Posted on 12/08/2015 2:17:28 PM PST by Zeneta
You can watch the full 14 minute speech here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2RJhdQzd68
At ~5:35
"Fourth, with American leadership, the international community has begun to establish a process — and timeline — to pursue ceasefires and a political resolution to the Syrian war. Doing so will allow the Syrian people and every country, including our allies, but also countries like Russia, to focus on the common goal of destroying ISIL — a group that threatens us all."
Ceasefires and a political resolution?
WTF?
This is what 0bama said and I have yet to hear anyone ask the White House about this.
Putin and Assad are winning, Obama wants to save ISIS and Al Qaeda.
It means that the Russkies are kickin his raghead jihadi buddies asses.
OH THE HUGE MANATEE.
He is ‘pursuing the process’...which is bureaucrat speak to make it look like they are doing something when they are diddling around.
I get that and it’s not new.
Where is our media on this?
Our conservative pundits, at the very least?
At the same time, where are the leftist tools celebrating 0bama’s peacemaking skills?
I watched 0bama’s address and the ONLY new word that I heard was CEASEFIRE.
You’re right .. calling for a ceasefire says: “We give up”.
Consistent with the rest of Obama’s decisions .. he just caves to the enemy.
Of course, many of those rebel groups are allies of ISIS, so, as policy, it still doesn’t make any sense.
This is my point.
And nobody is asking them about this?
Shockingly, for 0bama, the US’s principal opponent in Syria is not ISIS, but the Assad regime. 0bama’s official policy is that Assad has to leave power before any negotiations can begin. Assad, the Russians and the Iranians think differently and Assad isn't going anywhere. 0bama wants some sort of settlement that would favor “moderate” Sunni jihadis. Besides being a pretty awful idea, it just ain't happening.
Only thing that makes sense to me.
Obama wants "his boys" to have time to regroup and gain strength.
Too many of his buds getting killed by the Ruskies and France.
He never reveals what he means, thus preserving the option to change his tune later on.
Too many of his buds getting killed by the Ruskies and France
Agreed.
But I want someone to ask this administration WHO they are negotiating a ceasefire with?
He wanted to oust Assad, but the American people would not go for it.
After Benghazi, there were serious questions about a series of governments destabilized in North Africa and the Middle East, to the obvious advantage of groups not aligned with American Interests.
People also noticed that while Assad will ruthlessly hold onto the reins of power, he was not murdering Christians, unlike the people who were taking over the destabilized governments.
The Egyptians threw Morsi out, despite his Muslim Brotherhood ties, because murdering Christians is bad for the tourist business.
The media have done a spectacular job of not reporting the salient points, likely to avoid presenting Hillary or Obama in a bad light and thus being denied access to the halls of power. Being there is an important status item for reporters, even to the point that they fail miserably in their jobs in order to retain that status.
Delivering an unbiased account of failure would cost them that status. Look at how Sharyl Atkisson (formerly CBS) was back-benched over Fast and Furious.
And all that said.
I want someone, anyone, to ask and demand this administration to answer a simple question.
"Who is this administration negotiating a ceasefire and political resolution with?"
And that is just the first question.
From John Kerry, a couple of weeks ago: The U.S. is engaged in a "three-pronged strategy," Kerry insisted, to degrade and defeat ISIS as well as "stabilize the region" and then push for a diplomatic solution to push Assad from power.
The next morning in the newspaper: "But in a remarkable break with the administration, Mrs. Clinton declared publicly what White House officials have privately said for months: that the fight in Syria is no longer about ousting President Bashar al-Assad. "We need people to turn against the common enemy of ISIS," she said. In saying so, Mrs. Clinton seemed to align her strategic approach more closely with those of Russia and Iran, who are backing the Assad government, though she criticized both nations in her speech Thursday.
Hope that helps.
Not sure if it helps.
But thanks.
Sunni vs. Shiite, and I’m not sure where 0bama stands.
Advancing war between the two seems clear to me.
Pulling the west into the war seems even more clear.
I gut says that he is more Shiite than Sunni.
At the end of the day I don’t think 0bama really cares about which version of Islam wins. As long as there is a war against the west and Christianity.
Recognizing the “Legitimacy” of either flavor of Islam and it’s place on the worlds stage is his goal.
Sorry, I should have added a /f after “hope that helps”. Being facetious, that is. Three leaders heading in three different directions.
Muzzies ask for ceasefires when they’re losing. Just ask the Israels.
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.