Dumb Wars

In 2002, Barack Obama phrased his opposition to the Iraq war as follows: "I don't oppose all wars. And I know that in this crowd today, there is no shortage of patriots, or of patriotism.

What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. . . . A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics."

Barack Obama, in concert with neoconservatives, American hegemonists, and war hawks in both the Democratic and Republican parties, is now preparing to commit the United States to a war. This war will involve military intervention, allegedly for humanitarian and liberal internationalist reasons, in a region where previous U.S. interventions have consistently exacerbated and even created humanitarian disasters and illiberal international norms. It will involve either tacit cooperation or explicit material support for Bashar al-Assad's regime in Syria - a regime which has committed every sin of which Saddam Hussein was guilty and which has systematically murdered moderate opposition, thus creating political and military space for the Islamic State. And Obama and his allies will enter this war essentially on the basis of viral videos.

In what way is this war neither dumb nor rash? How is this war grounded on reason? What principles has the Islamic State violated that our soon-to-be-allies in Damascus haven’t?