BEING SHAMED INTO ACTION IS NOT EXACTLY THE BEST FOREIGN POLICY

It appears that Barak Obama is about to launch a "limited" strike against the Syrian regime in response to their use of chemical weapons against their own citizens. This decision was prompted by the fact that Obama declared that the use of chemical weapons would cross a "red line" that would result in serious consequences. Now his bluff is being called, and he must act or be seen as a weak ruler whose word means absolutely nothing.

In other words, he is being shamed into action. This is not exactly the best rationale for military action, nor is it a reasonable substitute for an intelligent foreign policy.

Moreover, a decision motivated by a need to protect someone's ego could easily result in a greater fiasco than the unthinking politicians could ever imagine. A limited attack on Assad could be just enough to  provoke him to retaliate against Israel, bringing an escalation that will ignite the tinderbox of the entire Middle East. Obama could, in fact, play the role of the proverbial instigator who starts a fight then walks away. In this case the people of the Middle East will become the victims of failed U.S. foreign policy, or rather, failed random military actions in the absence of any real “foreign policy.”

To make matters worse, the public announcement that the goal is not regime change takes all the teeth out of any action that may be taken. As long as Assad believes he will be untouched, he will continue to fight and kill to maintain power.

This may very well be the beginning of that last World War. Unfortunately, our government is led by incompetent self-serving people who live in a fantasy of their own making. When reality hits all hell may break loose. Are we ready?