Not quite two weeks ago, a group of Islamofascists attacked the town of Maaloula, Syria. The attack didn’t garner all that much attention, primarily because it was drowned out by the roar of President Barack Obama getting sacked in his own diplomatic end zone by Russian President Vladimir Putin. Furthermore, in a civil war like the one which currently has Syria in the headlines, a bunch of AK-toting murderers rolling heavy into some village which hasn’t upgraded its cable since the Crusades is about as common as Obama flunking an American geography quiz.
But the sack of Maaloula is actually noteworthy. The attackers were not a swarm of Syrian President Bashar Assad’s goons. They were elements of the rebel forces fighting against Assad; specifically, a gang called the al-Nusra Front. And the al-Nusra Front boasts of allegiance to al-Qaida. Therefore, we’re supplying weapons to a mob of killers from the same freakshow family that we’re firing our weapons at in Afghanistan.
Sadly, the al-Nusra boys are not the only examples of the bad guys getting geared up on your nickel. Last week, the world was treated to a series of images of the group known as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) summarily executing prisoners in typically brutal Islamofascist style. And the cheering audience featured plenty of the local kiddies. ISIL is a prominent part of the anti-Assad Syrian resistance. And of course, ISIL is interchangeably linked with al-Qaida.
It was bad enough to endure seeing Obama get pantsed in front of the world by a former KGB spook, but now we’re going to start teaching Akbar the unbathed proper care and feeding of his anti-tank missile? As I’ve pointed out before, President Peace Prize has yet to proffer an entrance strategy for Syria. For that matter, I have yet to hear President Peace Prize proffer any particular goal in Syria. If we send our military – and the militaries of all our “secret” allies – into another desertified craphole, it might not be the worst idea to come up with something akin to an actual plan. Moreover, it might not be the worst idea to figure out not only who the good guys are, but whether there are any good guys at all. Alas, Obama’s Syrian strategy appears to be “talk out of both sides of my mouth and give guns to everyone with an accent.”
During last Tuesday’s bizarrely self-contradictory speech on Syria, Obama took repeated jabs at former President George W. Bush’s policy of fighting two different wars at the same time. At this point, Obama’s almost infantile foreign policy has essentially guaranteed we’re landing boots on the ground in Syria. And our mission will entail securing weapons of mass destruction, regime change, fighting terrorism and/or stopping bad people from doing bad things; more or less.
I’ll grant that there’s no shortage of crazy – and even stupid – in the Obama Administration. But the idea of a Nobel Peace Prize-winning President desperately trying to force his way into a violent conflict involving murky alliances, American-armed al-Qaida fighters and our old pals the Russians is certifiably nuts. And it was all supposedly planned by the same political polymaths who brought us Operation Fast and Furious, the Benghazi cover-up and a level of governmental spying on its own people which would be right at home in George Orwell’s nightmares.