At the time of this writing, our government is planning to attack the sovereign country of Syria. There are many reasons why this is a bad idea:
1. There is no threat from Syria to our national security.
2. The rebels we support in this civil war are heavily infiltrated by al-Qaida terrorists.
3. Our actions have the potential of starting a world war, considering Syria's allies: Russia, China and Iran.
4. Most former military men (like myself) agree that an attack by the U.S. on Syria would be a huge mistake.
5. There is no evidence (at this time) that the al-Assad regime used chemical weapons any more potent than tear gas on civilians.
6. Our bankrupt country can't afford to get involved in another costly war.
7. Regardless of what other presidents may have done in the past, it is an impeachable offense for Obama to go to war without the approval of Congress.
8. One of our biggest allies, Great Britain, has refused to back such a foolish endeavor.
There are many more reasons, too numerous to mention here, why we shouldn't get involved in this boondoggle, but you need only look at our history of ousting "dictators" and the turmoil that ensued after our actions; is Iraq better off after Saddam Hussein? What about Lybia, post-Khadaffi? How's Cairo doing these days since the removal of Mubarak? Is Afghanistan a safe place to be since we took out the Taliban and its government and installed Karzai? The list goes on and on.
Something is definitely wrong with this picture. Thomas Jefferson once said that if the government is acting against the will of the people, we have the right to remove that government.
Can you say secession?
Steve D. Stivers