Monday, September 09, 2013

Worlds Apart

Let's ponder the difference between waging war for your survival and using military force for your reputation.

We have upped our game to promising 3 days of strikes on Assad in punishment for using chemical weapons on civilians:

The Pentagon is readying more intense and longer attacks on Syria than originally planned, set to last three days, the Los Angeles Times reported on Sunday.

So this means planes and not just cruise missiles. But the 3-day barrage isn't exactly going to make a thug dictator who is already standing on the graves of 110,000 civilians, rebels (and terrorists, too, in some cases), and his own soldiers and militia quake in his boots.

Assad, by contrast, leaves nothing off the table:

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has warned against possible reprisal attacks if the United States attacks Syria, saying that if there were military strikes, Americans can "expect every action."

Assad is fighting for his life. He's already shown he will use chemical weapons and slaughter his own people.

President Obama is worried about his credibility for setting a red line in Syria, yet has already said that he was elected to end wars and not start them. So he is pre-exited from conflict. Our enemies know that. Our friends, too.

Assad figures he can endure pain more than President Obama can inflict pain--let alone endure pain on our side stride for stride with him.

Our troops will carry out any missions with skill and imagination. But our military doesn't set the objectives. You go to war with the civilian leadership you have and not the civilian leadership you wish you had.