David Glenn, you are absolutely correct when you say this barbaric strong arm, we seem to take pride in, began years before Obama was considered as a presidential candidate. But rest assured Americans find no comfort in that justification, we are still waiting for Obama to fulfill his promise.  Was it not he who promised the conflict would end in an effort to win the hearts of the American people who elected him President? The one who is representing us has let us down and yet the Left still feels compelled to continue blaming the Right.  Bush is still the scapegoat, and Obama’s hands remain pearly white.

 

I believe both sides are united in this common interest, or should I say our lack of support, to continue this unnecessary military rampage on the Middle East.  The cost of war can not be limited to the cost of a Tomahawk missile or two.  In fact, Obama is intending to shower the skies of Syria with Cruise Missiles that cost $1,410,000.00 a piece. How do you like them apples friend?  Ron Paul was quoted in the Fiscal Times to say, “Just because one cruise missile might cost one-and-a-half million dollars, there are a lot more expenses involved”.  We seem to forget about the additional expense of transporting our military, housing and feeding them, paying their salaries, as well as running our navel yards and military compounds.  Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel analyzed, that with the added monthly expenses, the war Syria will run the U.S about 1 billion dollars a month.  As we already know, through our experience with the Iraq war, these reports are always far from accurate to our financial burden and the true cost of war.

 

I am equally concerned with the inability of our government to put a price tag on our soldier’s lives.  Both the Right and the Left have to agree, the lives of lost fathers, sons, and husbands, is an expense our President is thinking too little of.  How many more soldiers lives need to be sacrificed helping a country that has proven, time and time again, they can not be trusted and they are not our friend. The Middle East as a whole is not our ally and there is not a single country we can consider a valuable asset.  Our only interest is in foreign oil, a problem that could have been satisfied, if it wasn’t for the veto given on the production of the Canadian Pipeline.  Once again I lay blame in the way of the President, progress that could have created our independence from the problematic Middle East.  Is it fear or just plain ignorance on his part?  I can’t speak for him, but as an American, I would like to have faith that my leaders are looking out for our best interest.

 

Let’s discuss who we are supporting in this effort, shall we.  The Syrian Rebels, also known to be directly linked to Al-Qaida, our sworn enemy and the terrorist organization Bush set out to destroy. Seems a little fishy to me, our President is aiding our enemies, but then he has taken multiple steps to furnish this terror organization with financial assistance and weapons.  Jamal Halaby of the Associate Press reported on September 8th that “Syrian rebels led by al-Qaida-linked fighters, seized control of a predominantly Christian village northeast of Damascus”.  What purpose did they have to engage in such action?  Well, the ancient village of Maaloula is the home of the oldest surviving Monasteries.  What appears to be, through the American media, a civil war of a government against its own people, is in fact a holy war to bring the forcible hand of Islam to every corner of the earth.  Was there a government military concentration in that area? Absolutely not, the only government military in the area arrived after the rebels seized the city.  They surrounded the city to protect these two ancient holy places of worship, and fight the terrorist organization.  Fear not, the Libyan military did prevail; the Islamic Extremist’s were defeated and are now hiding in the hills.  So why are we going to aid the Rebels? This, among many other things, continues to fuel suspicions of Obama’s intentions.   

 

It is easy for me to blame Obama, solely, after all he is our current Commander in Chief, he is the one who has the power to make these haphazard military actions cease.  Regardless of who began this debacle, it was he who promised us change and progress.  The Left made accusations of Bush’s capitalist motives in the middle east; now you refer to current situation as Neo-Liberalism, seems both are in the same category, what is the difference between purple and violet? We can both agree this is a venture the American People, both Democrat and Republican, are uniting against. Will our elected officials take a minute and listen to us chanting in protestor will they continue to abuse their overpaid positions to satisfy pacts and earn their corporate contributions.

 

Believe me, when I say, those people sitting in positions of power up on capitol hill do not represent the new generation of Republicans circumspectly awaiting our turn to take over.  Unless of course the ones who were so blindly trusted in positions of power destroy the United States before we get a chance to get started.