News Analysis: Still living in shadow of Iraq conflict, U.S. public may not back Obama's Syria strike

Email|Print|Comments       twitter     facebook     Sina Microblog     reddit    

WASHINGTON, Sept. 11 -- U.S. President Barack Obama's latest effort to gain public support for a military strike on Syria with a speech Tuesday may fail amid still fresh memories of the brutal conflict in Iraq, experts said.

In the nationally-televised speech, Obama made his case for a limited strike on embattled Syria in a bid to get the Congress and the U.S. public on board. It came on the heels of accusations that Syria's government forces used chemical weapons, crossing a "red line" that Obama has said could result in U.S. military action.

Washington alleged that the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad launched a chemical attack in the suburbs of Damascus on Aug. 21, which U.S. intelligence claims killed more than 1,400 people. The Assad government has strongly denied the accusation.

Obama argued that it is in U.S. national security interests to "respond to the Assad regime's use of chemical weapons through a targeted military strike" to degrade Syrian government's capability to launch such attack again.

While Washington appears to negotiate a diplomatic deal after Russia proposed to place Syrian chemical weapons under international control to avert a U.S. military strike, it is keeping the U.S. military on alert to continue pressuring Damascus.

But Obama's call for U.S. public support to his Syria strike plan may have fallen on deaf ears, as war-weary Americans still live in the shadow of the brutal Iraq conflict, some experts said.

"It was the most coherent case to date on the horrors of chemical weapons but it's unlikely to move the needle with Congress and the American people," Republican Strategist Ford O'Connell told Xinhua, referring to Obama' s speech.

"In essence he is trying to buy time by hitting pause," O'Connell said, referring to Obama's request to Congress for delaying a vote on authorizing him to launch a military strike against Syria.

Still, the administration is going all out to make the case for a military intervention. As part of that effort, White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough showed up on all five Sunday TV talk shows, arguing that U.S. intelligence on the alleged chemical weapons attack is accurate.

But experts said the U.S. risks getting sucked into a quagmire, warning that any U.S. military action would simply amount to yet another player entering the fray amid a multi-faction civil war in which no side currently dominates.

While Iraq was initially expected to be a limited conflict after ousting former leader Saddam Hussein, U.S. forces were mired in an unexpected but brutal and lengthy guerrilla war that became deeply unpopular at home and cost some 1 trillion U.S. dollars.

Some have made the argument that past U.S. conflicts, such as Kosovo under former President Bill Clinton, saw the public rally after initial low levels of support.

But other experts said this time is different, since Iraq remains fresh in the minds of a war-weary and increasingly isolationist U.S. public which is concerned mostly about the economy. In fact, repeated opinion polls have shown a great majority of Americans oppose Obama's military action on Syria.

We Recommend

• DPRK holds military parade to mark 65th founding anniv.
• Highlights of MAKS 2013 Int'l Aviation and Space Show
• 10th China-ASEAN Expo opens in Nanning
• Eagle Boy takes to sky to break another record
• 12-year-old boy becomes pillar of the family
• Eye-gouged boy receives blind rehabilitation in Shanxi
• Top 10 naked hotels in the world
• The most gorgeous Chinese women in the eyes of foreigners
• A collection of bizarre rooftop buildings around China