Skip to comments.The Syria Babble We Donít Need (Regurgitate, you will)
Posted on 09/07/2013 5:46:25 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
OUR country is about to make the most excruciating kind of decision, the most dire: whether to commence a military campaign whose real costs and ultimate consequences are unknowable.
But lets by all means discuss the implications for Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Iowa, New Hampshire and 2016. Yea or nay on the bombing: which is the safer roll of the dice for a Republican presidential contender? Reflexively, sadly, we journalists prattle and write about that. We miss the horse race of 2012, not to mention the readership and ratings it brought. The next election cant come soon enough.
So we pivot to Hillary Clinton. Were always pivoting to Hillary Clinton. Should she be weighing in on Syria more decisively and expansively? Or does the fact that she authorized the war in Iraq compel restraint and a gentler tone this time around? Whats too gentle, and whats just right? So goes one strand of commentary, and to follow it is to behold a perverse conflation of foreign policy and the Goldilocks fable.
The media has a wearying tendency a corrosive tic to put everything that happens in Washington through the same cynical political grinder, subjecting it to the same cynical checklist of whos up, whos down, whos threading a needle, whos tangled up in knots, what it all means for control of Congress after the midterms, what it all means for control of the White House two years later.....
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
I wish a ton of bricks would weigh in on her cankleness.
Funny he asks which is the safer roll of the dice for these Republicans, but leaves out the fact that Obama has now refused to even pick up the dice. Always misdirect and deflect to put the spotlight on someone other than Zero.
Hillary, by the way, is irrelevant. Most of her constituents are gone or headed to nursing homes.
He was the chief restaurant critic there for years. Talk about “foreign policy chops” huh? And he is “openly gay” which is about as surprising as water being wet.
Journalists. What a self centered life they lead. Is there anything they don’t know? Thank you for the retch alert.
I hope everyone recognizes that by attacking Syria, in the eyes of the world, and in eyes of most US citizens, Obama has committed an act of war in the name of the US.
The act of war will be the headline, and the secondary headline will be the WMD usage by Assad.
Nothing serious or of any importance is going on. Obama refused to talk with Putin and now is out having fun playing golf. “Don’t worry. Be happy “.
Many times I don’t have room for one. Headlines seem to be getting longer and longer since I started posting threads. I still hear about it from posters, even though my hands are tied.
This is true of ANY and EVERY military campaign.
But when the military leader of the Joint Chiefs of Staff sits before Congress and essentially says "I dunno shiite", that should give all of us reason for pause.
>Should she be weighing in on Syria more decisively and expansively?<
She is going to run for POTUS, so why should she commit herself to any side?
Did Obama show his cards when he ran for POTUS? Does he do it now? Does any community organizer have an opinion?
Babble, babble, babble.
A first for me; I hope they fail. And a third finger salute to the Saudi's.
Actually not a bad piece reflecting on the cheap state of American mainstream journalism, if you ignore his snide remarks about Palin and Trump, etc, but it wanders too much.
If he were a really serious journalist (like moi), he would be asking how did Syria get to the state that it is in vis-a-vis Obama’s kissing Assad’s ass via covert contacts since at least 2009.
One would ask about Obama’s semi-official advisor/envoy to Assad, Robert Malley, son of Soviet operative Simon Malley (one of the founders of a pro-Soviet “Communist Party of Egypt” in 1948, and thrown out of France, along with his whole family, by the French later in the 1970’s or 80’s as security risks).
What kind of covert messages of accomodation did Obama give Assad and in return for what?
Serious journalists actually ask serious questions but blogger Bruni is more like Andrea Mitchell and Leslie Nielson (”Shirley you can’t be Syrious” - “Don’t call me Shirley”) in his blog which bounces all over the page.
The real question to be asked here is why has Obama been so incompetent, wishy-washy, and cowardly (after pretending to act like a Hadrian’s Wall in the Middle East re the use of poisonous gases)?
Who are his Middle Eastern advisors,what are their professional qualifications, and how many of them have actually served in the Middle East, speak and read Arabic, and know something about subversion, the Islamic Caliphate concept, the Moslem Brotherhood, and the ethnic/religious divisions that are so important in the scheme of things.
Also, do they know anything about communism and its’ parallel goals for world domination. The fact that both Russia and Red China are getting more involved in the Middle East mean something but what? I think I know but I want to hear it from Obama’s “advisors”.
Bruni should also be asking about the quality of our intelligence/services in the Middle East? After the total disaster at Benghazi, you would think that a purge of Brennan, Clapper, Dempsey, etc. would have happened.
Also, has Obama and his intelligence group asked the Israelis for their imput since they just happen to live in the neighbor and have operatives inside each of the Arab/Moslem nations.
Poking fun at Sara Palin or Boehner, or Pelosi is “cute”, but it doesn’t get down to the real “nitty gritty” of what the hell is going on over there, why has Obama so screwed it up from day-one (his Cairo speech and the Arab Spring, etc), and what is he going to do about it (if anything)?
As for me, I’m more of an old Vietnam hand, and the one thing I learned there and back here as a journalist/historian, is that we usually are weakest in our intelligence operations (and lack thereof), usually underestimate our enemies, and fail to take “total action” against them when the time is right.
Also, we have a bad habit of leaving our allies in the lurch. With Obama, it is more like we are throwing them out of the lifeboats to swim on their own in shark-infested seas.
I hope that the “good guys” (whoever they are) in Syria win, but as has happened elsewhere, the “bad guys” are fanatical enough, have enough recruits who are armed, trained, and combat experienced/terrorism-experienced, and are facing both Russian/Red Chinese arms support networks to Assad and the Islamic jihadists at the some time.
For a historical precedence, look at what the Red Chinese communists (aided by Moscow intelligence if not actual arms shipments), did to the National forces (Kuomintang) when Chiang tried to unite China, fight the Japanese invaders, and fight communist subversion and guerrilla warfare all at the same time.
The same of the West’s betrayal of the national Chetniks of Mikhailovich in Yugoslavia during WW2. We believed the communist propaganda of Communist OSS agents and fools like flier George McGovern that the Chetniks were cooperating with the Germans/Utashi, etc. in stead of exactly the opposite.
That is why Yugoslavia became a Soviet satellite with a still dependable communist Tito to back them up on the world stage instead of being a western ally. Lies, more lies and damned lies!
Since Obama combines both communism and Islam in his life’s learnings and living, as well as in Chicago politics, it is impossible to believe he will do anything right to strenghten America in the world. His fiascoes so far in Libya, Egypt and now Syria are good indicators that he will
not succeed in bringing about any positive results since he has no interest in making America into anything other than a 2nd rate power and third-world economic eunuch on the world stage.
If Obama can be summed up in a few words/names, they would be “David Cantor (Soviet operative and mentor of David Axelrod); Frank Marshall Davis, old CPUSA operative and family friend; Rev. Wright, “a little of this (Moslem), a little of that “black reparationist theologist”; Anita Dunn - Mao was one of the two great philosophers she admired - but since when did killing 80,000,000 people qualify one as a philosopher? Valerie Jarrett - her whole background is a mystery but you can paint a lot of it “red”; Robert Malley (was he too a communist asset like his father, or was he something else we don’t know about?); Dr. Quentin Young (CPUSA leader in “universal healthcare” and personal physicians of Obama); and Bill Ayers, the avowed communist terrorist, who is married to an avowed communist terrorist (Weathermen), and who is so full of hate for America that it oozes from his pores 24/7. This is a man who Obama worked with in Chicago on foundations but claimed he barely knew him in the “hood”, yet is major political career move started in Ayers house.
His personality is a combination of extreme narcissism, an ego the size of Texas, an superior attitude about his knowledge (lack thereof) of the law (he was not a professor), a belief in a marxist form of government (the Utopian we-know better-than-you-peasants syndrome), and a complete lack of knowledge about the real world (partially deliberate ignorance, partially out of laziness to learn).
In other words, Obama is a far-left marxist with a strong sympathy to Islam, is an incompetent lawyer and leader, is totally incapable of hiring level-headed people to help him lead, is an extreme Machiavellian practionner and is a legend in his own mind.
He is an extremely dangerous person for America and the world.
I’ve wandered around, a little like Bruni, because I wanted to duplicate his way of writing, but I hope that I provided some information about Obama that should have been written by so-called journalists years ago before Obama ran for the Senate or the presidency.
Hey Bruni, where were you since 2004 or 2008? Obviously not practicing real investigative journalism or you would never had had to write this blog today because you would have uncovered the truth about Obama a long time ago.
Back to school and Journalism 101!
The author wants no backlash against his precious buttock obama. He deliberately refrains from mentioning brak at all in this piece about the Syria debacle, which has brak’s fingerprints all over it.
Why are the Libs so naive when it comes to Obamas war plans.
So we pivot to Hillary Clinton. Were always pivoting to Hillary Clinton. Should she be weighing in on Syria more decisively and expansively? Or does the fact that she authorized the war in Iraq compel restraint and a gentler tone this time around? Whats too gentle, and whats just right? So goes one strand of commentary, and to follow it is to behold a perverse conflation of foreign policy and the Goldilocks fable.Where was the Slimes when Hitlery pulled her "what difference does it make" horsesh--? Pivot on this, Slimes!