These reasons serve the realist notions of vital and national interest. The country is a quasi-client of the Russians, an ally of the Iranians, destabilizer of Lebanon, threat to Israel and a major state sponsor of terrorism. Is the United States truly prepared to make the case that we will narrowly punish a sliver of a rogue regime by tacitly accepting the deaths in the tens of thousands that have already occurred? I have stated on four other occasions that international realists and liberals should come together over Syria. However, the complete absence of horror for the 100,000 dead is unbelievable. It conjures up dark memories of the most evil character of the 20th century, Josef Stalin, who notoriously stated, вЂњA single death is a tragedy a million deaths is a statistic.вЂќ We can and should be horrified by the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian regime they have broken any protection of sovereignty and must be destroyed.

However, what of the deaths by shell and shot? These have become mere statistics, in a 21st century obsessed with numbers to replace judgment. This use of chemical weapons is an absolute travesty and is a crime against humanity. Yet, in an act of neobarbarism the foreign policy team of the current American administration is laser focused only on the over 1,000 killed by chemical weapons. Last month the United Nations estimated that this number is well over 100,000. The number of dead in Syria has now crossed the Rubicon of statistics. In fact, our poor credibility in the Middle East and beyond may well have exacerbated the situation, putting a finger on the scale in ways we did not imagine. We never laid the groundwork to influence that calculation. The essence of deterrence is the perception that a response is likely and that it will be so painful as to stay the hand of a would-be transgressor. In that unfortunate choice rests both international and American failures. We canвЂ™t be sure why he saw the need to use such weapons вЂ“ he had other options вЂ“ we know only that he decided he could and should. Obviously, in AssadвЂ™s calculations, the value of using chemical weapons outweighed what he perceived as the price вЂ“ his own price вЂ“ for doing so, a price supposedly to be exacted by the international community. policy, and of collaborative international security efforts, has been preventing the spread and use of weapons of mass destruction or at least preventing or punishing their use. Enter your PIN sssxxxxsss At a very simple level, AssadвЂ™s attack reflects a failure of deterrence.

8muses sapphirefoxx