Has anyone noticed how our numerous post-Iraq military interventions ? actual and proposed ? have nearly always been the result of a sudden "humanitarian crisis"? The War Party ? facing popular skepticism, indeed, outright opposition from the American people, who were lied into a war that should never have been fought ? is now forced to come up with an "emergency" rationale, which poses the issue in terms of "if we don't intervene immediately thousands will die."

They did it in Libya, where we were told if we didn't intervene on the side of the crazed jihadist "rebels" as many as a hundred thousand would be slaughtered by Gaddafi's "mercenaries" in Benghazi. That turned out to be complete BS, to put it charitably, but the War Party got their way ? and you see the results in the headlines.

They tried the same act in Syria, on several occasions, coming up with a cock-and-bull story about Bashar al-Assad's alleged use of "poison gas" against the crazed jihadist rebels who were terrorizing the country ? but that turned out to be yet another fabricated scenario, and the American people didn't fall for it anyway. Instead of listening to the usual clowns who pass themselves off as "foreign policy experts," Americans rose up and said "No! No! A thousand times NO!" Our politically savvy President knew when he was beaten and so passed the Syrian hot potato to Congress ? which backed down with amazing speed.