Whoever he does gas, it will have Pope Francis's blessing. After all they share the same religion.
Posted on 04/07/2017 2:36:40 PM PDT by Kaslin
U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Nikki Haley forced Bolivia to "defend the atrocities of the Syrian regime" in "full public view" on Friday, after the country's ambassador requested a closed session to discuss President Trump's strikes in Syria.
Trump ordered the missile strikes in response to a chemical weapons attack by Syrian President Bashar Assad Tuesday which killed dozens in northern Syria.
Haley revealed the Bolivian ambassador's request for a private emergency session of the U.N. Security Council in a written statement Friday morning.
She countered: "The United States, as president of the Council this month, decided the session would be held in the open. Any country that chooses to defend the atrocities of the Syrian regime will have to do so in full public view, for all the world to hear.”
At the session, Haley stood by the U.S. actions, and said that when the international community fails to act, it is up to individual states to act themselves.
”The moral state of the Assad regime could no longer go unanswered. His crimes against humanity could no longer be met with empty words. It was time to say enough. But not only say it, it was time to act,” she said.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
How is that decided?
Is the Ummah innocent?
She’s a freaking badass. And this is another huge FU to those that thought she was unqualified or in over her head. Could you just see Samantha Power in that job right now?
She did great on that one. About time they know not all of our women are like that Samantha Powers.. Nikki gets applause from me on that one.
Too true, unfortunately. Too true.
I love the job this lady is doing.
Is she going to mention atrocities in Saudi Arabia, Yemen, or most of Africa and all the Muslim world? No? I mean, if the US is going to right all the wrongs in this world, why stop with just Syria?
The million dollar question is, how does this benefit the US?
It's possible Venezuela was seeking to support Assad, perhaps even to "defend atrocities", but I'll guess it's more like the Venezuelans wanted to criticize Trump, instead.
Which means Haley possibly got away with misrepresenting an opponents viewpoint.
If so, her doing so would be ---not exactly intellectually honest.
The Venezuelans however, are not due any deference on that score. They are far from being 'honest' about much of anything involving the United States.
Gamesmanship at the UN.
The world would like to blame the U.S. for (ALL) of that too (like they're all just innocent little babies, picked on by the world's biggest bully ---who sends about half of them foreign aid dollars) but just maybe that will either; end, at least somewhat abate, or else the U.S. will start playing by their rules, the rules they use to govern their own behavior, and words?
There are more than a few who should think long and hard about whether they'd want the U.S. to be just like themselves ---when it comes to how they hold their mouths when speaking out loud, at the so-called 'United Nations'...
Assad who has once again used chemical weapons against his own people?
That's a good question but it doesn't justify the leaving of Assad in his position.............
You would think that the Bolivians would know better since they are in the middle of a diplomacy campaign to regain a seacoast between Peru and Chile.
I LOVED IT!
Well gee do you want me to get qualified for ballot position??
million dollar question?
I’ll answer for a short beer.
The world will know that use of chemical weapons will not be tolerated.
It’s on the written record, now it can be seen that there are consequences.
Nukes are a similar situation. I think some on this site would give Iran the bombs.
A supporter of Trump? Hell, she’s working her ass of for the guy?I prefer to think it's for us.
Some "Trump supporters" care about "the flag"...The rest of us think it's just a meaningless frigg'n flag.
If some (former?) Trump supporters want to fly "the flag" at their house/business, have at it.
Whoever he does gas, it will have Pope Francis's blessing. After all they share the same religion.
It's not about justifying "leaving him in his position". It is about what comes after Assad is driven out.
Believe it or not, it could be worse. Just look at some of the people fighting what's left of Syrian government armed forces. ISIS, for one. Much of the rest would fold like cheap suits to be rolled up in Persian rugs, resulting in Iranian influence becoming even more solidified.
Or what? Would they have Saudi benefactors (plus some fro Qatar, possibly Oman and the UAE)? The Russians would still be trying to get their fingers in the works. It could drive them to make further 'more' nice with Turkey (even though, in the deepest recesses of their minds, the Russians are dying for a chance to take Istanbul Constantinople).
Volatile situation(s) all around. Jared Kushner is a bit out of his league, I'd say.
Our wolfish "let's fight" Generals know how to fight. That's their job. They'd just as soon do what they know how to do, rather than sit around twiddling their thumbs. That can be a good thing, and it can be bad thing. Taking advice directly from Generals -- instead of asking them -- "what if?" and "could it be done>" can be approach tangled up, politically difficult challenges ---backwards.
He that chooses to live by gunboat diplomacy can die a hundred different ways, in the long run. His own people can be made to pay the price, too (and that's after his own troops pay with their lives, and having made others pay-pay-pay, too).
Whoever assumes power in Syria -- from U.S. perspectives -- better have some measure of approval of Israelis, and Saudis? I'm not the first one to take notice of that seemingly odd paring.
Also, lest we forget -- do not ever forget, the Iranians are anything but stupid. They may be a bit crazy, BUT they can read the tea leaves (and opium poppies, and non-state terrorists actors --some who have their support) as good or better than anyone in the Middle East.
The Kurds will still want a piece of Syria. And part of Northern Iraq. The Turks know the Kurds would want a big piece of Turkey. Erdogan would screw over his own mother with a splintery broomstick before he'd allow that to happen. Kurd's won't get any of the small part of Iran they desire, not without becoming Iranian puppet to far more extent than whatever they would be granted limited administration over present day slivers of far-Northwestern Iran -- that is, if the Iranians gave Kurds anything. Yet there they are, kind-of right in the middle of everything (that is not Israel).
Partition of Iraq too? Split off the Western Provinces, those ending up aligned with House of Saud and the Hashemites? (The better to keep the rug merchants at bay) Is that part of the plan? How long would that last? It all sounds like dirty pool, to me. Thank God I'm not a Kurd, or was born a Christian in Northern Iraq, or Syria. I'm sure I couldn't figure it all out, other than laying low, or fighting whatever was in front of of my nose, by turns. But who the hell could? It's a mass of confusion, deceit and (MORE than three-sided) bloody war.
That globalist language again... What exactly is "international community"? What civilization is that to stufy? There is none in it. Also, why would nationalism come as a last resort if allies buckle? How about securing ourselves first nationally and then stand up to this international mafia threat? This is why I do not like the feminine in politicis as we are facing thugs from generations.
Whoever he does gas, he'll have Pope Francis's blessing. After all they share the same religion.
And to do it while one of our adversaries China was visiting for dinner
Perfect example of a professional politician. We don’t need those dopes to have any more influence than they already have.
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.