At a recent closed-door event (where remarks were recorded, of course), Bill Clinton reportedly said President Obama risks looking like a “wuss” and a “fool” for staying on the sidelines in Syria. John McCain, who never met a war he didn’t want to mong (H/T Jim, Foolish Literalist), angrily attended that same event and angrily agreed with Clinton’s assessment. McCain has been angrily emitting angry noises about Obama’s reluctance to open up a third conflict for months now.
To his credit, Obama has ignored the backseat drivers so far. Here’s Booman, via commenter lamh36:
Bill Clinton is correct when he says that you can’t let opinion polls be your guide to foreign policy. But when he compares the situation in Syria to the situation he faced in Kosovo, he’s making one of the stupidest statements that I have ever heard from him…
First of all, the idea that the United States can “cause” a calamity in Syria is ridiculous. It is already a calamity, and it’s not because of our inaction. And the idea that all we need to do to fix the calamity and solve the refugee problem is to “drop a few bombs” is beyond idiotic.
For Clinton to appear with John McCain and make comments like this is a perfect vindication of my total opposition to his wife’s candidacy for president. We cannot afford more leadership from people who think about American power in this way. Obama has already overruled the advice of Hillary Clinton, the Joints Chiefs of Staff, then Director of the CIA David Petraeus, and then Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, and kept us out of the conflict in Syria. Now he has the former president intimating that he’s a wuss and a fool.
This is what we gained when we won the presidency for Obama. A cool head.
But even as you read this, CNN and other media outlets are designing slick new logo packages for reports on the next conflict, the occasion being the news that the White House has said Syria crossed a “red line” by using chemical weapons. The drumbeat is getting a bit louder.
I don’t claim to understand all the facts and implications in the Syria situation, although obviously it’s a tragedy, and innocent people, including children, are being harmed and killed. That sucks.
But should we really be shoveling weapons to the people who are opposing Assad, as McCain has angrily urged? Is it a good idea to send RPGs to the heart-eater guy and take sides in a conflict between factions aligned with Hezbollah on one side and al Qaeda on the other? Can’t we continue to provide humanitarian assistance and otherwise stay the fuck out of it?
According to another account of Clinton’s remarks, he made an additional astoundingly wrongheaded comparison:
He compared Syria with Afghanistan when that country was fighting the Soviet Union in the 1980s. American help to the Afghans at that time yielded great benefits for the U.S. in the eyes of the Afghan people. Unfortunately, the U.S. didn’t follow up by supporting Afghanistan and Americans shouldn’t think interventions are quick or easy, he said.
Does anyone remember how that turned out? Sweet Fancy Moses, I thought if any former president understood blowback, it would be Bill Clinton. Keep ignoring the backseat drivers, Mr. President.