Posted on 08/28/2013 10:12:46 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper
The question facing the administration is less whether to launch a military strike, but what would come next
The challenge facing President Barack Obama and his political and military advisers is this: How to "punish" the regime of President Bashar al-Assad for its alleged use of chemical weapons on civilians, but not punish it too severely, lest that destroy a government whose survival is deemed preferable, for U.S. regional interests, to one led by extremists.
While the administration appeared to be gearing up this week for some form of military response to an incident denounced by Secretary of State John Kerry on Monday as a "moral obscenity," White House Press Secretary Jay Carney told reporters Tuesday that the purpose of any intervention was not to oust Assad. "It is not our policy to respond to this transgression with regime change," he said. "That is not what we are contemplating here."
(Excerpt) Read more at america.aljazeera.com ...
I think if the Syrian government is killing Muslim Brotherhood adherents, it is a good thing. I’m against attacking that government. Just like Eqypt and Libya.
In hindsight, we should have just nuked Iraq, Afghanistan, and Iran if they made a peep.
OH NO they want it they need the ratings I know that for a fact LOL!
I am watching Al Jazeera America their programming sometime better than Fox news or CNN internatnial on international news LOL!
He should just come out and declare that Assad is going to win. That seems to be an Obama curse. That would punish Assad without firing a shot!
"If I had a Syrian dictator son he would be Bashar Al-Assad..."
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.