Issues / War & Peace
Will the Syria debate get Congress to take a hard look at U.S. policy in the Middle East? Don't hold your breath.
Well, not within, but without: U.S. senators are drawing up a plan as an alternative to military strikes.
President Obama seems torn between standing down and going ahead with a military strike.
As with nuclear weapons on high alert, non-nuclear missiles can rush the enemy into a bad decision.
Both insist on viewing the chemical-weapons attack in black or white: mounted by either the Assad administration or the opposition.
Even if you believe that the Syrian government or military used chemical weapons, it’s unclear who gave the order, but it matters.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
A quick reader on why military intervention in Syria is a big mistake--and what we should be advocating instead.
The White House has declared a strike upon Syria imminent without providing a clear rationale for military action, except as an attempt to satisfy an arbitrary “red line.”
Kicking a leg out from under the Iran-Syria-Hezbollah tripod could also undermine Iran President Rouhani’s diplomatic initiatives.