There is increasing evidence that Barack Obama would very much enjoy a conflict over the topic of Health Insurance rather than discuss the issue to bomb or not to bomb or what the hell one should be doing in the Middle East. At points, the president resembles the proverbial deer who has been caught in a car’s headlights and is lost and confused. Obama reminds me of the Lyndon Johnson dilemma. Johnson’s main and only real goal was to end poverty in America so what the hell happened–he got stuck in a war far, far away in Asia. Obama has dithered because, he correctly, grasped there was no desire among Americans to fight a war anywhere at anytime. Perhaps, two years ago, he might have got away with a “no fly zone” in Syria, but he never tried. He apparently believed doing nothing would prevent him from doing something leading to trouble.
Egypt is in confusion, Iraq has returned to violence and religious violent intolerance and looming in Afghanistan is who the hell knows what. So, Barack wants to bomb. What happens the next day? Another bombing? Bombing to make a moral point is very moral, but it it is not a policy, it is an emotion. President Obama must present a “policy” which sets the parameters of what America seeks in the Middle East.
Resolving the Israel-Palestinian conflict based on an independent Palestine.
Negotiating with Iran to end sanctions on the basis of a grant policy change.
Supporting an Egyptian army negotiation with the Muslim Brotherhood which gives them power in government while creating a modern Egypt.
Placing the issue of Syria on the agenda of confronting Middle Eastern issues.
Bombing simply is not POLICY