Posted on 06/21/2016 12:51:52 PM PDT by Lorianne
Late Thursday evening, the Wall Street Journal reported, 51 State Department officials signed a statement condemning U.S. policy in Syria in which they repeatedly call for “targeted military strikes against the Damascus government and urging regime change as the only way to defeat Islamic State.”
“In other words,” as Zero Hedge summarized, “over 50 top ‘diplomats’ are urging to eliminate [Syrian Pres. Bashar al] Assad in order to ‘defeat ISIS’, the same ISIS which top US ‘diplomats’ had unleashed previously in order to … eliminate Assad.”
This gordian knot created by United States foreign policy — and intensified by that same policy — means not only could war with Syria be on the horizon, but if that happens, the U.S. could be facing a far more serious threat.
While discontented officials used what’s known as the “Dissent Channel” — “an official forum that allows employees to express opposing views,” State Department spokesman John Kirby explained in the WSJ — Saudi government officials employed more direct means to press their interests with the U.S. in Syria.
excerpted
I didn’t get this and still don’t. How is it attacking Assad is going to defeat ISIS?
So...
1. We let this guy into our country although there are many who are against letting in such people.
2. He’s put on the FBI watch list.
3. Disney reports him as being suspicious.
3. The gun dealer reports him as being suspicious.
4. He declares allegiance to ISIS.
And it’s the fault of some dictator who’s been at war with ISIS?
He was born here to parents who never assimilated. He was raised to hate.
Fanning the flames of war in the Middle East and making trouble all around Israel.
Sounds almost prophetic........
This is a gov’t that is dangerously out of control following NWO agendas and not those of our national interest.They will provoke a war with Russia.
It isn’t. It will only empower ISIS to virtually have no opposition. With Assad gone, the Russians will leave, Turkey will arm ISIS and the US will end it’s airstrikes. And it becomes even worse of a clustermuck than it ever was.
Ha! I thought you were talking about someone else. Not kidding. Seriously, but of course, it fits perfectly.
Hmmm, now who could I have thought you were mentioning?
This sounds like a push to turn all of Syria over to ISIS.
“How is it attacking Assad is going to defeat ISIS?”
It will only succeed in conjunction with Americans giving up their guns. The road to the defeat of ISIS will be paved when bitter clingers (Americans, not ISIS) give up their guns.
Hahaha. If the shoe fits ...
There are a lot who fit. Ugh
The Russians will never leave and will go all out to keep Assad where he is.
I didn’t get this and still don’t. How is it attacking Assad is going to defeat ISIS?
—
It would only help ISIS. I am sure Valerie Jarrett and Obama have their own personal reasons for wanting to invade Syria.
And I say send the sorry ass 51 State Department officials that want to attack Syria there to do it themselves.
Personally, I would rather Assad stay in power. He sure beats the options right now.
The Orlando shooter was born in the USA. We let in his parents way back in the 1980s
The only way to make sense of this may be to consider almost everything Zero has done benefits Shia or radical Sunni. The Sauds have bought the State Dept. types, perhaps and the impediment to the Syrian pipeline to the Med is Assad. So the Sauds want Assad gone and want us to do it for them. Zero ain’t eager to do it but can’t say no so we get this crazy war that ain’t war against Assad. The Sauds don’t care about ISIS because a number of these guys are Wahabists. So Zero doesn’t care much about ISIS. This seems to be the only way the behavior of these players makes sense. But to defeat ISIS by Qadaffiing Assad is like a geopolitical Rubic’s cube. There may be a way to do it but in a universe of infinite possibilities there can’t be more than one.
You need to apply liberal logic, and then it still doesn’t make sense. Either that or I am incapable of actually thinking like a liberal.
Your explanation makes sense.
LOL. Libtard thinking is like jumbo shrimp. The words just don’t make sense when juxtaposed.
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.