All of our recent Presidents have addressed the nation to justify military action. I thought it might be helpful to review the words used to justify military action, lest we forget. Below you can listen and/or read the announcements of military action by Presidents Reagan, Bush I, Bill Clinton, Bush II, and Obama. I think it's a good time to review these Presidents' reasons for military action as the way forward regarding Syria is being debated. I have included two copies of each video w/both the new and old embed codes, as well as links so you can read the transcript for each announcement of military intervention.
Here's a timeline of US Military Actions. After the end of WWII and up until 1980, there are an average of about 10 US military actions listed per decade. From 1980 forward, there is a huge spike in US Military actions listed which take place throughout the world.
Here are a few archived youtube videos of the Presidents' explanations and justifications for taking military action.
Panama, George Herbert Walker Bush President, Dick Cheney Secretary of Defense. (Transcript and video link)
On December 20, 1989, the United States broke both international law and its own government policies by invading Panama in order to bring its President Manuel Noriega to justice for drug trafficking.
The goals of the United States have been to safeguard the lives of Americans, to defend democracy in Panama, to combat drug trafficking, and to protect the integrity of the Panama Canal treaty. Many attempts have been made to resolve this crisis through diplomacy and negotiations. All were rejected by the dictator of Panama, General Manuel Noriega, an indicted drug trafficker.
The truth about what happened in Panama is revealed in this film. Some are calling the Panama invasion a preparation for the first Iraq invasion. The difference in Bush I's justification and reporting and the on-the-ground reports by Panama citizens are huge. When you have the time, I highly recommend watching this film: The Panama Deception - This film shows what actually happened but was not reported by the US media. (
Video Link)
1988 Operation Praying Mantis - Iran, President Ronald Reagan President, George HW Bush Vice President,
The military encounters climaxed on July 3, 1988, when the USS Vincennes accidentally shot down Iran Air flight 655, a commercial jet carrying 290 passengers and crew. All perished.
1991 First Iraq war, George Herbert Walker Bush President, Dick Cheney Secretary of Defense. (Video link) (Transcript)
Now the 28 countries with forces in the Gulf area have exhausted all reasonable efforts to reach a peaceful resolution—have no choice but to drive Saddam from Kuwait by force. We will not fail.
1992 Somalia, George Herbert Walker Bush President, Dick Cheney Secretary of Defense. (
Video Link Bush address begins at 1:58) (
Transcript)
Last night, the United Nations Security Council, by unanimous vote, and after the tireless efforts of Secretary General Boutros-Ghali, welcomed the United States' offer to lead a coalition to get the food through. After consulting with my advisers, with world leaders, and the Congressional leadership, I have today told Secretary General Boutros-Ghali that America will answer the call.
I have given the order to Secretary Cheney to move a substantial American force into Somalia.
1994 Haiti, Bill Clinton (
Video Link)
1995 Bosnia, Bill Clinton (Video Link) (Transcript)
Let me say at the outset, America's role will not be about fighting a war. It will be about helping the people of Bosnia to secure their own peace agreement. Our mission will be limited, focused, and under the command of an American general.
In fulfilling this mission, we will have the chance to help stop the killing of innocent civilians, especially children, and at the same time, to bring stability to Central Europe, a region of the world that is vital to our national interests. It is the right thing to do.
1998 Second Iraq attack: Bill Clinton President (transcript
here) (
Video Link)
Earlier today, I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors.
Their purpose is to protect the national interest of the United States, and indeed the interests of people throughout the Middle East and around the world.
1999 Kosovo, Bill Clinton President (
Video link) (
Transcript)
We act to protect thousands of innocent people in Kosovo from a mounting military offensive. We act to prevent a wider war, to diffuse a powder keg at the heart of Europe that has exploded twice before in this century with catastrophic results. And we act to stand united with our allies for peace. By acting now, we are upholding our values, protecting our interests, and advancing the cause of peace.
2001 - Afghanistan, George Bush (
video link) (
Transcript)
2003 Second Iraq war, George W Bush President, Dick Cheney Vice President (Transcript) (Video link)
I want Americans and all the world to know that coalition forces will make every effort to spare innocent civilians from harm. A campaign on the harsh terrain of a nation as large as California could be longer and more difficult than some predict. And helping Iraqis achieve a united, stable and free country will require our sustained commitment.
We come to Iraq with respect for its citizens, for their great civilization and for the religious faiths they practice. We have no ambition in Iraq, except to remove a threat and restore control of that country to its own people.
2011 Libya, President Obama (
Video Link)
Now, here is why this matters to us. Left unchecked, we have every reason to believe that Qaddafi would commit atrocities against his people. Many thousands could die. A humanitarian crisis would ensue. The entire region could be destabilized, endangering many of our allies and partners. The calls of the Libyan people for help would go unanswered. The democratic values that we stand for would be overrun. Moreover, the words of the international community would be rendered hollow.
It is important to understand the justifications of military action in the past in order to understand the present debate regarding possible Syrian intervention by the United States.
If you listen and/or read the above Presidential declarations and justifications for military intervention, many of these apply to Syria. However, if you also know the history of the outcome of the above military interventions you will also understand the great risks to civilians and the general well-being of a country AFTER US military intervention.
To date, I think Representative Adam Smith has made the most sense in this NPR interview this morning.
I commend President Obama for his willingness to put forth this serious issue before the US Congress where debate will be recorded for history. I think this debate will literally define the future of US military intervention. The outcome of this debate could change the course of history in ways yet unseen.
If we don't intervene, will the leaders of the Middle East step forward, which could weigh heavily on ending the sectarianism that undermines the stability for all citizens in the Middle East. These same leaders could decide to fight it out hoping to wipe out the "other side". I think they will opt to sign a Middle East agreement for a more secular approach to governing, while maintaining within their own countries the policies that now exist. Let us hope so. Let us hope that history will help end the sectarian divides, even hatreds because history repeatedly proves that devisiveness simmers, then boils, and then boils over to become civil unrest which always disrupts society, and can even end in genocide. History doesn't lie.
If we do intervene, if history is prescient, we risk becoming the scapegoat for the hatred of all the people of the Middle East which might unite them in place, but unite them in ways not in the best interests of the United States or the world.
I hope Congress decides to intervene by offering aid and comfort to the refugees displaced by the Syrian civil war. I think the US can be seen as the good guys if we limit our involvement by joining with the world leaders to provide aid to the victims of civil war.
Sadly, the timing for crisis anywhere in the world is a problem because a majority of the US Congress have decided that the US can't afford to provide food and other services to its own people. How will these same budget concious Congress members justify spending any money to help the Syrian people? European countries are facing the same budget dilemmas. How will deficit reducing countries justify short-changing their own people to help the people of Syria or anywhere else for that matter?