The Sad Story of Syria: A Scary, Shameful and Sorry Episode in the Tome of Human History

At Last!!! I can compose something again. Hurrah! But now need some shuteye, Folks! Accepting (i.e. hoping you do/will) my utter lack of technical expertise re this blogsite, even now...though suspicions of viral attacks from cyberspace are more and more seeming the reason, though naturally enough I'm hardly vainglorious enough to suspect that Yours Truly himself is especially being targeted! The situation, it can scarcely help being admitted, is becoming increasingly complicated and multifaceted/dimensional by the day and hour...to the everlasting shame and embarrassment of a growing multitude of world leaders...but despite this, and the many and various diabolical consequences allegedly resulting from taking the most-cited action/s being bandied about...there are any number of issues I'd like to take with some of the more popular (especially New Zealand's own TV3 Three60) media coverage of the situation, especially in regards to British (and soon American) political decision-making upon the matter... Why not rather - as is equally reasonable, surely - see/cite/frame this (parliamentary/congressional assent-seeking exercise) as a great/signal victory for democracy - unlike Obama's own (hitherto) undemocratic approach...For, unlike Tony Blair, not only did the (i.e. Britain's) Parliament decide, and so it wasn't merely yet another 'done deal', done-and-dusted type of all too familiar scenario...yes, not only did said parliament decide, and against, striking Syria's chemical weapons silos/facilities, but their current Prime Minister, David Cameron, unlike said Labour predecessor, actually - lo and behold, will miracles never cease? - gave them a choice in the matter. Yes indeed, he put the question to his nation's own political representatives, and that before committing himself/his nation's 'troops'. As he has also done, incidentally, vis-a-vis the European Union, again so unlike his ever-so-controversial, yea never-so-contentious, penultimate predecessor. Yes, in contrast to Mike McRoberts' et al's framing of the matter as a (supposed, but indeed technically-speaking it most certainly was) victory for (the once Great) Britain's 'loyal' Opposition, and likewise a political defeat for David Cameron personally...surely eco-terrorism by a state is/goes WAY BEYOND mere party politics... It is in fact a power vested in him (DC) - the so-called 'royal prerogative' - to declare (unilateral, British) war (in this case on Syria; as Margaret Thatcher did upon Argentina in the long ago on behalf of the Malvinas, or rather Falkland Islands) or at least precision missile strikes on its chemical weapons facilities/silos. So at least he has some legitimate 'cred' to his democratic credentials, accepting/acknowledging as he soon thereafter did: "I respect the British public's view [thus expressed by their parliamentary representatives] to not [strike] Syria. I get that, and so we won't be going. So sure, said 'incident' may well be characterized as a signal defeat for the British P.M., but that's a little like ye old glass half full, or half empty scenario - it all depends upon one's attitude/perspective upon such matters, one's preconceptions and presuppositions so to speak... But where oh where are these selfsame voices when it somes to the all too deafening silence coming out of the two organizations whose involvement is not only altogether relevant to the situation but moreover has never been more needed, i.e. the Arab League and the United Nations. Yes, both, as ever, mouthing all the right and proper sentiments one would expect to be expressed in such circumstances, but, in the final analysis, doing diddly squat...and sadly, that will not help one solitary child or adult (male or female), in Syria today...and, as I say, in the final analysis, what else really matters? No, really? P.S. And please don't give me ye ole Rwanda situation...as the old saying goes, two wrongs have never made a single right...and no, we do indeed learn not a whit from history's lesson book, and so are doomed to endlessly repeat its mistakes, nay tragic 'missteps'...but come again now, folks, surely only a rather pathetic apologist for Germany's infamous Nazi Regime could possibly characterize such historical blindness as mere technical faux pas...there used to be such a thing as moral outrage and indignation, but sadly that now seems a rather lost cause P.P.S. And the good ole US of A, and moreover its present hapless Commander-In-Chief, on this matter anyhow, simply cannot win. Yes, whatever it does - or in this case (perhaps) doesn't do, it simply cannot win...either way...no, it's damned if it does indeed do something/anything, and it's damned if it doesn't. P.P>P>S> But if America ever does revert to ye old and much-maligned 'isolationist' stance in world affairs, please, oh please, oh mainstream media, don't give us the usual cant of America dare not do so...for if, for a change, you examine your own never-ending critique of the States - over decades past - whenever it does do so you damn it anyway...hey, but due (and way overdue) self-reflection and self-awareness was never ever one of said media's strong points, was it?Hey, but if you ever and only and always blame ye good ole US of A for each and every and any problem the world suffers, has suffered or ever might suffer, methinks you'll thus be able to hide from giving ye selves a pretty good look in the mirror...and perhaps, just for once, not really liking - very much - what you happen to see. But, hey, welcome to the real world! (To be perfectly kind about the matter... .)

Yes, I didn't like the last bunch (very much), but this lot I don't trust...AT ALL