Posted on 09/10/2013 3:06:04 AM PDT by nikos1121
The Russians are calling Obama’s bluff for all the world to see. Within seconds Putin agrees to take the chemical weapons out of the equation, which lends credence to what you posted.
Now Obama is stymied. He's in a dilemma He can't bomb if the chemical weapons issue is resolved. IT never was about chemical weapons or the killing of innocents. WHo can be more innocent that helpless truck drivers, half naked soldiers, priest, nuns and countless Christians being killed? What troubles me is the thought of people like McCain and Graham. Are they in on this, but more so than Obama? Do the Saudis control them too? Bottom line...after this morning I am convinced that this is not about chemical weapons, but all about who controls energy in the ME.
Obama has managed to destroy the bonds between the US and many former allies. The results of this Presidency are that all that he claimed to desire in 2008 have all backfired on him, the nation and the world.
Anybody with half a brain could see this coming in 2008...
Re post 61. You are correct, sir.
Some, such as with the UK, were clearly purposeful. Some seem to have been lost for neglect and negligence, while he has teamed with his real allies in the world instead.
The US has several natural allies. Start with the anglosphere. Canada, Australia, the UK, and even New Zealand share a common language, a set of values, basic common law, and much more with the US. You have to go back 50 years and more to find worse relations between the US and these natural allies.
The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order.
Russia and America have a common foe in the clash with rising, conquering Islam. I believe Putin recognizes this. Obama (like, to some extent, Bush before him) choose to reject the reality of the clash and what is required to check the rise of Islam.
The so-called Arab Spring has been a great leap forward for one side in the clash. Perhaps both Putin and Obama understand this. One is OK with it. One is not.
It does not have to be an either/or proposition. It can be a both/and situation.
Yes, I agree. We have some very very smart people. I honestly thru the question out there cause I didn’t know.
Was listening to Fox & Friends, they sounded totally clueless. No one seems to question why Putin did this. They don’t see the simple fact that Putin called Obama’s bluff.
It’s not about chemical weapons. Never was. The framework of discussion here from all sides was very educational.
(gag) President for life---yup, that's his and his Chi/mob's pie-eyed scheme.
I guess they'll have to change their plans (cackle).
Yes, and I agree with you about facing the Islamic threat. We should be on the same side with Russia on this.
Funny. By threatening Syria, Russia has rearmed Assad to the teeth. He is now more secure than before this started, and he has Obama to thank for this.
No matter how you look at this, Obama bundled the whole thing from the start.
I think it was going to be a cake walk for him esp if he had support of the Brits and Germans. Take out Assad’s airport and airforce. Take out his communications and some of his air defense capapbilities.
But something very strange happened, almost like God decided to intervene, and the Brits back off, and then the Germans, and I’m sure Putin then came forth and made it clear to Obama that he would defend Syria.
Almost over night Obama reverses himself and decides to go to Congress. I’m sure he had one sleepless night. Kerry, Carney all of them scramble to say they were informed when obviously they were not.
Obama is a coward, he will not bomb anyone, now less so. Putin owns him.
Still funny to me that NO ONE IN THE MEDIA is questioning Putin’s move like we are here.
Obama will speak to America tonight on national TV and will declare ‘MISSION ACCOMPLISHED.’
The Norwegian Nobel Committee Has Decided to award a second Peace Prize to Obama.
Syria’s ‘Surrender’ Ends Bizarre White House Scheme
David Francis
The Fiscal Times
September 10, 2013
The debate over striking Syria for Bashar al-Assad’s alleged use of chemical weapons took a bizarre turn yesterday, with a possible diplomatic breakthrough that either represents shrewd statecraft or desperation.
The president and his administration have failed to articulate a coherent strategy for confronting Assad and selling the plan to attack him to the public and lawmakers. The White House’s mishandling of Syria exposes policy fault lines and leadership shortcomings, even if they accomplished their goal in the end. Here’s how it all went down:
Assad can prevail over the “rebels” — in fact, foreign to Syria Al Qaeda invaders, — without any chemical weapons. It was not in the Syrian government’s interest to use the chemical weapons; it is certainly a provocation designed to get America involved on the side of the bandits.
Putin simply did what is reasonable for the Russian national interest: to keep the Russian waning credibility up, humiliate Obama, show that Russia stands by its allies, and keep Syria as a guarantor, weak as it is, of Russian presence in the Mediterranean.
It just so happens that from time to time, Russian policies align with American Conservatism better than international Marxism and its American lackeys.
Putin: Check mate
Putin left Bozo holding the bag and Kerry looking incredibly small.
Pray America is Waking Up
You are exactly right. Of course it’s about regime change and not about chemical weapons. That’s the three card monty trick. I had come to this conclusion even before the Putin gambit based on the fact that you cite later in your very fine post. If the goal were, in fact, chemical weapons, then lobbing a few cruise missiles after ample time has passed to allow the weapons to be moved, hidden or buried accomplishes exactly nothing. Well, not quite nothing, it purports to enhance the “manliness” of the boy president. But either way, even before the Putin gambit, there was enough there to see that a fast one was being pulled.
I suspect the original plan was to use this as a Tonkin Gulf incident and morph slowly into regime change a la Libya. The evidence was there before, you saw it, I saw it, Putin saw it, and now the bluff has been called.
Nice post.
Great post - my only comment would be that not to long ago there was a coup d’etat in Qatar with I think the son deposing the father. My gut tells me that this coup must be part of the overall narrative but I can’t find it being mentioned in most of these discussions.
I honestly didn’t have it figured out. Some really great posts figured things out. I wish more people could read this entire postings and follow the discussion. Then if someone in the media can ask the tough questions we can see what the response would be.
I’m sure there are more things involved than just who controls ME energy, but one thing is clear. If you’re trying to get world support for toppling Assad what would be more effective in bringing the various factions together and esp the MSM?
A. The beheading of Priests, killing of nuns and burning of Christian Churches.
B. Chemical weapons allegely being used by Assad against Women and Children.
C. Roadside killing of soldiers
The military coup in 2012 failed.
In June of this year: http://aangirfan.blogspot.com/2013/06/coup-in-qatar.html
Qatar will pursue its ‘independent behaviour’ - new emir
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/06/26/uk-qatar-emir-idUKBRE95O06220130626
David Roberts, deputy director of the Royal United Services Institute based in Doha, said the speech had a “down to business tone, indicating that the country has work to and he is eager to get on with it”.
“It strongly suggested that Qatar will continue on its path with regard to foreign policy; there was no attempt to backtrack or rein that in. There was certainly no equivocation,” he said.
“Putin has been, after all, an incredibly cruel bully over his energy empire. I can supply you with tons of links about this...”
Post your links.
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.