The Anti-Bush, Indeed

Whatever you might say negatively about President George W. Bush and the Iraq War, he at least did set the standard that if we even think you have chemical weapons, American will attack you, hunt you and your supporters down, pull you from a spider hole, and hand you over to your former victims who will try and execute you.

Regardless of whether President Obama responds effectively to Assad's use of chemical weapons on his own people, we know that the fear of American resolve dissipated rather thoroughly.

UPDATE: In a related matter, after President Obama came to office insisting that the unilateralist George W. Bush failed to gather a proper international coalition to face Saddam, isn't the lack of UN backing over Syria's use of chemical weapons damning of our president's claim to be uniquely capable of rallying the world? Hasn't the boast of restoring our reputation proven to be hollow?

President Obama managed to trick Russia and China into going along with a "no-fly" zone over Libya that immediately was used to justify an aerial bombardment campaign.

And now the president looks to the Kosovo example to attack another state without even a fraudulent UN resolution as in Libya.

Wasn't gathering the international community for a good cause supposed to be easier now?

Not that I won't want our military to succeed when sent into battle, regardless of whether it is used intelligently. But I hope there is a little less haughtiness out of the White House after they've walked a couple wars in George W. Bush's shoes.

The problem wasn't Bush. It's the sainted international community and the fools who place so much moral weight in its judgments.