The public policy blog of the American Enterprise Institute

Subscribe to the blog

Discussion: (3 comments)

  1. SeattleSam

    I think the more salient point that Mr. Will has been making is that it’s probably not a good idea to get involved in situations where ALL the outcomes are bad. To paraphrase Robert Morley in Those Magnificent Men . . , the trouble with these Middle Eastern countries is that they are populated by Muslims, most of whom seem hell-bent on trying to return to the eighth century, or being ruled by thugs.
    I can send a cleaning crew into a crack house, but a few weeks after they leave it will look like a crack house again.
    Intervening in Syria is not beyond our means, but changing the character of the Middle East is. Syria would end up either being ruled by another thug or an Islamist mob.

    1. Changing the character of the Middle East is no more beyond anyone’s means than changing two centuries of German imperialism was.

  2. Vinnie

    I completely agree with SeattleSam. As with the fiasco in Yugoslavia, if the locals (such as Saudi Arabia) don’t think intervention is worth the problems it would cause, the US has no interest blundering into Syria. All the hype about intervening to “stop the killing” is nonsense. It’s a civil war. People get killed in civil wars. How many pro-Assad civilians have been murdered by the rebels?

Comments are closed.

Sort By:

Refine Content:


Additional Keywords:

Refine Results

or to save searches.

Refine Content