Has Obama become a warlord?

Comments:  | Leave A Comment

UlishCarterWeb.jpg

ULISH CARTER

Instead of concentrating on the economy President Obama has allowed the Republicans and unrest in the Middle East to pull him off course.
All we hear from the media today are the wars in the Middle East and what should the US do? Not how many jobs have been created for U.S. citizens. Not how many businesses are being created and how many are growing and how many are failing. And once again, how many jobs are being created.

I watched a media report on one of the major cities in Syria, which was the center of the fight between government and rebel forces. That city, once a striving city with all its beautiful high rise buildings is now a ghost town. So was there a winner? No. So now the U.S. is talking about bombing certain targets to send a message to the Syrian government that they must not use chemical weapons. Which leads me to ask, if the rebels had the chemical weapons would they have used them as well?  This is one time I agree with the Libertarian Party, when they say we have no business interfering with foreign countries’ civil wars. What if England, France, or Spain had interfered with the U.S. in our Civil War?

Sure we all feel sorry for the many innocent victims of these senseless wars, on both sides. But sending our young men and women over to die will not change anything. Nor will bombing certain targets in which civilians may die.

I sincerely believe that if we did more humanitarian aid instead of military aid we would have more support in the Middle Eastern, African and Asian countries instead of the hatred we have today. And we would be spending less time and money on terrorism because there would be fewer people hating us.

When you kill or maim people regardless of whose side you are supporting it creates more people who hate you because these people have friends and relatives. However, if you help by providing food, shelter, and medical assistance to people, again they have friends and relatives as well who now think of America in a positive light instead of the big bully trying to force smaller countries to do what they tell them.

Syria is not the only battlefield in the Middle East.  It has overshadowed Egypt, which is still battling to determine who will rule this country. Will it be the military or the elected government? Millions have died on both sides, and even more wounded and there’s no end in sight.

Everyone keeps saying no boots on the ground. No boots on the ground. But is that reality when we keep messing around over there?
Why haven’t the U.S. confronted Syria about the creation of chemical weapons before? We know it has been there through four presidents starting with the elder Bush and possibly Reagan, through Clinton, W. Bush and now Obama, but no action until now.

Over 60 percent of Americans are against the bombing or getting involved in war at all with Syria or any other Middle Eastern country.

Chemical weapons vs. conventional weapons. Does it really matter what people are killed or maimed from? More than 100,000 people have been killed thus far in Syria from each side and even more in Egypt. And those figures go into the millions when you deal with the injured, and what about the economic loss to the countries as a whole, which affects everyone.

In a survey of the people of Syria by a CBS correspondent most people are concerned about who will rule the country. Most surprisingly more were content with the current government because there are at least 26 different factions fighting for power. Their biggest fear is how much more bloodshed will occur when one side wins.

Instead of taking sides in all these Middle Eastern conflicts, America needs to be peacemakers. We need to be trying to find a way to create peace. Because it doesn’t matter who’s in charge in these countries, the results are going to be the same unless the U.S. moves from military solutions to humanitarian solutions. That would also give us more influence.

Has our military intervention really improved the lives of the average citizen in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya or Vietnam? No. And it will not in any of the Middle Eastern countries.  

Many are saying this could be a threat to Israel?  Get real. Israel has enough weapons of mass destruction to kick anybody’s butt who thinks about attacking them. Israel can take care of themselves. But all these wars have to be taking its toll on the economy in this region because people can’t work when entire cities are being destroyed.  So ending these wars, not prolonging them is in the best interest of the U.S.

The Congress will take a vote to sanction the air strikes. It’s up in the air which way they will vote. Most don’t believe they will support the President. But if they do support the limited strike nothing is really going to happen other than us upsetting more people if civilians are killed.

I hope Congress listens to the people and votes against the strike. We need to move away from military solutions to diplomatic solutions. That is what candidate Obama promised, but has moved away from since becoming president.  

(Ulish Carter is the managing editor of the New Pittsburgh Courier. He can reached at ucarter@newpittsburghcourier.com)

 

 

Follow @NewPghCourier on Twitter  https://twitter.com/NewPghCourier
Like us at https://www.facebook.com/pages/New-Pittsburgh-Courier/143866755628836?ref=hl
Download our mobile app at http://www.appshopper.com/news/new-pittsburgh-courier

Comments

blog comments powered by Disqus
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 9,825 other followers