In the wake of this, the American public is voicing its loud and determined protest. For we are a nation not only war weary, but after continuous engagement over two administrations and 12 years of heavy commitment of our armed forces, we are a nation increasingly conscious of the risks of further military action in a region that seems to perpetuate warfare and for which peace and stability is but at times all too fanciful and fleeting a notion.
Before he became president in 2000, candidate George W. Bush promised he would not invest our nation's military in the endless and at times hopeless task of nation building. Through two terms in office, and countless billions of dollars spent and thousand of American lives lost, George Bush left behind the legacy of two wars, two worn, torn countries whose weak and unstable governments would not assure stability let alone establish a bright path of prosperity and democracy.
His successor, Barack Obama, while though ending direct American military involvement in one Middle East country, has in large part remained on an active path of engagement, which has only brought further instability and turmoil to a region neither in need of or lacking of either.
In short, rather than building upon a successful path of American diplomacy, furtive action against the Assad regime in Syria can and has rightfully been seen by most Americans as only a dangerous continuation of a failed attempt by America, and at times its Western European allies, to remake the Middle East with its ancient tribal cultures, into societies which accept the standards of civilization of America and Europe.
Crusades centuries ago failed to bring this about, and modern American military technology in the form of cruise missiles stand little chance of changing that as well.
— Kevin Krajewski