On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 3:14 PM, Vorl Bek <vorl....@antichef.com> wrote:
Excellent question. And to extend it a bit, why should we be > involved in a proxy war between Israel and the Islamic Arab world? > > Why should America spend blood and money defending Israel by > attacking Syria (or Iran or Iraq), when Israel is a country only a > tiny minority in the US has any real attachment to, a country > that means nothing to the overwhelming majority of us? > It's very simple. The strong protect the vulnerable. Israel is not all that vulnerable -- it now has one of the most renown militaries in the world, and it is able to defend itself against its immediate neighbors. But the regional stalemate is possible in part because the US have stood behind it. In the 1930s the world stood by as a vulnerable population was systematically and mercilessly culled. Gradually, with a lot of difficulty, we have been learning our lesson. Bosnia was a turn in the right direction. There is a similar rationale for taking action against the use of chemical weapons on a civilian population. Those who are in a position to prevent it bear responsibility for doing so. That the geostrategic calculations make things quite complex and require that a little thought be put into the matter does not alter the basic equation. Eric
