The devastation of Syria will be Obama’s legacy

theguardian.com ^ | September 22, 2016 | Natalie Nougayrède

[LouieFisk]

"As his presidency comes to a close, the fact is that Obama has little to show the world on Syria. With an estimated half a million deaths, the Middle East in flames and European allies destabilised by the impact of refugee flows, he will pass on a festering crisis to his successor."

[LouieFisk]

Legacy of devastation here and abroad.

[Ciexyz]

This is significant when the leftie newspapers slam Obama.

[BlessedBeGod]

This is significant when the leftie newspapers slam Obama.

I was just thinking the same thing -- The Guardian, of all places!

[SpaceBar]

Oh please. Tomorrow the Guardian will be performing felatio on her highness. If that’s phsically possible.

[boycott]

We can add Libya to his legacy. Libya was prosperous and is now a failed state. They were not a threat to the USA or anyone.

[silverleaf]

Not just SYRIA
Libya
Iraq and Afghanistan not looking too good either
UKraine
Yemen ( the invisible war being waged by our overload saudis)
How’s Turkey doing ? If only Assad was as tolerant and democratic as our buddy Erdogan?
Wait, then there’s europe -
And Mexico
North Korea? Reduced to being a good neighbir thanks to US strength in support of our allies.
Africa? Not a good time or place to be a Christian thanks to muslim thugs
Iran- on its way to being the next North Korea with nuclear proliferation tolerated or abetted by western money

[detective]

“The devastation of Syria will be Obama’s legacy”

The devastation of America will be Obama’s legacy.

The genocide against Christians in the middle east will be Obama’s legacy.

The destruction of the middle class in America will be Obama’s legacy.

The bankrupting of the most prosperous nation in the history of the world will be Obama’s legacy.

The destruction of the best health care system in the world will be Obama’s legacy.

[Alberta's Child]

What’s pathetic is that you could replace “Obama” with “George W. Bush” in your post, and almost every statement would still be correct.

[Psalm 144]

Nazis were hanged for less.

[Psalm 144]

What’s pathetic is that you could replace “Obama” with “George W. Bush” in your post, and almost every statement would still be correct.

##############

That’s elitist globalism for you.

[AC Beach Patrol]

One is the geopolitical realism line, which Barack Obama has chosen to follow largely because it fits with his reluctance to get involved in another war. The line is that US or western security interests are not at stake in an intractable, far-flung civil war that can more easily be contained than solved. The other is the moral imperative line that Power has repeatedly advocated within the administration. It refers to the doctrine of “responsibility to protect”, according to which a state’s sovereignty can be violated when a regime slaughters its own citizens.

No, this article doesn't slam Obama for starting the Syria civil war (which he and his CIA and DoS did), but not going in for full regime change and leaving Syria as an Islamist nest of vipers state. Thus Syria would no longer be a strategic threat to its neighbor but a major incubator for the continued Islamization and death of the West and Christianity.

[thirst4truth]

I have been thinking about what to do in these conflicts overseas. Bush went to war to remove a dictator that was violating UN resolutions, firing on our jets in the no fly zones we were monitoring and was supplying al quada with ied's among many other "war crimes". The left complains that it cost a trillion dollars and killed 5,000 service men and over 100,000 dead Iraqi's.

So now we have Syria where the dictator is violating UN resolutions, violating human rights by using chemical weapons against its citizens, the congress and POTUS says he has to go, but we did not go to remove him. Now four years later we have over a half a million dead Syrians, another million wanting to go to other countries which is causing world wide chaos and the dictator still in power, maybe we have not spent a trillion dollars yet?

So what is the better way to handle conflict in the middle east, we have tried the R way and the D way, both with results of mass death and destruction.