Sarah Palin jumped into the political fray over Syrian military intervention with a blistering Facebook post opposing any military action. Palin argues that while Americans are sympathetic to the plight of those suffering under Bashar al-Assad, there’s too much uncertainty about what the outcome could be and many of the rebels are al Qaeda-affiliated, so as far as she’s concerned, “let Allah sort it out.”
Palin mockingly refers to Obama as “our Nobel Peace Prize winning President,” hitting him for lacking a clear and decisive plan, as well as potentially going around Congress to take unilateral action. She questions the logic of getting involved in Syria now, only after chemical weapons were used, when thousands and thousands of Syrians were being killed well before Assad crossed the red line.
We didn’t intervene when over 100,000 Syrians were tragically slaughtered by various means, but we’ll now intervene to avenge the tragic deaths of over 1,000 Syrians killed by chemical weapons, though according to the White House we’re not actually planning to take out the chemical weapons because doing so would require “too much of a commitment.”
She also spoke to public opinion on Syrian intervention, telling Obama he needs to go with the will of the people on this one.
There’s no explanation of what vital American interests are at stake there today amidst yet another centuries-old internal struggle between violent radical Islamists and a murderous dictatorial regime, and we have no business getting involved anywhere without one. And where’s the legal consent of the people’s representatives? Our allies in Britain have already spoken. They just said no. The American people overwhelmingly agree, and the wisdom of the people must be heeded.
She accuses the president of only considering military strikes to save “political face” over his red line threat, concluding that we are still “dangerously uncertain of the outcome” and the U.S. needs to stay out of it.
Have a tip we should know? email@example.com