As the US prepares for military intervention in Syria
by Charles J. Guenther, Jr., PEP Board Member
Professor (emeritus) St. Louis Community College
I have three questions as President Obama and Secretary Kerry continue their efforts to pressure Congress and the public into supporting another war effort by the United States.
It has been a couple of years since cruise missiles were used in Libya. The hardware and software for these missiles have surely been upgraded since then. Is it time to combat test these weapons again?
This may sound terribly cynical; however I cannot forget the September 1991 issue of the IEEE Spectrum magazine, that displayed a blazing front cover with the headline: “War as Test Lab.” Here was my professional journal, published by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, replete with articles evaluating the performance of weapons systems used in the 1990 Iraq War.
I spent some years as a weapons test engineer, and know only too well the temptation to put our high-tech weapons to the ultimate test in combat. Such testing helps to secure more contracts!
Shortly before Obama “pivoted” towards Syria (of course this was precipitated by an egregious massacre involving chemical weapons in an ongoing civil war), he was campaigning for lower college costs and more affordable student loans. Newspaper articles talked of the looming budget crisis, the deadlocked Congress, and the effects of “sequestration.”
My brother in-law is an engineer for the EPA, and has been furloughed many days this year since the sequester. Apparently, the government is having trouble paying for his services in working to reduce mercury pollution by power plants. And yet, when it comes time to start shooting cruise missiles, the government always seems to have loose change available to pay for it. Why is that? Don’t we have a huge spending and borrowing problem? What about the national debt? Huh?
My third question is inspired by a letter by my wife, Margaret Gilleo, published in the September 6 issue of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. She expresses the moral outrage of all decent people at the use of chemical weapons, and says that leaders of the Syrian government should be tried by the International Court. Yet, the Obama Administration says it wants to “punish” Syria.
It should give us pause that our national instincts continue to be to resort to violence instead of putting trust in international bodies and negotiations. So, why isn’t the US a participant in the International Criminal Court? Hasn’t this been terribly expensive for us over the years?
