Without a “classified briefing” about events in Syria, I lack the ability to have my questions answered or to make a truly informed judgment. I am reminded, however, of the events leading up to World War II and of how letting an evil get away with violating international norms and law only led to much greater troubles going forward.

There are no good choices here, and admittedly the easiest course of action is to remain a bystander and let others control events for us. But how do we answer the argument that standing idly by, especially after we have threatened consequences, will serve only to embolden other rogue states to test the limits of a U.S. response?

Where should we draw a line? After another country or terrorist group attacks another with nerve gas? This is yet another slippery slope that needs to be considered.

I’d vote for letting the president and his advisers conduct foreign policy and trust that they will weigh the appropriate options and do the right thing.


Bill Williamson


Only subscribers are eligible to post comments. Please subscribe or to participate in the conversation. Here’s why.

Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.