We live in an age of moral and intellectual retardation. Moments like these remind us of that.
The Syrian civil war has killed hundreds of thousands with everything from beheadings to WMDs. Both sides in the Islamic civil war, Shiite and Sunni, have brutally killed each other without mercy. And no, there isn't very much we can do about it because the problem is "baked in" to religious differences in Islam. And Islam settles theological disputes with mass murder.
The latest news, that the Syrian government has reportedly been burning bodies, has led to the usual hysterical reactions. "ANALYSIS: SYRIA, A MODERN DAY HOLOCAUST?"
No, no it's not.
For others the stark black and white images of the crematorium will echo the Holocaust as Trump’s visit to the Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial remains unconfirmed. It isn’t clear the state department sought for the crematorium, a cogent symbol of genocide, to be their central talking point.
The only relationship here is technique. The Nazis also used bullets to kill Jews. It does not mean that anyone who uses bullets is a Nazi or is committing genocide.
There's a fundamental difference between technique and objective. The Nazis sought to exterminate the Jewish population. Syria is killing political enemies. That's not cricket. But plenty of those political enemies have no problem killing political enemies.
That's why it's a civil war with no good side. The Holocaust was not a civil war. It didn't have two sides. Actual genocides don't. When both sides are roughly evenly matched and killing each other with the same basic disregard for human rights, that's not genocide. It's an exchange of atrocities. That's what we have in Syria. And we should be wary of being dragged into it.
I endorsed President Trump's bombing because
1. It helped restore US credibility on Obama's Red Line
2. WMD's in the hands of terrorists and terror states are a national security threat
3. It sent a message to China
We should not be backing either Shiites or Sunnis in Syria. If we do back either side, we should have a compelling national security argument (e.g. rolling back Iranian influence) not selective appeals to emotion.