Really noOB?
Who was in charge of the executive branch when the instances which I pointed towards occurred?
Here's a hint. It wasn't "W".
Got that? Yet Obama, and most all of "the "left" had blamed it all on George W. Bush.
Name a problem -- even one of your own personal problems -- blame it all on George Bush, was the order of the day.
When it comes their own turn, when they are in charge -- suddenly it's a "bi-partisan problem?"
Obama was successful in snatching defeat from the jaws of victory -- in Iraq. He owns that winding down of affairs, and much of the aftermath, since he did run for office of chief Executive -- TWICE.
As far as Syria and the Assad regime goes --- years ago Assad did next to nothing in slowing the flow of fighters and weaponry from and through his nation to Iraq -- to fight American soldiers there in Iraq. Yet that was not nearly as bad as what the Iranians did along the same lines.
Pay-back is a real bitch. When will that bitch howl in Iran I do wonder?
Syria has also long been used by the Iranians as a bridge to the Islamists which they supply with weaponry in Lebanon -- to be used against anyone who opposes Islamists in Lebanon, and eventually (when not sooner) be used to terrorize Israel with rocket attacks.
Still, despite all of this deadly Sunni/Shiite stuff, I think we missed a chance or two a couple of years ago now -- to agree with the Russians, at least in part, and not entertain talk of supporting anyone attempting to overthrow Assad, by force. Better a devil you know, then an assortment of devils who are even worse..?
Even Assad seemed to have been amenable to a proposition that would lead towards a slower re-mapping of power in Syria, including himself eventually stepping down. Or so he seemed to say...
But Obama and the Hildabeast screwed the pooch at every opportunity, reacting as they do to "news of the week" soundbite politics with yet more (shallowly considered) soundbite politics of their own