Skip to main content

View Diary: The Onion absolutely nails Syria. (126 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Two points here (0+ / 0-)

    No, I do not forget the other half.  But look at the wording:  war is THUS . . .

    The other half is therefore dependent on the first, so yes, a political/diplomatic interest is required.

    As to whether a war is justified, that is a meaningless concept. Defining war properly is of vital importance precisely because good/bad, right/wrong, justified/unjustified are all irrelevant to war.  

    War is a tool, a means to an end. If arrived at properly, all political and diplomatic means to achieve the strategic interest have been exhausted, and therefore war is selected as the tool to use to achieve our ends.

    So, we really have 2 questions:

    - Is the strategic interest / political goal justified? Is that goal the right goal? Is it in our best interests?  In this case, I believe the answer is yes.  The unchecked use of chemical weapons emboldened Saddam back in the 1980s, and will embolden Assad and others of his ilk today.  It will give North Korea and Iran assurance that they can do as they please with their nuclear programs as well.

    - Can that goal be achieved without a war?  And remember: war does NOT mean we have to remove Assad.  It does not mean we have to help the Syrian opposition win.  It does not have to mean boots on the ground, etc. etc. It only means the use of military force to achieve our interest. In this case, I believe war is the only tool left to us.

    Liberalism is trust of the people tempered by prudence. Conservatism is distrust of the people tempered by fear. ~William E. Gladstone, 1866

    by absdoggy on Fri Aug 30, 2013 at 07:47:34 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site