Justify Syria
- Thread starter delldude
- Start date
Ms Tree
Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2010
- Messages
- 9,731
- Reaction score
- 9,009
Funny how you ignore the folks who supported Bush going into Iraq "task from god" but who are dead fast against going into Syria. And others who were for interviening in Syria untill Obama said OK then they were against it and now they are for it "McCain".
OK, may be your myopic view is not so much funny as expected.
eolesen
Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2003
- Messages
- 15,958
- Reaction score
- 9,374
Maybe we've just evolved in our opinions...
In Iraq, there was some level of support -- public polling was in the 45-60% range before and after Powell's speech to the UN. There's no such support now. Internationally, there was also the series of UN resolutions which were ignored.
Where are the UN resolutions on Syria?...
The fact is that Obama's essentially standing alone on this, and was too dumb to realize that making threats he couldn't follow up on would have consequences.
And now he wants to shift the blame over to Congress?.........
Sorry, but the administration is the one who drew the red line in the sand.
Oh well.
This will go down as being one of the most biggest foreign policy bunglings ever. He's surpassed Jimmy Carter in terms of incompetence by a long shot, and proven himself to be far more naive than Neville Chamberlain was.
To be clear -- we have no business getting involved in domestic disputes on our own, no matter how horrific they are.
If the UN goes in, we have an obligation as a member. But the UN isn't supporting anything right now, right?
The minute he crosses the border into Turkey or Israel, there's justification for action. They're allies.
But this is still a domestic dispute. The underlying problem here isn't whether or not it's justified.
The problem is that King Barium didn't know what he was doing. Again.
Had Pharaoh just kept his mouth shut as he did in Egypt and Libya, perhaps the US wouldn't look quite so weak.
Then again, perhaps Pharaoh has managed to finally unite the world. Against the US, that is.
So much for thinking he could "repair the damage" caused by Bush, eh?
In Iraq, there was some level of support -- public polling was in the 45-60% range before and after Powell's speech to the UN. There's no such support now. Internationally, there was also the series of UN resolutions which were ignored.
Where are the UN resolutions on Syria?...
The fact is that Obama's essentially standing alone on this, and was too dumb to realize that making threats he couldn't follow up on would have consequences.
And now he wants to shift the blame over to Congress?.........
Sorry, but the administration is the one who drew the red line in the sand.
Oh well.
This will go down as being one of the most biggest foreign policy bunglings ever. He's surpassed Jimmy Carter in terms of incompetence by a long shot, and proven himself to be far more naive than Neville Chamberlain was.
To be clear -- we have no business getting involved in domestic disputes on our own, no matter how horrific they are.
If the UN goes in, we have an obligation as a member. But the UN isn't supporting anything right now, right?
The minute he crosses the border into Turkey or Israel, there's justification for action. They're allies.
But this is still a domestic dispute. The underlying problem here isn't whether or not it's justified.
The problem is that King Barium didn't know what he was doing. Again.
Had Pharaoh just kept his mouth shut as he did in Egypt and Libya, perhaps the US wouldn't look quite so weak.
Then again, perhaps Pharaoh has managed to finally unite the world. Against the US, that is.
So much for thinking he could "repair the damage" caused by Bush, eh?
Ms Tree
Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2010
- Messages
- 9,731
- Reaction score
- 9,009
Yep. There wss some support for Iraq. Why was that?
Yes Obama did screw up by drawing a line in the sand. Oh well. Biggests screw up? Hardly.
You are awafe how the UN security council works right?
Shift the blame? What planet are you from. This is Congress' s job. They have the autbority to declare war. The right was complaining that Obama would not consult Congress and now they are complaining that he is going to Congress. Geez. Make up your mind already.
I do agree that we have no business in Syria.....Egypt..... Libya.......Iraq.........Afghanistan.......
Yes Obama did screw up by drawing a line in the sand. Oh well. Biggests screw up? Hardly.
You are awafe how the UN security council works right?
Shift the blame? What planet are you from. This is Congress' s job. They have the autbority to declare war. The right was complaining that Obama would not consult Congress and now they are complaining that he is going to Congress. Geez. Make up your mind already.
I do agree that we have no business in Syria.....Egypt..... Libya.......Iraq.........Afghanistan.......
Fwiw... Palin on Egypt
IOW, this is the alternative we actually had,, coupled with McCain's eagerness to send US forces into any and every trouble spot based on nothing, and to arm and support known jihadists in Syria specifically. Just to be "doing something..." To show the US, of his generation, is still relevant.
If you can figure out what, if anything, she actually said, 'splain it...
"She did not offer specifics for how she would handle the crisis, saying only: “We need strength and sound mind there in the White House. We need to know what it is that America stands for so we know who it is that America will stand with.”
Here’s the full transcript of Palin’s remarks as released by CBN:
“Remember, President Reagan lived that mantra trust but verify. We want to be able to trust those who are screaming for democracy there in Egypt, that it is a true sincere desire for freedoms and the challenge that we have though, is how do we verify what it is that we are being told, what it is that the American public are being fed via media, via the protestors, via the government there in Egypt in order for us to really have some sound information to make wise decisions on what our position is. Trust but verify, and try to understand is what I would hope our leaders are engaged in right now. Who’s going to fill the void? Mubarak, he’s gone, one way or the other you know, he is not going to be the leader of Egypt, that that’s a given, so now the information needs to be gathered and understood as to who it will be that fills now the void in the government. Is it going to be the Muslim Brotherhood? We should not stand for that, or with that or by that. Any radical Islamists, no that is not who we should be supporting and standing by, so we need to find out who was behind all of the turmoil and the revolt and the protests so that good decisions can be made in terms of who we will stand by and support.”
(&hellip😉
“It’s a difficult situation, this is that 3am White House phone call and it seems for many of us trying to get that information from our leader in the White House it it seems that that call went right to um the answering machine. And nobody yet has, no body yet has explained to the American public what they know, and surely they know more than the rest of us know who it is who will be taking the place of Mubarak and I’m not real enthused about what it is that that’s being done on a national level and from DC in regards to understanding all the situation there in Egypt. And in these areas that are so volatile right now because obviously it’s not just Egypt but the other countries too where we are seeing uprisings, we know that now more than ever, we need strength and sound mind there in the White House. We need to know what it is that America stands for so we know who it is that America will stand with. And we do not have all that information yet.”
IOW, this is the alternative we actually had,, coupled with McCain's eagerness to send US forces into any and every trouble spot based on nothing, and to arm and support known jihadists in Syria specifically. Just to be "doing something..." To show the US, of his generation, is still relevant.
If you can figure out what, if anything, she actually said, 'splain it...
"She did not offer specifics for how she would handle the crisis, saying only: “We need strength and sound mind there in the White House. We need to know what it is that America stands for so we know who it is that America will stand with.”
Here’s the full transcript of Palin’s remarks as released by CBN:
“Remember, President Reagan lived that mantra trust but verify. We want to be able to trust those who are screaming for democracy there in Egypt, that it is a true sincere desire for freedoms and the challenge that we have though, is how do we verify what it is that we are being told, what it is that the American public are being fed via media, via the protestors, via the government there in Egypt in order for us to really have some sound information to make wise decisions on what our position is. Trust but verify, and try to understand is what I would hope our leaders are engaged in right now. Who’s going to fill the void? Mubarak, he’s gone, one way or the other you know, he is not going to be the leader of Egypt, that that’s a given, so now the information needs to be gathered and understood as to who it will be that fills now the void in the government. Is it going to be the Muslim Brotherhood? We should not stand for that, or with that or by that. Any radical Islamists, no that is not who we should be supporting and standing by, so we need to find out who was behind all of the turmoil and the revolt and the protests so that good decisions can be made in terms of who we will stand by and support.”
(&hellip😉
“It’s a difficult situation, this is that 3am White House phone call and it seems for many of us trying to get that information from our leader in the White House it it seems that that call went right to um the answering machine. And nobody yet has, no body yet has explained to the American public what they know, and surely they know more than the rest of us know who it is who will be taking the place of Mubarak and I’m not real enthused about what it is that that’s being done on a national level and from DC in regards to understanding all the situation there in Egypt. And in these areas that are so volatile right now because obviously it’s not just Egypt but the other countries too where we are seeing uprisings, we know that now more than ever, we need strength and sound mind there in the White House. We need to know what it is that America stands for so we know who it is that America will stand with. And we do not have all that information yet.”
Obama hasn't given any detailed specifics either, other than 'we're going to bomb you a little bit'....
The people demanded democracy in Egypt, Obama supported the Muslim Brotherhood.
The three Am phone call came in Benghazi and Obama was hiding under his desk.
You have comprehension issues?
Dog Wonder
Veteran
Does this mean you are done spanking your monkey over Benghazi?
Obama gets the high sign, those 400 manpads boosted in Benghazi and some of Mavericks pals yelling Allah Ahkbar will be all over the news......don't worry....be happy.
Coming to a mall or theatre near you:
http://www.theblaze....outhern-border/
Ms Tree
Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2010
- Messages
- 9,731
- Reaction score
- 9,009
Kerry did make a somewhat compelling argument. If Syria implodes and does not have a transition power set up the result could be a country with large stock piles of weapons and no governing structure. We would also have lots of groups of people in a fairly large country do as tbey see fit and that could spill out over their borders.
Ok
So I spend lunch here in beautiful downtown MKE reading the WSJ
(" I read his book..." - George C Scott )
Amidst the continual barbs at Obama, and their obvious bias, it seems that there is no good strategy for Syria. STFO is just as bad as wade right in. We do have national security interests in the region, if not in Syria's civil war. If we arm the rebels, we likely arm the most radical jihadists and Israel haters. If we do nothing, Assad continues being Iran's ally/puppet and Iran etal are "emboldened".
So... The best idea seems to be to appear to GAF, strengthen the rebels, but not too much, and degrade Assad, but not too much, and let them drag this out long enough to wear each other out. Then hope that by that time, something like an identifiable, moderate entity or coalition appears out of the ashes, that we can support, or at least tolerate.
Pretty messy, and not satisfying to the shoot from the hip git 'er done crowd, but it is the ME. It is by definition a mess.
To that end, there is no hurry to take action, and so waiting for congress to debate the issue is a positive overall, and coincidentally serves to effectively, if not actually legally, rein in the executive vis-a-vis unilateral military action, at least in cases where the threat to the US is debatable.
And some folks in Congress, both sides of the aisle, are going to have to take a stand, instead of just sniping at " the other guy", for a change.
It seems.
Not the dumbest move I've seen
So I spend lunch here in beautiful downtown MKE reading the WSJ
(" I read his book..." - George C Scott )
Amidst the continual barbs at Obama, and their obvious bias, it seems that there is no good strategy for Syria. STFO is just as bad as wade right in. We do have national security interests in the region, if not in Syria's civil war. If we arm the rebels, we likely arm the most radical jihadists and Israel haters. If we do nothing, Assad continues being Iran's ally/puppet and Iran etal are "emboldened".
So... The best idea seems to be to appear to GAF, strengthen the rebels, but not too much, and degrade Assad, but not too much, and let them drag this out long enough to wear each other out. Then hope that by that time, something like an identifiable, moderate entity or coalition appears out of the ashes, that we can support, or at least tolerate.
Pretty messy, and not satisfying to the shoot from the hip git 'er done crowd, but it is the ME. It is by definition a mess.
To that end, there is no hurry to take action, and so waiting for congress to debate the issue is a positive overall, and coincidentally serves to effectively, if not actually legally, rein in the executive vis-a-vis unilateral military action, at least in cases where the threat to the US is debatable.
And some folks in Congress, both sides of the aisle, are going to have to take a stand, instead of just sniping at " the other guy", for a change.
It seems.
Not the dumbest move I've seen
southwind
Veteran
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2008
- Messages
- 7,709
- Reaction score
- 3,928
FINALLY! We agree on something ! BaRack-O-Care will go down in history, as his biggest screw up !
Meanwhile all the 'baaad' stuff is/has been hidden in residents homes, churches, old peoples homes, hospitals.
Foreign Policy Amateur Hour
Nice shot Obamammy.
KCFlyer
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2002
- Messages
- 11,520
- Reaction score
- 1,451
Sorry, but 'no governing structure' seems to desribe pretty much any middle east country. How will us bombing the #### out of Syria help with a "transition of power". From what....Hezbollah to Al Qaeda? They are killing each other. Let them. And they already have lots of groups of people who do what they want - it's Islam after all...different sects hate the other sects enough to want to kill them.
Ms Tree
Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2010
- Messages
- 9,731
- Reaction score
- 9,009
Work on your reading comprehension. I said it was not the biggest screw up.
