Thursday, April 18, 2013

Troops To Syria?

I understand that the United States does not want chemical weapons to fall into terrorists' control. That being said, this detail seems troublesome:
The Pentagon is sending about 200 troops to Jordan, the vanguard of a potential U.S. military force of 20,000 or more that could be deployed if the Obama administration decides to intervene in Syria to secure chemical weapons arsenals or to prevent the 2-year-old civil war from spilling into neighboring nations.
The Boston bombing, gun legislation, immigration reform, the media screw-ups during the Boston bombing coverage, and North Korea, seem to have pushed this plan out of the public consciousness.

The Los Angeles Times continues:
Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, who disclosed the deployment Wednesday in testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee, made clear that both he and President Obama remained deeply wary of intervening in Syria just as U.S. forces are trying to withdraw from 12 years of war in Afghanistan.

But U.S. officials say they have stepped up preparations because the Syrian civil war shows few signs of abating, and a political settlement that includes the departure of President Bashar Assad appears increasingly unlikely.
Wariness about committing U.S. troops into another foreign adventure is welcome. Having this potential break through other political noise would be beneficial.

No comments: