I am not going to write about Syria

Well, except for this one post.

The situation really worries me.  We attacked Iraq because we believed that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, in violation of UN Resolutions that effectively formed the cease-fire agreement after they attacked Kuwait.

We attacked Serbia to get the Serbs to withdraw from Kosovo.

We bombed Libya because of some variety of humanitarian reasons.

But we’re planning on attacking Syria so that Obama can save face over his “chemical weapons is a red line” comment? 

And that despite the real risk that we end up replacing Assad with Al-Qaida?  Or just end up more feckless than before, if we just have a couple plainly symbolic bombings?

Well, I guess Obama doesn’t have to strive for a Nobel Prize if he’s already got one.

[Additional irritation about the Syrian situation:  a budding new blogger is supposed to comment on other blogs with links to one’s own articles, but there’s not much out there to link to today.  National Review Online was all about Syria and I just can’t do it — I just can’t get myself to try to get involved in a conversation in which, ultimately, I’m completely powerless about the outcome, and can’t even imagine that I can make a difference.]