“There are no vital national interests at stake in Syria. None. Not Iran, not Israel and not oil. Yes, we can watch from the sidelines and let the Iranians and Syrians form their own politics. This is what the U.S. did with Mexico and Canada. Did the U.S. relish interference from Spain, France, Great Britain and Russia into its affairs? How brainless is it to act as if the refugee crisis is an independent reason for intervening, when it is an outcome of the war itself, encouraged every step of the way by the U.S.? And why must the U.S. rectify this tragedy? What good is a ‘freedom’ that marches us off to wars willy-nilly or grabs our wealth to do what it wills?”
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/138136.html
Related posts:
A Note on the Goofy U.S. Government
Most Bizarre Hedging Statement Ever?
The Real Reason College Costs So Much
Phoenix Woman Ordered to Not Give Out Water in 112 Degree Heat Because She Lacked a Permit
Constitution prohibits Trump's pre-emptive strike against N. Korea
Is the lawlessness of Obama's drone policy coming home?
Larger Spending Cuts Would Help the Economy
Justifying the Unjustifiable: US Uses Past Crimes to Legalize Future Ones
Syria: Act of War or Military Strike?
Rick Rule: This Is Fun
Government Agencies Failed, so We Must Give Them Even More Authority
Post-Cyprus Blues: Confusion and an Erosion of Faith
Committing War Crimes is a Duty; Reporting Them is a Felony
The Economist Hoists Its Battle Balloon?
SILVER: Meltdown to $20, You Will Remember