Posted on 07/03/2014 11:04:47 AM PDT by TigerClaws
Now that the U.S. government and the Syrian regime are both fighting ISIS in Iraq, the faltering U.S. drive to topple Assad is in even more peril.
There’s a battle raging inside the Obama administration about whether the United States ought to push away from its goal of toppling Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad and into a de facto alliance with the Damascus regime to fight ISIS and other Sunni extremists in the region.
(Excerpt) Read more at thedailybeast.com ...
How about Obama resign first then we’ll talk.
Obama administration , so much confusion ,so little time
Obama — Dither; Delay; Deny; Lie — repeat..............
Kinda what I was thinking. I know lots of folks(no debate)wondering about how soon the lyin’king should go. About 6 years ago as far as I’m concerned.
Soon, 0bama will bomb ISIS for Assad, and bomb Assad for ISIS. Or neither.
Seemed like “Assad must go” was the decided on conclusion back when Obama wanted us to be ISIS’s air force.
Quick. Someone run the tapes — the many, many tapes — of Obama talking about how evil Assad is and how he crossed a red line that makes him an unredeemable pariah. It may actually make sense to support Assad. But the incompetence of how this administration handled the situation is mind-boggling. If you have two evil scumbags fighting each other, you don’t vocally side with one or the other. You may switch back and forth. But you don’t destroy your credibility by loudly saying one must go and then siding with him.
Spot on analysis!
“Soon, 0bama will bomb ISIS for Assad, and bomb Assad for ISIS. Or neither.”
lol! That’s Obama in one of his incisive moments.
I don’t know which is worse. The vacillation of this Administration, or their decision to broadcast to the world their vacillation.
Trying to get rid of Assad is akin to getting rid of Saddam Hussein.
Were he still in charge of Iraq, he would’ve kicked ISIS’ a$$ — in fact, there would not have been an ISIS.
Each and every muzzie country needs a dictator or tyrant to keep these bearded barbarians in line.
And, as the Duelfer report concluded, he would be busy reconstiting his WMD.
I'm beginning to wonder if it wouldn't be better if the leaders just got out of the way and let the militaries of all of the countries getting involved get together and eliminate ISIS themselves. It worked in Egypt.
Who would you prefer to be in charge of the WMDs — ISIS or Saddam?
(It was never suggested that Saddam had his agents inside the US. Can you say the same about ISIS?)
The right scenario would hae been for Obama to support Maliki. Obama didn't talk to Malike ONCE since 2009. He watched Iraq crumble with gratification. He didn't want to move Iraq forward because he didn't want Bush to take the credit for bettering Iraq.
I bet someone has a raging clue as to which side we should be on:
Purportedly, Assad is living on a Russian naval vessel. And, his wife is drinking Martini’s in London. They don’t have any skin in the game and they will watch the entire country destroyed.
They never should have allowed Assad’s wife and kids safe haven.
You want to effect a strategy in Syria, first thing you do is hellicopter Assad’s family to a roof top in Damascus. Good luck!
Does it matter? They are all tyrants and the ones we install turn out to be worse than the ones we depose. How about we stop trying to remake the Middle East and let them go about the business of killing each other? We need to produce our own oil and gas and tell them to drop dead.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.