The Obama administration is considering a military response against "Syria" for the chemical attacks that killed hundreds. But, in true lead-from-behind thinking, this announcement comes 30 months after the first shot was fired in Syria, after 100,000 have been killed, after 200,000 plus have been wounded, and after a million plus Syrians have become refugees.
During this same 30 month period, Obama sat back and watched Libyan weapons being scooped up from its desert by any jihadist with a pickup truck (including shoulder fired SAMs). During the same time, Russia moved warships into the Mediterranean and provided Assad with state-of-the- art "mobile surface to air missiles.
Recently, the squabble between Obama and the Egyptian military resulted in the closure of Egyptian airspace to U.S. warplanes. And finally, the absence of American leadership has left moderate Arab states highly vulnerable and alienated from American when we need them most.
Whatever Obama has in mind is risky and foolhardy.
The Syrians have state-of-the-art Russian SAMs to shoot down warplanes.Thanks to Obama's blundering, we won't be flying over Egyptian airspace. If we fire cruise missiles over or near a frigate line of Russian warships what would they do in response? Will Iran attack Israel if the U.S. does attack Syria?
And since 9/11 is just days away, are we nave enough to think that we won't be attacked by Islamic terrorists in retaliation?
America had a chance 30 months ago to pick a "winner" in the Syrian conflict -- but we didn't. We could have vetted and armed those who were pro-western and toppled Assad -- but we didn't.
Reeling from domestic and foreign scandal, Obama cannot right five years of "leading from behind" by pushing a button now. Wrong action. Wrong time -- and once again, clearly the wrong man for the job.