Replies

All the result of Obama’s “Strength through weakness” policy.

Good, let Russia take over. They won’t have their hands tied with the asinine Rules of Engagement.

It is quite unfortunate. A lot of effort was put into Iraq - not to mention lives taken and/or changed, and Trillions of Dollars spent/lost - only for the situation to degrade to the level that another foreign power, one that is not necessarily friendly to the United States, is moving in. It was never meant to be like this, and unfortunately it doesn't seem like the US has an alternative solution.

While it's true that Russia's entry will provide relief to the various religious minority groups in Syria (no need to mention Iraq as all religious minority groups are either dead, enslaved, refugees, or at various levels of progression of those three possibilities), one should not be deceived and believe that Russia is there to save Christians. Not at all ...they are there for their own geopolitical reasons, and the solace to Christians and other Syrian minorities is simply a (fortunate) side effect of a geopolitical move.

Unfortunately, Obama has shown the world that his administration has zero credibility when it comes to truly helping a situation, and the after-effects of the Obama-led American action in Syria and Libya will, for a good time, weaken any future American-led coalitions simply based on the obvious results. This means that in instances where an American-led coalition would be absolutely helpful - for example, a situation similar to the US-led coalition to remove Saddam from Kuwait during the First Gulf War - it will probably be difficult to get a big enough coalition. Most definitely NOT from Europe as they are the ones bearing the most cost from the recent Syrian migration (and I seriously believe that 'cost' will go up in the future once some of the 'refugees' turn out to be anything but). That is a bad outcome as there will be instances in the future where a US-led coalition will be absolutely necessary.

Obama's adventures in Syria and Libya (and to a lesser extent Bush's move into Iraq ....sorry, I love Dubya as a man, and an honest man at that, but it was always not wise to go and effect regime change without having a credible replacement) have actually decreased the likelihood of America leading the Free World in a coalition against a future (real) threat. And by a future (real) threat I am not talking about some pathetic sandbox country or banana republic. I mean something real ...think China or Russia (with China the most likely option due to what's happening between it and it's neighbors, and Russia obviously not far due to its liking for messing about with its neighbors).

Whomever is going to be the next POTUS will have a lot of work to do fixing the issues created by the current POTUS. I hope the vote goes for someone who is strong, credible, patriotic, honest (I don't just mean honest to the voters, but also honest to enemies so that they clearly know he means what he says ...Reagan was great at this), and finally, a good man (why ...because America's strength, in the hands of an evil man, would result in an evil empire. Strength is but a tool, and under a good strong will is a tool for good, but under an evil strong will is a force for evil). The next POTUS will have a lot of work to do.

Putin again fills the vacuum and strives to rebuild a Russian empire based on chauvinism and collaboration with the mad mullahs of Iran.

U.S. President Barack Obama is scheduled to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Monday for the first time in nearly a year to discuss Moscow's plans in Syria.

Looks like Russia may finally be going to help out in Iraq. Hope Obama brought lots of lunch money for the meeting.