Posted on 10/13/2016 10:42:24 AM PDT by grumpygresh
The question is whether it was also "bolster" al-Qaeda linked jihadists whom the US has been supporting for the past several months as a result of the perverse merger of "moderate" rebel forces in Syria.
(Excerpt) Read more at zerohedge.com ...
If he takes military action in Syria, Hillary is in big trouble!
How about no?
He’ll decide in needs looking in to.
How about the BIGGEST MOTHER ####ING NO EVER!!!!!
With 99 days left, just go play golf.
I trust ZH just slightly more than I trust O
which is to say, ZH occasionally does publish some interesting articles but ZH has such severe biases that I’ve nearly stopped reading it
gotta be VERY careful reading ZH, there are some very peculiar elements writing in it
I tend to side with the Syrian government. I choose secular over radical muslim every time.
The Academic Socialists in charge are not just going to go away quietly, and meekly march into prison for their crimes.
NO WHERE in history have Socialists simply given up power without violence, once they have it.
If it takes WAR WITH RUSSIA to keep them in power, then WAR WITH RUSSIA it will be. After all, it will not be them and theirs endangered, they all have nice big bunkers to ride it out in.
He is a wimp - No worries. How did the Red-Line work out?
If he starts something and gets some F18s shot down and Pilots as POWs on TV, what is left of his precious ‘legacy’ is toast.
I guess it is about time I put up the info I have on Obama.
What do you think, Lucy?
I guess it is about time I put up the info I have on Obama.
What do you think, Lucy?
Be sure to tell Syria when you will attack...
He’ll decide in needs looking in to.
since any more “military action” in Syria would almost certainly lead us directly into WW3,
is it fair to ask Congress to prevent the IslamoNazi Infiltrator in Chief from plunging us into another (BIG!!!) war? Or will Congress just be/go on vacation or?
A sharper military conflict in Syria will not be WW-3, that would have to be defined as full global engagement of the USA and NATO allies with some power capable of the projection of global force. To a limited extent we have that already with militant Islam which means, technically we have a sort of shadow WW-3 with ISIS plus whoever supports ISIS. If that includes assets of the US government then I guess we have a shadow WW-3 covering for a nearly unambiguous civil war (except that no defined entities have declared that they are fighting that civil war).
It’s all a murky situation.
I can’t see Russia risking massive destruction by upping the ante on Syria, but anything’s possible here. You could have a third world war with only limited nuclear exchanges that were probing the will of the adversary. At whatever point that became an all-out nuclear exchange, civil liberties would become a meaningless concept, it would be every man and woman (family) for themselves very quickly.
The question be will ask himself is :will the Jihad help his Islamic brothers to spread Islam around the world?
Obama is shooting for another Nobel Prize before he leaves office!
I am getting frigging nervous. I hope they are keeping that idiot far away from the “football”.
What is our pressing national interest in Yemen that we want to fight there?
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.