There’s a lot of truth to what you’re saying...but. Do you recall how gung ho liberals were for military action against Bashir in Syria? I remember them salivating once he crossed Obama’s ‘red line’ & gassed his own people. [Or so I understand, though I also have read comments indicating that it wasn’t Assad who did that. I’m afraid I haven’t followed it as closely as some.]
Anyway, all of a sudden the Left got hot & bothered about a dictator torturing & killing his own people. Usually they act as if—just as you said—they *like* that kind of thing. But in Bashir’s case they wanted Obama to be Mr. Tough Guy & give Bashir a good thumping.
So what do you make of that? Was it the fact that they thought Obama was serious about the ‘red line’, & they figured they’d better play up the torture, suffering & death to give O cover for military action? Or if not, what was going on? There was undisguised dismay on the Left, of all places, when Obama weaseled out of his threat & tossed the ball into Putin’s court. Obama really let down the side on that one. What’s your take?
Saw no response from the real left wanting Assad taken down. You are talking about the person who Nancy Pelosi visited on her own. Shook his hand and all. The DINO left or oligarchy leftists may have wanted Assad taken down, just to support the oligarchy. But in the end, Obama backed away from air strikes on Assad. He was hamstrung by the real left into just using covert actions funding rebels. Bombing Assad is a dangerous game with all his WMD facilities. Just look at what all those WMD’s we bombed in Iraq did. Ooops. The CIA tried to cover all that up now, didn’t they. No WMD in Iraq was the false claim used to cover up the devastation our bombing of WMD sites had done in Iraq. And the foolish left fell for it, along with the BDS right.