“In the fight against ISIL, we cannot rely on an Assad regime that terrorizes its own people—a regime that will never regain the legitimacy it has lost,”
Obama, pot calling the kettle black.
Domestic spying, IRS political targeting, calling people who expect the Constitution to be upheld an dlaws enforced “terrorists”.
There will be US forces, FSA forces,Syrian Army forces, ISIS forces and Russian forces all fighting in the same area.
Who is fighting for who, and against what?
It just can’t be any more simple. /s
Syrian Government: Go Ahead, Bomb Our Country!
“Bomb us, please.” Love it.
This administration has really screwed the pooch with everything they put their incompetent paws on - it’s hard to contemplate such stupidity. Unless it’s intentional.
Absolutely cannot trust anything out of Bammy’s purple lips nor his shady, incompetant admin.
How many Syrians do we have to kill to keep Syrians from killing other Syrians? Maybe we can find exactly the right faction to support:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gb_qHP7VaZE
Why is this all starting to sound familiar:
NVA forces, RVN forces, Hmong Tribesmen, US Forces, UN forces, Viet Cong forces, Chinese forces, Cambodian forces..........
Yup, we can handle it, BTDT
Hey Bath-house Barry, Assad’s regime isn’t the only regime that will never regain it’s legitimacy.
Interesting...
The Daily Kos says that indeed Syria is quite adamant that the US get permission.
The Syrian government and its close allies in Moscow and Tehran warned Barack Obama that an offensive against Islamic State (Isis) within Syria would violate international law yesterday, hours after the US president announced that he was authorising an open-ended campaign of air strikes against militants on both sides of the border with Iraq.
Syrian opposition groups welcomed Obama’s announcement and called for heavy weapons to fight the “terror” of Isis and Bashar al-Assad. Saudi Arabia and nine other Arab states pledged to back the US plan “as appropriate”.
Online tweets suggests that the Daily Kos is more correct than Slate.
Interesting to note though these to rags of socialism’s hate are seemingly at odds on their theology at the moment...lol
The “moderate” nature of the CORE of the “Syrian opposition” is a myth.
Yes their are “moderates” in the coalition, just as there were moderates in the coalition that Khomeini formed against the Shah of Iran and in the coalition in the “Arab Spring” that demanded a new government in Egypt.
At the core and in the majority are not “moderates” but the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood, whose HQ has always been the city of Homs and that is why the battles over that city were so heavy and so strategic.
The “moderates” are useful fronts for western consumption.
Once “victory” is achieved they will be gradually swept aside, as they were in Iran and as Morsi did in Egypt.
Assad is no saint by any means.
But OUR regime change agenda against Assad has been attached to a local Sunni Islamist putsch against Assad, funded and supported by the most fundamentalist Islamist countries among our so-called “friends” in the Middle East.
We should ONLY be going after ISIS in Syria, and that’s it.
If we do, we might be able to see a military stalemate between Assad and the “Syrian opposition” and by ONLY attacking ISIS, we might gain some leverage at convincing Assad and the “Syrian opposition” to sign a truce, keep a truce and plan on political talks about Syria’s future. If we don’t keep our actions in Syria held to ONLY attacking ISIS, Russia, Iran and Hezbolla will all up their aid to Assad and the war in Syria will totally engage and engulf all of Lebanon as well. The conflict will widen, and that will make for even more dysfunction in Syria and Lebanon and more opportunities for ISIS and Al Queda.