Meet the new war... Same as the old war?

OK, Gadhafi is dead. Good riddance.

But Obama and NATO, what have you done? What of the 30,000 anti-aircraft missiles that are still unaccounted for and presumed in the hands of Libyan rebel or jihadist fighters? With armed tribes roaming the countryside, the chances of a civil war in Libya are far greater than democracy. But then again, what are the chances for democracy in Iraq as Iran asserts its own “manifest destiny” over the Persian Gulf region in our absence? Where are all the purple fingers pointing now?

As we threaten Pakistan with the buildup of U.S. troops on their border, Afghanistan now says that if the U.S. goes to war with Pakistan, then they will fight alongside their Pakistani brethren in Afghanistan against us. Hmmm... Kind of sounds like democracy. Will they call our bluff — of are we not just simply saber rattling this time around as Indian troops also take part in an intimidating show of force on the Pakistan border?

Is myopic American foreign policy, diplomatic blackmail and military pressures leading to the unthinkable with this kind of brinkmanship? India and Pakistan have fought several wars, so like no big deal, right? Wrong. With the Islamists waging holy war in Pakistan and winning the PR fight against America, a war against America would be seen as a holy war for liberation against the U.S., even as we exit Iraq.

In Pakistan and India, we have more to worry about than only 30,000 aircraft missiles in the hands of terrorists. India could easily be dragged into a conflict with Pakistan and both countries have nuclear tipped missiles facing off over hotly contested Kashmir. If Pakistan falls to the jihadists, mushroom clouds could form over New Delhi. This “use it or lose it” mentality could easily be justified by a distrustful Pakistan which openly sympathizes with the jihadists and fears a U.S. invasion to take over their nuclear arsenal. I wish I were making this all up.

Fresh from the victory of her NATO-led war against Gadhafi, the game of chicken being played with Pakistan by Hillary Clinton is extremely dangerous. With the death of Osama bin Laden, tensions have been running high in the region, and now they threaten to boil over at Washington’s behest to force Pakistan into submission. The only problem? It’s not going real well for Hillary as angry mobs burn life-size posters of her in Pakistan.

Not only have we sided with violently taking out any leaders that oppose U.S./NATO rule in the region, we have told the president of Syria now in no uncertain terms that his head is on the chopping block next. OK, so no one will shed tears for Assad when he is gone either, but excuse me? Where are the anti-war crusaders who called Bush a gun-slinging cowboy? Has our government gone completely mad?

Will Syria’s Assad go quietly after watching the way Gadhafi was executed by the rebels? Syria has threatened a missile strike on Tel Aviv if the West interferes with the civil unrest in that country. Now that the odds have decisively turned against Assad, at what point will he determine that “Western influence” has turned the tide against him?

Syria knows that a strike on Israel would be suicide, but with nothing to lose, Syria would in all likelihood try to draw its ally Iran into the fight against Israel, and by extension, draw our (still remaining) troops in Iraq into the conflict as well. With arch-enemies Iran (Persian Shiites) looking down the barrel of a gun across the gulf at Saudi Arabia (Arab Sunnis) from recent accusations of a plot by Iran to kill the Saudi ambassador, the region does not need any more excuses to go to war.

The Euro debt crisis has led to a vacuum of leadership in the West and there is no one left without blood on their hands to credibly call for restraint in the Middle East. I fear the worst.

Got oil?

Seymour is a resident of Kalispell.