General Obama wants to spike another football.
Posted on 08/31/2013 10:39:10 AM PDT by neverdem
Edited on 08/31/2013 10:42:43 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
If our attitude is that Obama screwed up, but that now the least-screwed-up remedy is to attack Syria, then we are indeed in bad shape.
Of the bad and worse alternatives, the worse is attacking without specifying our aims, means, and desired results. Yet to do so would convince Obama to drop the idea.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
Hubris of Obama and he supports the Brotherhood. Outside of that.... can’t think of a point unless you consider the epic ineptitude of this administration when it comes to foreign policy.
He’s come a long way from his Cairo speech hasn’t he?
Where is Waldo Boehner? Why hasn’t Waldo conducted a press conference and slowed this nonsense down?
Where in the world is Waldo Boehner?
Release the evidence to the public.
Was this gas military grade or home cooked?
Have the rebels stolen the gas and set it off accidentally or intentionally?
Did Syria’s shelling accidentally set off stolen gas?
Where is the evidence?
Libya is a model for nothing. Leading from behind took out a monster in rehab and gave us Islamists instead, with the logical fruition being the mess in Benghazi.Benghazi is not the fruition of failed US policy in Libya. It is merely the blossoming. The fruition threatens to be far, far worse.
Recounting US involvement in the Middle East, Hanson notes:
All sides’ hating us is difficult to achieve, but they do.Congratulations, Obama.
There is no point in attacking a two bit, nay, penniless dictator.
We have absolutely no advantage in an aggressive action.
General Obama wants to spike another football.
The only point is 0bama’s sharp middle finger.
Absolutely right! Let them kill each other. Maybe after the King Obama supported Brotherhood and they take over, then wipe Syria off the map.
An attack on Syria would be the action of the perfumed prince that is this kenyan.
It’s a DEMOCRAT going to War....big difference.
Zactly!
Entanglements concerning the “red line” reveal a pervasive misunderstanding of war and diplomacy as irreconcilable alternatives. For this Administration military action would be a bewildering, tragic, accidental consequence of hideous attacks enabled by their failed diplomacy.
To manage this contentious environment, Obama brought his newly minted Nobel Peace Prize. He and the nominating committee considered Basher al-Assad received a crushing blow as Obama lead Western leaders in saying he must go to benefit the Syrian people. Clearly, al-Assad should have realized the brilliance of Western conflict resolution and entertained peaceful dialogue.
However, al-Assad shares the perception of Greg Lewis in American Thinker, who portrayed Obama as a beta male. The alpha male dog approaches directly, while the beta male displays acquiescent gestures signaling submission. Lewis saw submissiveness in bowing to King Abdullah, sending John Kerry to Syria, and in generally ridiculing the U.S. whenever Obama appeared on an international stage.
When al-Assad’s actions beleaguered the feebleness he trampled in rising to power, liberal statesmen became befuddled by the intricacies and chicaneries of this unorthodox diplomacy. Al-Assad saw this confusion and ongoing debates narrowing national interests. He then asked why abandon strategies proven against behaviors disregarded in my rise to dominion?
Effective diplomacy would have been methodical, overt/covert, multi-faceted, and predictably lethal. Talks, conferences and economic measures would have been war without bloodshed invigorated by intelligence, propaganda, and espionage. Military action could then exact grievous forfeitures from ruling elites through the planned consequences of inattention to international isolation and internal dissention.
Did We Elect a Beta Male As President?
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/10/did_we_elect_a_beta_male_as_pr_1.html
The point of a Syrian intervention is to effect the same results we’ve seen in Egypt and Libya; we also saw the same non-intervention effect in Iran a couple of years ago.
Specifically, the goal - OBAMA’s GOAL - is to cause the installation of Muslim Brotherhood control into as many Muslim countries as possible. It’s no more complicated than that.
He, Obama, must intervene because Assad is kicking the Muslim Brotherhood’s rebel ass, and Obama cannot create his own world without it.
Amen.
How was the gas delivered? Some reports indicate it was by a ballistic missile. The U.S. has Patriot missile batteries (with radar) in Jordan (don't we have some in southern Turkey also?) and the Israelis have Iron Dome. Surely some of these assets would havd detected a missile launch if there was 1.
Just who were the civilian casualties in Damascus - neutral parties, allies of Assad, or allies of AQ and the MB?
It is also possible that missile that was fired hit a home cooking operation
or hit a stash of stolen gas, which set it off. The point is we don’t know.
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.
