The President said he wanted to have a debate. Let’s give him one. Let us start by reminding him of the real teachings of the same Dr. King on peace and justice that he and others have so thoroughly sought to appropriate. What is at stake is both the fate of the suffering citizens of Syria and the fate of our own democracy. We are, as King told us, caught in this inescapable network of mutuality.
Let me end on a practical note: Yes, I partially agree with President Obama. We as a world community can not stand by and allow the usage of chemical weapons to go without consequence. The question is what kind of response, on whose behalf, and in what way. The question is given the United States’ politics vis-a-vis the Middle East, given the United States’ own usage and manufacturing of chemical weapons, if we in the United States are in any moral position to be leading this effort. The question is whether it will be an international response or an American response. The question is whether it is a humanitarian intervention or American bombing. The question is whether it will alleviate suffering. The question is whether there will also be consistent responses to America’s own violations of sanctity of human life. Questioning the moral consistency, sanity and compassion of Obama’s statement should in no way be taken as a support for the blood-thirsty tyrant dictator Bashar al-Assad. Given the unfathomable suffering of the Syrian people, the dilemma is whether Obama’s steps will actually alleviate suffering, or whether they will only further deepen America succumbing to the Military-Industrial virus.
- See more at: http://omidsafi.religionnews.com/2013/08/31/rebuttal/#sthash.ASTZ0MIO.49lzRRAT.dpufA rebuttal to Obama's war against Syria: a point by point refutation - What Would Muhammad Do?
No comments:
Post a Comment