SyriaU.S. military doubts purpose, efficacy of U.S. strike on Syria
The Obama administration’s plan to attack military targets in Syria is not greeted with enthusiasm by a U.S. military still carrying the scars of military involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan and facing deep budget cuts.Many in the military have reservations about a military action in Syria, with the main reservations concerning the potential unintended consequences of launching cruise missiles against Syria. Both supporters and opponents of a strike on Syria, though, agree on one thing: “Remember, with respect to policy choices concerning Syria, we are discussing degrees of bad and worse,” one officer said.
The Obama administration’s plan to attack military targets in Syria is not greeted with enthusiasm by a U.S. military still carrying the scars of military involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan and facing deep budget cuts.
The Washington Post conducted interviews with more than a dozen military officers ranging from captains to a four-star general, and summarized the views of other military people who spoke or wrote in other fora, and found that many had reservations about a military action in Syria, and that the main reservations concern the potential unintended consequences of launching cruise missiles against Syria.
- Retired Lt. Gen. Gregory S. Newbold, who served as director of operations for the Joint Chiefs of Staff during the run-up to the Iraq war, noting that many of his contemporaries are alarmed by the plan, said that “There’s a broad naivete in the political class about America’s obligations in foreign policy issues, and scary simplicity about the effects that employing American military power can achieve.”
- Marine Lt. Col. Gordon Miller, a fellow at the Center for a New American Security, warned this week of “potentially devastating consequences, including a fresh round of chemical weapons attacks and a military response by Israel.
“If President Assad were to absorb the strikes and use chemical weapons again, this would be a significant blow to the United States’ credibility and it would be compelled to escalate the assault on Syria to achieve the original objectives,” Miller wrote in a commentary for the think tank. - A young Army officer who is wrapping up a year-long tour there said soldiers were surprised to learn about the looming strike, calling the prospect “very dangerous.”
“I can’t believe the president is even considering it,” said the officer, who like most officers interviewed for this story agreed to speak only on the condition of anonymity because military personnel are reluctant to criticize policymakers while military campaigns are being planned. “We have been fighting the last 10 years a counterinsurgency war. Syria has modern weaponry. We would have to retrain for a conventional war.”
