Opinion
Reading Los Angeles: Join The Times' new book club
Opinion Opinion L.A.

On Syria, let's be clear: What we're about to do is go to war

So we’re going to war with Syria.

Oh, sure, that’s not what anyone is calling it. What people are saying, after Bashar Assad’s government allegedly used chemical weapons on its own people, is that such actions “cannot go unanswered” (Anders Fogh Rasmussen, secretary-general of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization), and that they are a “moral obscenity” and that “President Obama believes there must be accountability for those who would use the world's most heinous weapons against the world's most vulnerable people,” (Secretary of State John F. Kerry).

So the United States, along with France and Britain and whatever NATO and other allies want to join in are going to strike militarily at Syria. You know: Go get us some “accountability.”

But why can’t we call a spade a spade? When you bomb another country, it’s a war. People are going to get killed. It’s not a video game.

Don’t think so? Well, suppose Mexico decided to take out a few weapons depots in the United States because it didn’t like the way we were treating some of its citizens who had made their way north of the border. Just a little “accountability”? Right.

Make no mistake, then, about Syria: What we’re contemplating is war. And here’s what happens in war: There’s talk about what targets to hit -- arms depots, command-and-control centers and the like. As if it’s just “stuff.” But there will be people in and around this “stuff.” And some of them will die. And the ones who die almost certainly won’t be the ones who ordered the use of those chemical weapons.

And, of course, those U.S. warplanes and U.S. ships that will be used in the attacks contain Americans, and some of them may die.

War is hell? Yeah. Especially when you’re the one doing the dying.

World leaders, on the other hand -- who most certainly won’t be doing the dying -- are seemingly eager to show their “resolve.”  But judging just from emails to The Times’ letters to the editor, there’s a healthy amount of skepticism among Americans about this latest Mideast adventure.

My colleague Jon Healey neatly summarized the Syria dilemma in his post on Tuesday, “Chemical weapons and Syria: How do you deter a desperate despot?”  Times columnist Doyle McManus delved into Obama’s strategic goals on Thursday. And I took a crack at the subject Friday in my Opinion L.A. blog post, “Enough with the phony 'red line' on chemical weapons in Syria.”

Which proves one thing: It’s easy to write about Syria.

Talk, in fact, is always cheap. But the lives about to be lost in this war aren’t. So the least we could do is call it what it is.

ALSO:

Egypt and the limits of democracy

U.S., China and an unthinkable war

The Rim fire and the folly of sequestration

Follow Paul Whitefield on Twitter @PaulWhitefield1 and Google +

Copyright © 2015, Los Angeles Times
Related Content
  • In Syria, diplomacy is failing but humanitarian aid must not
    In Syria, diplomacy is failing but humanitarian aid must not

    At this point, the best solution to the staggeringly brutal but seemingly stalemated civil war in Syria is probably a diplomatic one. But with support for Syrian President Bashar Assad from China and, more reliably, Russia, diplomacy so far has failed. As permanent members of the U.N. Security...

  • Congress must come to agreement on authorizing war on Islamic State
    Congress must come to agreement on authorizing war on Islamic State

    For seven months, the United States has been engaged in military action — war, to put it plainly — against Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. Yet it's not clear that Congress will provide explicit authorization for airstrikes and the commitment of uniformed advisors.

  • The world's extraordinary refugee crisis demands extraordinary aid
    The world's extraordinary refugee crisis demands extraordinary aid

    The Turkish government recently began issuing identification cards to refugees from the more than 3-year-old civil war in neighboring Syria. It was a bureaucratic act that will make it easier for the displaced to receive some services, but that adds a worrisome sense of permanence to what should...

  • De-radicalization programs offer hope in countering terrorism
    De-radicalization programs offer hope in countering terrorism

    The director of the U.S. National Counterterrorism Center, Nicholas J. Rasmussen, told the House Homeland Security Committee on Wednesday that the number of men and women joining Islamic State is on the rise. Of the 20,000 foreign fighters, he said, at least 3,400 have come from Western countries,...

  • Iran is a dangerous 'ally' in Syria and Iraq
    Iran is a dangerous 'ally' in Syria and Iraq

    At the dawn of 2015, the U.S. has yet to articulate a comprehensive foreign-policy strategy to counter the influence and territorial gains of Islamic State, the terrorist group that emerged last year — and poses a dangerous and vexing threat to stability across the Middle East and North Africa....

  • A conspicuous failure of U.S. foreign policy in Syria
    A conspicuous failure of U.S. foreign policy in Syria

    In 2011, the U.S. ambassador to Syria, a mild-mannered diplomat named Robert S. Ford, became the face of American support for the Arab Spring when he boldly visited opponents to the brutal regime of Bashar Assad in the northern city of Hama.

Comments
Loading