All I can say is I HOPE diplomacy DOES work. We don't need to be involved
in yet another war in the middle-east where it doesn't matter which side
wins... we lose.
Yes, our congressional delegation wants to channel the Obama hate and vote no to
get support for their reelection. Time to not be partisan on International
@ atl Yep I am sure that you are correct. Obama scared them right out of their
boots. Assad I am declaring that I am going to attack you. First I
need to go play golf, then I am going to Russia for a few days. Oh and here are
the targets I am going to bomb. This attack will only last a few days and it
will be amazingly small, and won't result in your removal.I just want to
knock your garage windows out. I don't have to but I think I will wait and
see if I can convince 500 plus members of my Congress to go along with it and I
need to convince the American People if its alright. And I have assembled a
coalition of one to join in this effort. This my friend will not be shock and
awe but shuck and jive. Yep it was credible to a T. Did I leave any detaiils
The only reason we have this chance of getting Syria to give up its chemical
weapons without us having to fire a shot is because they (Syria and Russia)
thought there was a credible enough chance of a strike and wanted to avoid that.
We might get exactly what most of us want (no conflict) with the bonus of
getting their chemical weapons too, that should be a win. However, you all are
so determined in your hatred of Obama that you refuse to see any result as
@mohokat"That would be a rare case in his narcissistic life, someone
telling him no."Oh get over it... this Congress sets record
breaking numbers of filibusters. It's practically expected that if he sends
something to the House they'll reject it automatically because it's
something he wants. He didn't get his immigration bill (at least not yet),
or cap and trade, or the public option in Obamacare, or all sorts of judicial
and administrative appointments.
pragmatistferlife, you are right in so many ways. However, if absolutely no
retaliation outside of their borders happened, by degrading his capabilities, we
would have taken a definite action supporting the rebels. Samson01
is right on with the refugee thing --- that is a "heart in the right
The Community Organizer and his minions that like to have control over us lacks
real leadership. He shoots from the hip and the military and Generals have to
be in awe and shock with his tactics. Diplomacy should have been on-going for
the last 2 1/2 years. He had an election campaign to run and our dedicated men
in Benghazi paid the price for that error a year ago. The President forgot
about his "four fastest ships" that he was supposed to have deployed.
He is dealing not with Syria but the big guys from Russia that our
country has been thwarted by for 80 years or more. The big guy is the most
experienced and seasoned KGB person that there is with the power and influence
of a country that has lost in Afghanistan and seen it's power and influence
drop out of sight.Russia has a larger place in the world of
terrorism now. Russia is a permanent member of the Security Council that can
ruin everything we try to do, with one vote.We are at their mercy in
a world where power and influence is vital to the media's presentation of
what we do.
My issue with this whole situation is that there are no good guys. There are
bad people killing bad people with innocent lives as collateral damage. Perhaps the best that we can do here is throw our resources behind the
refugee camps and allow the innocents to flee to a safe place.There
is, at this point, no right answer that I can see.
OlderGreg, no one call for tell the future, but I think it's reasonable to
believe that there won't be a significant backlash, and the Syrian
government accepting a deal that would destroy their chemical weapons is a sign
of that. First of all, the government has been fighting the civil
war for two years so their capabilities to retaliate are definitely diminished.
Like Hussein who warned and promised but had nothing to back it up because of
wars and sanctions. Secondly their easiest retaliation would be to
launch missiles into Israel. You may question what the Americans can accomplish
but Syria would have no questions about what Israel would do or accomplish, and
it certainly isn't good given they are all ready swamped in a civil war.Thirdly even though Russia and Syria are allies the last thing either
need is a completely unstable or radical Syria. Which is exactly what you would
get if they retaliated. Russia all ready has serious radical Islamist problems
in the area and Iran is moving more and more away from war talk.
Delay the vote in favor of diplomacy? Ya maybe but most likely because the vote
will be no.That would be a rare case in his narcissistic life, someone telling
him no.Something his ego would not handle
When the ground troop were massed around Iraq I wonder if this option was
available to President Bush or did he want to attack Iraq?I seem to
remember reading some where that Saddam had confidentially expressed the desire
to realistically negociate and he was more than willing to do what ever it takes
to remain in power.He saw the handwriting on the wall and would do
anything we wanted.Had we used this option we would have saved many
US lives and three trillion dollars.
Obama, in his speech, said that we should go on the internet and watch the
videos taken of victims of the gas attack; emphasizing the way children were
killed.Obama, go to youtube and watch videos that come up when you
search "Syria Rebels admit to chemical Attack" and "Fallujah The
Hidden Massacre". The use of depleted uranium weapons has assured that
babies will be still born there for the next 4 billion years, the half life of
depleted uranium, if this toxic material is not cleaned up. The images of
babies with multiple heads, single eyes, multiple limbs, internal organs exposed
is horrific. If Obama cared so much about the children, he would ban the use of
these weapons by the US military. The truth, he does not care. Hypocrite!Obama appears to be a shill for the war mongers and war profiteers in
the world. He is not listening to the American people, the majority is against
any military action in Syria. Ask yourself "What will happen when we choose
to look away when our own government is responsible for such atrocities."
"This would be a targeted strike to achieve a clear objective:--
degrading--capabilities" Like the Japanese strike at Pearl
Harbor? No backlash, or "whoops" results?