In this article titled Obama's mixed messages on war (Jonah Goldberg, LA Times, 9/29/2014), Obama is criticized on his taking responsibility for the war in Syria. The author notes that while the president uses words like I, and me when talking about his victories, he will cast the blame on others when the situation is less than perfect.
He implies that the act of taking troops out of Iraq and moving them to Syria was a mistake. That's the issue Obama is criticized about in this article: What's more important? Fighting in Iraq? or Syria? While it is true that Obama seems to be avoiding responsibility when he said this quote about Iraq: "What I just find interesting is the degree to which this issue keeps on coming up, as if this was my decision [to withdraw U.S. troops]," I think the author is focusing on a minor issue in comparison to what the president should be held accountable for.
He (the author) acknowledges in the last paragraph of his article that the US is constantly called upon for assistance in world affairs, almost always concerning war. Given this role of our country, if the president sees fit to move troops from one war zone to another, it would be best to refrain from excessive or thoughtless condemnation. I mean how much experience do you actually have as a war commander? How do we know that Syria would not have been worse of than Iraq had we kept troops there?
Maybe it is true that the president is neglecting some accountability in his decision, but as far as I am concerned he is still more competent than Jonah Goldberg in managing a war.
No comments:
Post a Comment