Neither the United States nor the United Kingdom understands their history!
Given the shock of both liberals (e.g. Tony Blair) and neo-conservatives (William Kristol) to the events unfolding in Egypt, Libya, Iraq, they should take pause in urging the United States to involve itself in the affairs of Syria.
In the United States Government there are those who think intervening to end the violence is Syria is the right and proper course. Of course most have never served in uniform.
Most can speak about the absolutes of counter insurgency having never had to make it work. Most believed that democracy would spring forth confluence of Tigris and Euphrates if we liberated Iraq; likewise they believe is Assad is overthrow suddenly Syria will become the beacon of democracy in the Middle East.
Their naïve about Syria is surpassed about their naivety about Iraq.
Unlike Colonel Lang, I am not an expert in the history of the middle east; but at least I admit such a deficiency, unlike those who wish to see the United States stick our nose into the business of every country who does something they find reprehensible.
But I do consider myself knowledgeable about not only the history of the United States but also the history of the United Kingdom. Despite what Paul Wolfowitz and other might think democracy did not spring forth from the James River in 1619; in fact what passed as representative government in 1619 in Jamestown probably would not pass muster of the Supreme Court. Nor did parliamentary democracy spring forth from the field of Runnymede in 1215.
What we view as democracy is not really democracy by definition rather we are a representative republic. The United Kingdom is a parliamentary monarchy, in which the citizens elect Members of Parliament to represent them at Westminster. What we call democracy today has developed and evolved over four centuries in the United States and over almost nine centuries in the United Kingdom.
Our democratic institutions reflect our Western and Christian heritage. It reflects the changing mores of our societies and our citizens.
Iraq is a different country, it has been shaped by a different history, it reflects the mores of the Arab culture and the influence of Islam.
The slide contained in this entry shows three slides developed by the author prior to deploying to Iraq in 2004 to serve as a strategic planner. I attempted to use these slides to persuade those with whom I worked that rather than creating a little America in the Middle East we would do well take a step back an attempt to understand Iraq’s history. This was not well received by my fellow Americans nor was it well received by the Brits, although it can be surmised that perhaps they were remembering their own misadventures in Iraq in the years after World War I.
It was George Santayana who reminded us that those who failed to study history are condemned to repeat it. Unfortunately for us Americans failure to understand our own history makes unable to appreciate others history. This is not the first time we have made this mistake and unfortunately I have little faith that we will not repeat it.
So what’s your point?
People who attain great power did not get it by reading history. They got it by making history, and being history.
The closest thing America and the UK have to an Historian Prince is New Gingrich. Now, didn’t you just throw up just a little?
Until Academia changes and value is placed upon discerning the facts of the past, and being mentally open and intellectually curious about applying the lessons of the past to the present and future, we’ll be parachuting into the Bekaa Valley soon to bring Democracy! to the Syrian rebels, Hezbollah, and Iranian Revolutionary Guard.
The Arabs hate us because we support Arab dictators, they hate us because we don’t intervene, they hate us because we do intervene, no matter what we do, they will hate us. I was reading today about a car-bomb in Iraq that killed 18, some six months after we left. What is happening in Syria is a tragedy, but the world is filled with tragedy.
Not one American life is worth 10,000 of those f&%*kers. Let the Arab League figure out how to solve the problem on their own. The U.S. has enough on its plate. Keep an eye on things, but require Congress to approve any military action.
I don’t understand all of the uproar and sudden necessity to involve ourselves in Syria. African countries have had far more atrocities committed in their respective nations recently and hardly anyone cared at all (and that was Christians being massively massacred). Why should we care more about the so called poor Islamist Syrians?
Soldiers vote. But if they’re overseas, their absentee ballots get tossed without a fight.
The only possible reason to go into Syria (one I don’t think is valid just yet) is to prevent their chemical weapons from falling into the hands of forces hostile to us. The Syrian government is not hostile toward us just yet however (unlike Iraq and the Taliban when they were in control of Afghanistan), so such a move is not only unnecessary, it’s a BAD idea. The only thing preventing Assad from using chemical weapons in his own country is that he is still dealing with an internal problem.
The minute armed UN or US troops (same thing, I know) go in he no longer has any reason to hold back and is very likely to actually use them. Whether he uses them on Syrian civilians, us, or both nobody really knows but that will likely be the point where he decides to make use of the significant amount Syria has.
The best course of action is to just let them all kill each other and then take a close look at the winner to determine if they are a threat to us, or will be in the near future. If the answer is no, then we should continue to leave them be to kill each other for as long as they like.
Syria has some strategic attributes. Whether these are of importance depends on the man or woman in the White House.
Syria, along with Iraq and Israel, isolates Lebanon. Syria and Lebanon have been labs and incubators of terrorism.
Long term, Syria presents Turkey, with its growing militant fundamentalist Islam with either an ally in terrorism, or an enemy. Turkey wants Syria supportive, and Turkey wins if Assad or the terrorists rule.
A friendly Syria strategically dislocates Iran’s tentacles in Lebanon, Turkey, and the Balkans. Makes the logistics more problematic.
Syria may serve as a money-laundering function.
Russia and China are vehemently against our involvement. Russia and China are never vehemently against anything unless it involves the possibility of the US spending huge quantities of cash. The Powell Doctrine allows for Russia and China to get a revitalized business partner in Syria, and access to Syrian markets, just like in Iraq and A-stan.