Replies

I would hope you would think about the long-term complications of a re-invigorated Russia in the Middle East with an impotent Untied States leaving the playing field. Despite Ron and Rand Paul’s arguments to the contrary, we have important national interests in the Middle East.

I spent a great deal of my adult life opposing the Russian’s quest for conquest and thought we had put it behind us post the fall of Communism. Now Obama has turned it all around—in a very bad way—in his JV league thinking of Realpolitik. This is not good for us—the US—in the long run.

First and foremost concern I have: Why does Putin need cutting edge anti-aircraft missile systems over Syria? ISIS has no Air Force...

However, both the USA and Israel do. Now, under Obama, Putin has nothing to worry about.

For the Israelis, Iran getting a nuclear bomb is unacceptable. Their Air Force is capable of taking out the Iranian facilities. But not if Russia is guaranteed to try shooting them down when the sortie out of Israel toward Iran, which means they’ll need routes over Syria. Russia has unequivocally allied itself to Iran.

So... I think the Russian ant-air defense is targeted at Israel. Do the Jews just wait until the Persians launch their missiles?

Obama has lead Israel on a path in which the Samson Option—nuclear launch against ALL of her enemies cities and capitals—is the only solution, even though it means death to all.

But Putin will have strong anti-ISIS competition post Obama if Trump gets in. If Russia’s real reason to be in Syria is to prop up Assad and protect Iran, than, yes, there will be conflict.