No Fly Zone Over Syria???

Joe Lieberman has suggested that a “No Fly Zone” may be needed over Syria should the violence continue to escalate.

Sen. Joe Lieberman suggested Sunday he would support military intervention in Syria if its president resorts to the kind of violent tactics used by Libya’s Muammar al-Qaddafi.

Dozens reportedly have been killed in protests against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s government, raising questions about whether the international community would get involved.

Lieberman, chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, told “Fox News Sunday” that if Assad starts slaughtering his own people, he will risk other countries imposing a no-fly zone “just as we’re doing in Libya.” He urged Assad to, instead, negotiate with the “freedom fighters” in his country.

“There’s a precedent now that the world community has set in Libya, and it’s the right one,” Lieberman said.

I don’t think many people would argue that the bloodshed is heart wrenching.  I abhor violence, and detest aggression.

However, something to keep in mind is that liberty and freedom, once stifled by tyranny, often requires quite a lot of bloodshed to restore.  This wording was at the heart of the majority of the words of our founding fathers.

But I can’t help but wonder, is there consistency here?  Lets say we have some people who do not agree with the government, and want to see things change.  This group of people talks about revolution, and maybe even collects some small weaponry to form a “militia” (as is their right as Americans).  Perhaps they begin protesting by distributing literature urging people to stand up and be counted for liberty, or some other freedom movement idea.

Would our government respond peacefully to these people, who are (up to that point) acting peacefully and within their rights?  Or would our government come down on them, threaten their freedom, and kill  them if they do not acquiesce?

See, this is what bothers me here.  I am not saying that I support Syria or Libya slaughtering their own dissidents.  Not in the least.  But it seems excruciatingly obvious that even our own government is accustomed to violently squashing insurrectionists and dissidents.

And I DO idolize our founding fathers.  However, I see their errors and evils as well.  George Washington marched on  and killed US Citizens in the Whiskey Rebellion, because they would not comply.

But this is even deeper than that (which, honestly, is an understandable squashing of a rebellion, as it violated the will of The People).  Now a days in America, death is used as the ultimate threat for every single one of 600,000 different laws  If you do not wear your seatbelt, you can be killed for it.  Seem silly?  Try not paying the ticket, then refusing to surrender.  Fight for your freedom, as a free man should be allowed to do when an “authority” attempts to enforce a victimless law.  You will be killed for resisting this tyranny, make no mistake.

And, in the case of the above rhetorical question, you can be certain that dissidents are killed routinely.  There are multiple counts of “freemen” either being killed or imprisoned for their activities (which, in all fairness, have not always been above board).  We are all familiar with the Montana Freemen, right?  And their untimely demise.

But an even more clear case is the Hutaree’s.  Held without trial for years, judges have repeatedly ruled against the Federal Government while they tried to built their case.

So it makes me wonder.  What happens when the “freedom bug” hits America?  You can already see the waves building, and with the economy getting more and more shaky you can be that a maelstrom awaits us somewhere in the darkness.  Will our own government exercise the restraint they demand in Libya and Syria?  Or will they continue acting just as atrociously?

Regardless, the one thing Sen. Lieberman and I can agree on:

“Each of these situations is unique,” she said on CBS’ “Face the Nation.” “Certainly we deplore the violence in Syria.”

Source