We should go with that.
Should Assad be mean to Islamists, well that's a Good Thing.
On Syria? Probably..
Problem is, Obammy would have provided weapons to those who became IS.
That’s awkward considering Obama declare Assad must go a few years ago. Makes him look washy washy.
Opposition to ISIS doesn’t mean we have to support Assad. I don’t get this.
Assad was his trading partner. I doubt his support was idealogical.
Was Putin right about Syria?
of course he was
Ass-head, keeping his foot on the necks of islamofilth....same as Saddam, Kadoffy, the Shah, Mubarak etc.
They served a purpose, the president acted stupidly and took them out. Now we need some new ones.
The losers (at the hand of their own President or ISIS:
“Syria’s war has killed more than 162,000 people, and forced nearly half the population to flee their homes.”
The winner because people are dying anyway:
Al-Assad
http://www.businessinsider.com/assad-is-the-big-winner-of-the-iraq-crisis-2014-6
At some point we Americans have to accept the fact that Putin is not only MUCH SMARTER than our President when it comes to world events, he is also MUCH SMARTER than the Republicans...who either have NO CLUE as to what’s out there, or are scared to say anything because their consultants (most of them gay, by the way) tell them to avoid “becoming the issue”.
If we had listed to Russia the past 20 years, neither Bosnia, Kosovo, Libya, Egypt, or Syria would have had to deal with Islamic radicals, and the world would be a MUCH BETTER place.
Putin was absolutely right. We were about to become ISIS air force. However after Egypt and Libya, the idiocy of our middle east policy was so “transparent” the American (and British) people rose up and said “No freakin way”.
Yup. We've been cyber-screaming about it here since it began.
Would anyone have a problem with Assad gassing ISIS?