While Senators could not be troubled to go to a simple briefing on the NSA warrantless surveillance program and some like South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham shrugged off the importance of privacy, the same Senators are demanding the intervention into yet another war in the Middle East. It does not matter that we have major educational and environmental programs being cut for lack of funding. It does not matter that our invasion in Iraq is an ongoing nightmare. We are being told to intervene in a civil war where Sunnis and Shia are carrying out centuries of hatred with atrocities on both sides. Senators want the U.S. to enforce a no-fly zone which would involve direct attacks on Serbian air forces while President Obama has already pledged to directly support rebel forces with arms.
Graham is frustrated by the delay in intervening into a fourth war: “We need to create a no-fly zone. We cannot take air power out of the equation.” His colleague, Georgia Republican Sen. Saxby Chambliss, has proclaimed “A no-fly zone may be the ultimate tactic that needs to be taken.”
Once again, the media is almost uniformly supporting this hawkish support by framing the question as to how far we should militarily intervene as opposed to whether we should intervene at all.
While Graham referred to the area as a “powder keg,” he is desperate for us to join the fighting through a no fly zone as well as military support. In the meantime, Russia has said it will oppose any no fly zone. Russia is of course the only nation with as conflicted a policy as our own. While denouncing Obama’s decision to supply arms to the rebels as destabilizing, Russia is of course sending massive support to the regime.
Once again, I am struck by how the media attention presupposes our intervention in some form rather than consider the possible position of non-intervention. We have a country filled with religious extremism and sectarian violence. Yet, these Senators are virtually panting to get involved in yet another war. Why?