missile defense in Turkey, Assad's not our baby

Submitted by myth (Germany), Aug 28, 2013 at 05:41

A limited strike on airfields, not touching the chemical weapons, as a means of disciplining Assad serves which purpose exactly? I agree with Dr Pipes, it would be symbolic.

I do spot a purpose on the horizon. Our allies should be the focus of our actions. That translates into the safety of Israeli and Turkish territory. European NATO military have deployed missile defense along the Turkish-Syrian border for a while now. What would be their role be in a limited air-strike? A strike would de facto end the defensive character of that mission.

Let those discipline Assad who support and supply him. It makes more sense for us to pressure Russia or Iran to have them stop chemical warfare. Assad's is not our baby, he is theirs.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".