Chuck Norris has a Syria plan. Roundhouse kicks?

Actor, karate champion, and Obama critic Chuck Norris weighs in on the Syria crisis. His message to Obama: 'Quit taking the bait' from Syrian President Assad.

CBS/AP/File
Chuck Norris in his fourth season on CBS as 'Walker, Texas Ranger,' in 1995.

Chuck Norris has a plan for dealing with the Syrian situation.

Why should US officials care about the foreign policy opinions of an actor best known for feet and fists of fury? Because he’s an expert in conflict, he says.

“As a six-time world karate champion, I know something about fighting, winning and losing,” writes Mr. Norris in an opinion piece on the right-leaning WorldNetDaily.

First off, when it comes to the Norris view of how to respond to the Bashar al-Assad regime’s alleged use of chemical weapons, roundhouse kicks are not involved. Norris is not calling for himself, Sylvester Stallone, and Bruce Willis to parachute into Syria and end the civil war by hot-wiring Scud missiles and using them to blow up President Assad’s chemical weapons depots.

Although that would be awesome.

However, Norris is proceeding from an unusual assumption. According to him, Assad wants the US to bomb Syria. The wily Syrian leader – “a dealer in lunacy and a high-risk roller autocrat,” in Norris’s words – used chemical weapons knowing President Obama might react with US munitions.

In Norris’s formulation, by using poison gas Assad showed his supporters that he won’t back down – for him, the civil war is do-or-die. And US air strikes would only increase sympathy for Assad among his international allies such as Russia and Iran and the many anti-American Middle East factions.

The whole thing is geopolitical theater, to the action screen star. He does not mention that Assad might just be a teensy bit worried that maybe a cruise missile would end up in the Syrian presidential palace if he goes down this road.

“If I were one of our US lawmakers, I would emphatically tell the president: Quit taking the bait!” writes Norris.

Furthermore, Norris scoffs at the US approach to possible strikes, in which officials from Obama on down have insisted that any attack would be limited in scope.

“What professional fighter says, ‘I’m going to go into the ring and throw a series of blows and then get out,’ as if the opponent has no bearing on counter measures?” writes Norris. “One can’t limit an attack when you’re kicking hornets’ nests or throwing matches on gasoline!”

(Here’s bonus Chuck Norris humor: When Chuck Norris kicks a hornets’ nest, the insects sting themselves, out of fear.)

Then Norris proceeds to swerve into a four-point solution that could have come from the Brookings Institution or the pages of Foreign Affairs:

1.) Don’t unilaterally draw red lines dealing with any country that is not an imminent threat to the US.

2.) Tell the public you won’t go it alone against Syria.

3.) Present real evidence to gather as much international and congressional support as you can.

4.) If you have majority support, decide together (with Congress and the UN, presumably) on the best course of action.

Wow, when you put it that way, it sounds so easy, doesn’t it?

In closing we will note that Norris is a long-time Obama opponent who last year wrote that the administration had a secret plan to raise gas prices to European levels of $10 per gallon or more.

Prior to the 2012 election Norris taped a campaign video warning that defeating Obama would “preserve for our children this last best hope of man on earth,” while an Obama victory would “sentence them to take the first step into 1,000 years of darkness.”

So it’s not like he is predisposed to approve of the administration’s foreign policy.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.