You can now read 5 articles in a month for free on Read as much as you want anywhere and anytime for just 99¢.

letters | stakes raised in syria

Where was Obama as thousands died by conventional weapons?

If the Obama administration proceeds with military action against the government of Syria, it will not be a stance against the killing of civilians. Instead, it will be a move by President Obama to pick and choose among the methods by which the Syrian government kills civilians.

The war has lasted for more than two years, during which time more than 100,000 people have been slaughtered. Where was the Obama administration’s determination to act earlier? Why dive into another foreign military intervention simply because Syria has chosen to use chemical weapons? Why has it not been objectionable to allow the killing of one or 10 at a time through the use of bullets and bombs?

Continue reading below

If Obama were to succeed in preventing the future use of chemical weapons in Syria but not to stop the slaughter of civilians by other means, what will have been accomplished?

Daniel Levenson


Loading comments...
Want each day's news headlines delivered fresh to your
inbox every morning? Just connect with us
in one of the following ways:
Please enter a valid email will never post anything without asking.
Privacy Policy
Subscriber Log In

You have reached the limit of 5 free articles in a month

Stay informed with unlimited access to Boston’s trusted news source.

  • High-quality journalism from the region’s largest newsroom
  • Convenient access across all of your devices
  • Today’s Headlines daily newsletter
  • Subscriber-only access to exclusive offers, events, contests, eBooks, and more
  • Less than 25¢ a week
Marketing image of
Marketing image of