Skip to comments.Syria: Obama’s Own ‘Problem From Hell’
Posted on 05/05/2013 9:05:29 AM PDT by Kevin in California
The Syrian civil war exploded over the weekend, with mass murder and sectarian cleansing along the coast, Israeli airstrikes in Damascus, and confusion, frustration and paralysis in Washington to the point where the New York Times described President Obama as trapped in a geopolitical box, his credibility at stake with frustratingly few good options.
That is appropriate. Obama is from H*ll. Like most Democrats.
The only problem The Won has with Syria is trying to make it look like he’s not in favor of the current situation.
Sounds like a good time to "just pack up and go home."
After all, no other President in history has had to face problems as difficult as those facing our Affirmative Action President.
Too bad the world isn't set up to hand him Affirmative Action Problems.
I don’t think any of us want another war much less one with these bastards..As for Obama he is a sissy and we know that..It is taking Israel to keep us all safe because the idiot and chief is such a coward..God help us if he ever wants us gone from the earth he has so many savage friends we could be wiped out very fast..
And yet, this isn’t a pass-the-popcorn moment.
Thanks Kevin in California.
Perfect comment! :’)
If the president doesn’t want to address the problems in Syria, the mainstream media will tune out to make sure he doesn’t look bad.
The only thing I am sure of is that obama won’t be backing any side other than the muslim brotherhood.
How’s that “line in the sand” working out?
This is a “Line of Death”, you cross it, you die.
Ok...you cross this line, you die.
Cross this line, you die.
This line you, die.
Alright, that’s it, you come knocking on my door, I’m not coming out...nyaah!
Where is the red line now obozo? Guess it got covered up by all the camel dung he’s been throwing around lately.
He better o outside, hold up his finger and see which way the wind is blowing. From Benghaz you say? Uh Oh!
Obama lies every time he speaks. Why is this any different?
To quote Hillary ....
0bama’s credibility is not really an issue, as I see it, that ship has sailed. There is no worse reason in the universe to become involved in Syria. We have no business there and nothing to gain from it. Let them fight it out.
“If the president doesnt want to address the problems in Syria, the mainstream media will tune out to make sure he doesnt look bad.”
I notice it’s not on Google’s Top Stories.
Wow. O is having to deal with muslim dictatorships. This is way harder than anything GW had to deal with.
Except GW did have to deal with it, except he didn’t have the advantage of a loyal opposition and he certainly never had the advantage of a supportive media.
Faced with the very same thing, he made a decision to take down the loudest and most aggressive of a crowd of bullies. That made everything O is doing possible.
Only a leftist dipsh*t like Obama would see this as a problem.
Syria is in chaos with a Baathist dictator and Al Qaeda jihadis bashing each others brains out. And what is the problem with that?
Israel, who is totally capable of taking care of itself, is just cleaning up the mess of missiles and chemical weapons that can leak out. Its also using the opportunity to take Hezbollah (and therefore Iran) down a few notches.
If anything, the USA should be quietly supporting this opportunity.
The author didn't consider the best option - STAY THE HELL OUT. It's their problem.
Naturally, Boy Blunder's real brain, Valerie Jarrett, had him back the worst bad guys and now he cannot just vote “present’ and walk away without looking like a complete fool. [Well duh, Barry and Valerie.] So, POTUS dithers and dithers. The Israelis will do what seems to them in their best interests and Barry doesn't have a clue. Wait...I know...go do another 18 holes on the golf course or take a vacation or do a fundraiser. That's the answer...ignore the problem.
Oh...give Carney a chance to spin Monday:
For the Obama Administration, Syria is simply a “pre-contingent, oversea contingency operation”.
After all, US advisors in Jordan might be considered...well...”grief conselors”.
Russian Special Forces in Syria are...shall we say...”mentoring”.
The Israeli air strike was just a “tangential encounter” with Syrian airspace.
The White House Press Corp will lap it up at the dog bowl.
Maybe like Iran vs. Iraq in the ‘80’s, they’re busy killing each other, just make sure neither gets too far ahead.
Obama is still too busy campaigning to worry about such tripe.
So I guess you’re fine with Iran taking over Syria.
There is nothing credible about this empty headed King playboy of America the great and holy King Obama.
A red line covered in blood is hard to see.
Everyone talks about Zero’s âline in the sandâ but few mention the no bluff line drawn by Putin. I believe Putin, long before Benghazi, told Zero to stay the hell out of meddling with al Quida in Syria. Putin well knows that Zero was a big player in all the Jihad chaos that has taken place in the Middle East and he is fed up with it. Benghazi was Putin’s wake up call to Zero - I TOLD YOU TO STOP IT OR ELSE. Zero now knows Syria is red hot and that he better not touch Syria.
Iran is already in charge of Syria. There would be no change.
Surprised Obama hasn’t praised the terrorist who did Chris Stevens up the ass for coming out as a homosexual. What has Obama done about Benghazi? Jailed a probably Christian filmmaker for an obscure unconstitutional sounding parole violation. Not being allowed to use the Internet could be a freedom of speech violation as well as interference with his right to work. Showed us already Obama’s line in the sand. Invade our embassy, rape the ambassador from behind, then murder him and Obama will do absolutely nothing. A red line or line in the sand meant something for the Bushs. Obama’s “line in the sand” is a joke. Did Obama ever stand up to a bully in his entire life?
If you set out to kill the king then you must kill the king.
Iran has full say over wmd stockpiles, military forces and all gov’t institutions? Really? I’m sure that would be news to the Ba’ath party and Assad.
What you are or think you are sure of and what I am or think I am sure of in that part of the world amounts to nothing. There is no way our involvement in Syria would improve anything for us because we cannot predict the outcome, nor is there evidence of any hunger for anything resembling a democratically run state. Freedom, to them, is apostasy. That the government considers itself Ba’athist did not stop them from aligning with coalition forces against Saddam Hussein in the Gulf War I. No matter what conditions we would seek to impose, the proposition for us is to enforce it by force, and see it deteriorate to default Al Queda control as soon as we leave or draw down forces. Our forces over there are or would be just a magnet for resistance. Should Assad lose power, that would just accelerate things towards AQ or other Islamist control.
If we are primarily concerned with the proliferation of chemical weapons stockpiled by Syria, the Israelis are 50 times better on top of that situation than we will ever be, and our intelligence (particularly under 0bama) has proven it is as likely to turn against Israel as towards any given Arab state. Thus, Israel is probably reluctant to share same with us. Very understandably. I’d like to keep it that way, consider present circumstances. We don’t get Arab logic, they don’t get ours. What we do in the name of imposing or allowing “freedom” is what they hate. It runs counter to their religion. I’m perfectly happy to let Israel take of whatever business they see as pressing and allow Muslims to wipe out other Muslims to their heart’s content. It’s a human tragedy but one that we cannot control and certainly cannot benefit from policing.
I think you guys are taking Mr. affirmative action leader out of context: what he was really saying is a line in the sand at the sand trap on hole 14.
But as I said, a full-scale takeoever of Syria by Iran is a possibility and in that case we are talking about a national defense reason for involvement.
Sure, if you believe that Israel is Iran's only enemy you can try to leave the situation to them. However, it is naive to think that Iran won't continue to use their influence against us. And, if so,pre-emptive action on our part would be desirable, both to support Israel as the only democracy in the area and for our own interest and self-defense.
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.