darkness absorbed the desires of the ancients and used all to try and defeat the world in global catastrophe. What stopped it? American resolve.
But in these later modern epochs of war-making, why is that resolve so shaky? In fact, is there even an effort to seek a common sense of resolve as the world makes a travesty of shattered dreams of humanity and brotherhood? Instead, from internally and externally, not only is that resolve buried under reams and reams of political discontent, one wonders if it can be resurrected in the American conscience or if the intent of some is to make out a monument of irreverence to its reference and bury the resolved under the catacombs deep under the foundation.
America resolve used to be found in the determinant 'national security issues'; foreign trade used to be an extension of that and as was demonstrated by Jefferson protective actions along the Barbary Coast, the beginning of a world-wide sense of international resolve worked its way into the world psyche and found itself deeply established in 1898 as the world was given notice and was later prepped for the great 'white fleet.'
Fast forward; and NATO type collaborations were the rule of the day as nations tried to protect against the likes of the Soviet Union. Even under a differing political machination, that threat has morphed; but it is not gone. Intermix the collaborations with the religious infighting that Islamist idealism are interjecting and one wonders, is there going to be a resolve to intercede for peace? Not if there is a Chamberlain-like consensus that warring factions will burn themselves out.
Who here thinks that the Russians will tire of their neo-Stalinist ideals and somehow orchestrate a peaceful solution to Syria's innate inability to provide a peaceful state which could allow the return of the refugees? What might an American resolve lend to the dialogue?
Maybe nothing but forestall the transition of the current strife in the region that will climax into a full blown World War III? But if the former America resolve that kept tyrants from wreaking total devastation and destruction on other parts of the world would work: is it really wrong to try?

Submitting....

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Submit a comment on this item

Reader comments (48) on this item

Title Commenter Date Thread
Trump correct to spank Assad for gas attack [72 words]Verner HornungApr 16, 2017 12:30238545
Not so sure, Mr.Pipes [191 words]SoloviewApr 12, 2017 13:38238456
ISIS' victims are generally anti-Israel countries [288 words]Michael SApr 15, 2017 01:12238456
Mixed Messaging of Confronting/Not Confronting National Security Issues [567 words]M ToveyApr 10, 2017 19:25238395
The world's policeman; Major Maintenance of world systems; The coming Pharaoh? [1051 words]Michael SApr 12, 2017 02:47238395
Courting Principalites and Strongholds - Which Will Fail First [246 words]M ToveyApr 17, 2017 18:50238395
No to Bombing Syria [43 words]Angel Oteros GonzálezApr 10, 2017 17:06238392
1Translation: Neither Assad nor Putin have scruples [110 words]Michael SApr 12, 2017 09:56238392
Who's Right... [69 words]Daren OlsinApr 9, 2017 22:33238371
I agree, but... [91 words]Kepha HorApr 9, 2017 21:41238370
Trump's ignorant actions [173 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
Jason PappasApr 9, 2017 08:32238345
There may be something positive though [244 words]JeffApr 8, 2017 14:59238316
2Brilliantly Overthought [113 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
Reality CheckApr 8, 2017 13:22238315
War is hell; peace is sometimes worse [368 words]Michael SApr 10, 2017 11:04238315
Minorities in Syria and Bashar al-Assad [149 words]dhimmi no moreApr 8, 2017 09:56238308
contradictory messages from MEF [19 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
henry m BoudinApr 7, 2017 22:49238305
is Pipes changing his vews ? [29 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
henry boudinApr 9, 2017 16:09238305
Trump policy changes, in Syria and elsewhere [542 words]Michael SApr 7, 2017 22:25238304
Michael S's analysis of Trump's decision to attack Syria. [100 words]PrashantApr 8, 2017 23:01238304
The Sheriff of the World [311 words]Michael SApr 9, 2017 05:33238304
What next, will Britain and France bomb America next time an untypically large number of civilians is killed in a nato attack? [70 words]AnonApr 7, 2017 21:36238302
Eisenhower, Bush, Trump ... more ignorant policy [168 words]Jason PappasApr 9, 2017 08:31238302
Agree [92 words]Jack LehrApr 7, 2017 18:56238296
Why not wipe out the entire Syrian Air Force? [104 words]SandraApr 7, 2017 16:01238289
Better diplomacy could have been employed in this missile strike [112 words]Solomon2Apr 7, 2017 15:49238288
2That's an immoral and unwise position [34 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
DanApr 7, 2017 15:00238287
Just a Little Reminded [60 words]RebeccaApr 7, 2017 14:25238286
not viewing this holistically. [27 words]Harvey L. PoppelApr 7, 2017 13:16238285
Today's Blog [59 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
Ari SigalApr 7, 2017 12:37238284
1"No" to bombing Syria? [118 words]dianne gallenApr 7, 2017 11:48238283
Missle response [150 words]Elizabeth ReissApr 7, 2017 09:48238282
To withhold is a virtue [65 words]KesselmanApr 7, 2017 09:09238281
a message to the public and Putin rather than Assad [237 words]mythApr 7, 2017 08:45238280
Syria. The Evil that will wax worse and worse. [604 words]Anne-USAApr 7, 2017 08:38238279
1Right [80 words]Peter NiedermannApr 7, 2017 07:05238278
1Yes To Bombing Syria [83 words]DaveApr 7, 2017 06:50238273
It doesn't have to be either-or [33 words]Dina GrossmanApr 7, 2017 05:05238272
I generally support this, but what's your thoughts on action against chemical weapons [15 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
JazzalohaApr 7, 2017 03:01238270
This limited strike sends a powerful message to all as to who is now in charge [16 words]BorisApr 14, 2017 13:00238270
This limited strike sends a powerful message to all as to who is now in charge [16 words]BorisApr 14, 2017 19:52238270
Syria Tomahawks [192 words]Geoffrey LuckApr 7, 2017 01:50238269
2Not to bombing Syria [184 words]Admiral Peter KikareasApr 7, 2017 00:29238259
Beg to Differ [226 words]lenApr 7, 2017 00:28238258
2NO, Dr. Pipes, we shouldn't arm ISIS! [89 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
UNCLE VLADDIApr 7, 2017 00:17238256
1Confusion: Aod Hitler vs. Stalin?! [230 words]DajjalApr 9, 2017 21:18238256
An Opinion [115 words]Andreas GeovanosApr 7, 2017 00:05238252
No to heavy involvement but there are limits. [53 words]EdApr 7, 2017 00:02238251
Trump is not involving the country in a new conflict. [14 words]stevenlApr 6, 2017 23:44238249

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to Mixed Messaging of Confronting/Not Confronting National Security Issues by M Tovey

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

ADVERTISEMENTS

eXTReMe Tracker

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2019 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)