Remind Me Again, Sen. McCain, Why We Want to Back Syrian Rebels?

Oh yeah, don’t you worry about it. These are the guys we want to link arms with. With the Washington Times:

Members of an al Qaeda-linked group in Syria executed a 15-year-old boy in front of his parents after kidnapping and torturing him for making disrespectful statements about Islam’s Prophet Muhammad, a human rights group in the region claimed.
Mohammad Qataa was seized Saturday in Aleppo by gunmen with the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria — formerly known as the Nusra Front — after he was overheard saying during an argument with another, “Even if the Prophet Muhammad comes down [from heaven], I will not become a believer,” according toReuters.

The captors displayed the bloody and beaten boy to a crowd on Sunday, issuing a warning to those who might similarly speak of the prophet before shooting the teen.

Now, Bill Clinton is cheerleading for Barack Obama to listen to Sen. McCain and aid the Syrian rebels. Am I being cynical by suggesting that I suspect that Bubba is motivated to urge this action by something other than humanitarian concerns, or even America’s national interest? With the new foreign policy brain (less) trust over at the White House, led by the thoroughly inept Susan “Good Soldier” Rice, the latter is the last thing that will ever be considered. Why do I think that Bill Clinton might be hoping that Obama will be suckered into his own brand new war, which then Hillary could use against him in the upcoming election? Yes, he’s not running again, at least not unless he can get a couple of new Supreme Court Justices to clear the way, but as you well know, these politicians are motivated by one thing, their insatiable desire for power. To the extent that Obama is weakened, he would lose the ability to influence the ticket and otherwise continue to wield power behind the scenes.

Also, don’t underestimate the desire of the Clintons to get back at Obama for using Hillary’s vote in favor of the authorization to go to war in Iraq against her in 2008. After all, he never had to vote on that issue, yet he, ever the high-minded poseur, demagogued the hell out of HRC’s choice to support Pres. George W. Bush. It had to be especially galling, since although he did make several statements against the war, State Sen. Obama actually stated in November 2005, that “I think I would have agreed with our senior Sen. Dick Durbin and voted ‘Nay,” which leaves room for him to wiggle out of that position if it became politically expedient later.  I can imagine the Clintons gleefully rubbing their hands together thinking about sweet it would be to pound Obama over another war, one that he didn’t just vote for, but thoroughly owns, in the Middle East.

Or maybe I’m just succumbing to the corrosive cynicism that I always deplore. What say you?

The Teri O'Brien Show

book