NOTE: Due to travel and other issues, YAD will be updating more irregularly than usual during the first two weeks of September. Follow YAD on Twitter if you need YAD methadone during this time.
You Are Dumb, which is not a blog, posts new columns every weekday, except for a couple of days each month when it doesn't. It is also a Twitter feed, @youaredumb, with content in a similar vein but much shorter. My spinoff food site, Forkbastard, can be found easily enough by the clever.
Dumb Ass Cuss
Memo to America: IT'S BOMBIN' TIME!
Because dead children and Hitler, that's why!
You like kids, right? And hate Hitler? You hate Iran and North Korea, right? But you love Israel? And America? Well, then, we should bomb Syria.
I am, as I write this, watching the Senate Foreign Relations Committee debate on freedombombing the shit out of Syria, and I'm hearing a lot of reasons why we should do it. These reasons mostly center on the idea that we can't not do something, because if we don't do something, we'll look like a pussy, and everyone will think we're a pussy and just go around gassing their own people and other people willy-nilly, and that would suck.
And lest I be accused of being an "armchair isolationist" by a wooden failed presidential candidate, I admit there is geopolitical value in not looking like a pussy. And I admit, there is geopolitical value in punishing the use of chemical weapons. Hell, I'll go one step farther and be grateful that Obama has decided to have a Congressional debate, even if it's a ridiculous, jingoistic one with a predetermined outcome (note John McCain maverickly playing poker on his iPhone during it) before taking military action.
What I haven't heard, from anybody, is how, exactly, targeted military strikes will help. I have, in fact, heard from some quarters that we don't really want it to help. Admittedly, those quarters are the Wall Street Journal, and thus suspect, but the idea is that we don't really like either side, so we want to bomb enough to show people that we've still got balls, but not enough that the rebels actually win and cause us hassle.
And frankly, my comfort level isn't helped at all about vague warnings about how if we don't do this now, next time it'll be worse, next time it'll be nuclear. I mean, Moderate Republican Obama stood right there in his Saturday press conference and essentially said we didn't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud.
Here's one thing I'm curious about. We've been bombing and invading and generally wrecking chunks of the Middle East for the better part of the last dozen years. If that hasn't shown them that we're willing to act, I have a suspicion this won't either.
But it doesn't matter, because that's not the debate we get to have. The debate we get to have is, on one hand, a pro-forma debate and rubber-stamp approval by Congress, with only a few protest votes by teabagger Republicans because the needs of opposing the one brown person outweigh the needs of opposing the many brown people; and on the other hand, calling Obama the new Neville Chamberlain because he "blinked" and went to Congress instead of personally throwing bombs at the Middle East the way Dubya did.
Beyond that, the Syrian intervention has caused CNN to move up the premiere date of its new version of Crossfire, which means right off the bat, this decision is hurting America. Not an auspicious beginning.