Why Conservatives will, and should, support the President on Syria

America cannot tolerate the Syrian government using chemical weapons. Photo: President Obama and Vice President Biden speak on Syria (AP)

WASHINGTON, September 3, 2013 —Few conservatives can offer any support for President Obama. Most worked against him in both elections and many have been against nearly every proposal and policy that he has put forth.

It is amusing that proponents of the president have allowed him the excuse that “The Most Powerful Man in the World” has been unable to accomplish real and lasting economic or domestic success during his tenure because of those big old bullies in the House.

The President’s time in office is marked by weak and ineffective rule, an administration that has been big on sizzle and small on steak.

Nevertheless, a stopped clock truly is right twice a day, and during the president’s five-plus years in office, he has been right a few times, all of them concerning matters of combat abroad.

During President Obama’s tenure, both Osama Bin Laden and Moammar Qadaffi have gone on to whatever rewards the next life has for them. The President increased troops in Afghanistan and committed forces to assist in Libya.

With the question now coming forth regarding committing to military action in Syria he is right once again.

America cannot tolerate the Syrian government using chemical weapons.

America has a moral obligation, as does the rest of the civilized world, to punish the Syrian government for crimes against humanity. America cannot and must not become a player in Syria’s ongoing civil war. However, the United States can become a referee for a play or two, long enough to penalize the one cheating in the game.

A severe and massive air strike targeting government installments would make the point nicely. The message to Assad is to wage war in as human a way possible, or the civilized world will make you pay for your barbarism.

Those seeking for America to mind her own business would do well to remember a time not so long in the distant past where the United States and the rest of the world looked the other way on Rwanda. That apathy of action led to hundreds of thousands dying in brutal and rapid genocide.  

After a decade of wars in Muslim nations, why the American people would feel some trepidation toward increasing any type of conflict around the world is understandable.  America should not commit to troops on the ground or to peacekeeping efforts.

However, America has a responsibility to the other nations of the world, a responsibility to not allow such horror and cruelty to take place, when there are measures that we can use to punish the guilty parties for doing so.

The irony of this matter is almost gleeful. It is amusing to see that the very premises that the president rose to fame upon are the very same issues that he himself faces.

President Obama rose to power in the State Senate of Illinois and the US Senate with his stringent and vibrant condemnation of the Bush administration for its waging of war on Iraq.

The President, the Democrat Party that he belongs to, and the American Left vehemently opposed the Iraq War, calling it American bullying and imperialist. They said we were interfering in the affairs of other nations, they cited a lack of support from the international community, they claimed that Iraq had never attacked us directly, that we were fighting a war based more on America’s allies than on actual Americans, and called then-President Bush a war monger for leading us into wars in both Afghanistan and Iraq. 

Fast forward a few years and look at the new boss, same as the old boss. President Obama may have decreased the troops in Iraq, but he has ramped up the war in Afghanistan and committed to military action in Libya. If he allows military action in Syria, he will do so without the support of most of the international community, without the backing of most of the Democrat party, and over the objections of many of the American people, all done because of what is morally right for the victims in Syria. He will be acting to punish an oppressive strongman dictator.

One cannot help but chuckle a bit at the irony. All of the things that Bush’s enemies had to complain about, federal invasion of privacy, federal commitment of military action to foreign wars, tough economic times, high prices, crime in our cities, corruption in our local governments, all have been just as bad under President Obama, if not worse.

It is far easier to govern the affairs of a nation, especially in regards to warfare, from the floor of the Senate than from the desk of the Oval Office.

Somebody really ought to reset that stopped clock. Even if it makes us smile.


This article is the copyrighted property of the writer and Communities @ WashingtonTimes.com. Written permission must be obtained before reprint in online or print media. REPRINTING TWTC CONTENT WITHOUT PERMISSION AND/OR PAYMENT IS THEFT AND PUNISHABLE BY LAW.

More from Sharp Pearson Thoughts
 
blog comments powered by Disqus
Tamon Pearson

Tamon Pearson is a writer and self-proclaimed urban commentator from South Central Los Angeles. He was raised Libertarian, became a Republican in his early thirties, and became an independent conservative the day after the 2012 Presidential Election. He is the former chair of the Los Angeles chapter of The California Black Republican Council, and the former Vice-President of the Southern California Republican Club.

He is a frequent contributor to www.hiphoprepublican.com and www.hiphoprepublican.tv and is currently the district director of and Los Angeles ambassador for www.urbangamechanger.com.  He is an evangelical Christian and an avid Laker fan. 

He is recently married, and he and his wife live in Pasadena, California, with six children between them from their previous marriages.

 

 

Contact Tamon Pearson

Error

Please enable pop-ups to use this feature, don't worry you can always turn them off later.

Question of the Day
Featured
Photo Galleries
Popular Threads
Powered by Disqus