America Will Pay a Price for President Obama's Inaction in Syria

Townhall.com ^ | June 10, 2013 | Michael Barone

[Biggirl]

That it will.

[Gaffer]

I don’t believe the US has any business getting entangled there. Just like Eqypt and Libya.

[Netz]

...it's a fine line between “entanglement” and national interest...nobody knows anymore.
Obama cannot let himself attack anything other than his opponents. He wouldn't harm a fly because he won (for some reason) the Nobel Peace Prize. Friends and enemies alike today know that Obama is simply out golfing. He can wave his 9-Iron at our enemies but then they will just fart in his direction. What worries me is what our allies think of us now, a paper tiger.

[Gen.Blather]

Cops hate domestic disputes for good reason. Most often, when the cop shows up, both sides turn on him and he gets hurt. Such will be the case in Syria. Which of the two evil sides would the US come down on? Assad, is by far, the more attractive as he allowed the Christians and Druze to continue to exist. The “rebels” have promised ethnic cleansing. So, if the US helps them bring down Assad how will the American public, and the world, view the wholesale slaughter of perhaps millions of Christians, Druze, Alawites and others?

This is a wonderful example of when to mind your own business. The US has no strategic interest that can’t be better met by bolstering Israel.

[vlad335]

"I don’t believe the US has any business getting entangled there. Just like Eqypt and Libya."

Exactly correct. No business whatsoever.

[Kaslin]

Excellent point

[txrangerette]

Barone should be smarter than this.

Obama’s policies are a mess, but it appears deliberately so. Who could be so stupid as to back the Muslim Brotherhood - well, other than John McCain - while trying - albeit weakly - to topple regimes which are all that stand between us and much worse regimes arising in their place?

Carter on Steriods.

But the best that Barone can do is complain of “Obama inaction”??

[freedomfiter2]

Even if you equate national interest with the right to wage war, neither side will support US interests in Syria.

[broken_arrow1]

Yeah, let’s fight on the side of Al Qaeda so they’ll like us!

A special hello to Obama and the NSA for carefully watching my key strokes!

[TexasCajun]

Inaction?

He got a US ambassador and 3 others killed as a result of his gunrunning to terrorist supported "freedom fighters" in Syria.

Inaction?

Should we just let hothead, Juan MeCain loose on them?

[Jack Hammer]

Inaction?

Are we forgetting about the so-called Arab Spring?

The entire Middle East, always a powder keg, has been even more unstable since Obama started fiddling with politics.

[LibLieSlayer]

We had no business going into Iraq... we could have bought hussein much cheaper... we actually rented him back in the 80’s... that war was about revenge for the plot against GHW Bush. Libya was so illegal and so a wrong... Kadaffy had joined our side and was working with our intel... he was “with us and not against us”. Bush gave him assurances and obama gave him a sword enema. Afghanistan... we should have killed all taliban and al qaeda when they were escaping and heading for tora bora and other passes... we should have mined the mountain passes and continued to kill from the air until no problems existed. Syria... we should back Israel 100% and let the shia and sunnis eat one another and always encourage a muslim to kill another muslim... but no more Americans should die for that “death cult”.

LLS

[Dalberg-Acton]

Barone is wrong about this.

[LibLieSlayer]

barone is just a beltway mouthpiece and I no longer trust him or his manufactured analysis of anything.

LLS

[ScottinVA]

Syria is not our fight. No more American blood shed or treasure spent on behalf of filthy Moslems.

[Biggirl]

True.

But in other ways it will. It will inspire more jihadis to go after both Israel and the USA.

[Biggirl]

That is why security at home must be made stronger.

[Gaffer]

I won’t disagree about it, and most any Muslim government with power and resources will eventually go against Israel in a direct battle at some point. They will find Israel can take care of herself. I’d caution those leaders to stock up on 50,000 SPF sunblock when they start this.

As for the US, their goal is to take it from within - just like Britain, France, Sweden, et al.

[ScottinVA]

I completely agree. We could’ve bought off Saddam or someone else in the Ba’ath Party. The Christian community has suffered immeasurably since Saddam was overthrown.

Initially I supported OIF, but the “freedom” component is sadly missing for non-muslims.