You don't know whether to shit or go blind when it comes to Obama. Yeah...what a good idea: let's get involved in a civil war in Syria. That shit always works out well for us, doesn't it? Especially when it's a civil war motivated by eons-old religious rivalries. I'm sure all the Islamic militants currently cutting off each others' heads in Syria would never have decided to wage jihad if we had supplied weapons and training to "the moderates" whoever the fuck they are. Where'd you get your crystal ball?
And, if we had gotten involved and Americans started getting killed, or the weapons we provided to "the moderates" fell into the wrong hands or if "the moderates" suddenly became the "extremist religious zealots" as they are wont to do in places like Syria and started using the weapons against us or our friends.....you'd be crying and bitching about how all of it was Obama's fault. Bullshit.
We need to stay out of the internal affairs of other countries, especially other countries in the middle east that are currently embroiled in a religion-based civil war. There is no upside to it. I would think even someone as obviously dense as you would be able to figure that out simply by having read the newspaper for the past ten years. And, not just the comics and the sports section you fucking knucklehead.
Originally Posted by timpage
Yeah, let's give Obama credit for his deft and brilliant handling of Syria. Ever since the civil war began almost 3 years ago, he has been receiving regular intelligence briefings. Early on he proclaimed “Assad must go” - without thinking through what the US would do if Assad stayed. Then he drew a “red line” against chemical weapons - without thinking through what the US would do if it was flouted. You want us to stay the fuck out of Syria? Well then, tell me what useful purpose was served by having a US President make those public statements. Obama is his own worst enemy. He is a rank amateur when it comes to diplomacy and he is completely out of his league in the Middle East. He doesn't think ahead more than one move at a time. Everyone else is playing chess while he plays checkers.
Now consider this - All of the downside risks and scenarios we hoped to avoid by NOT taking sides in Syria have come to pass. There are now 3 million+ refugees. Jordan, Lebanon and Iraq are being destabilized. al-qaeda has a new base of operations. Chemical weapons have been used to kill thousands of civilians and children. While we dither, Iran keeps pouring in weapons and advisers (overflying Iraq, where we have little influence since Obama neglected to negotiate a status of forces agreement with Maliki when our troops withdrew two years ago)...
How bad does the situation have to get before you are willing to question Odumbo's policy choices (or non-choices) in Syria?
And who said anything about Americans “getting killed” there? Between sending in the Marines and doing nothing, there is a huge range of options. Obama has watched Syria deteriorate for almost 3 years now. He dicked around and promised - but never delivered - aid to the moderate Free Syrian Army forces. Then he left the FSA hanging out to dry. You want to know why the moderates are losing out to the radical Islamists? Because we let a power vacuum develop and made it easy for the extremists to attract new recruits. They can just point to the FSA and say – see what happens when you rely on flaky US promises? Now who do you want to join – us or them?
Can you name a single country in the Middle East that holds the US in higher regard today than it did before Obama became President? Israel? Egypt? Saudi Arabia? We've managed to piss off all of them at once – no mean achievement. So much for the unBush approach to restoring our international prestige. Yeah, let's give Obama credit for his deft Middle East diplomacy.
