Do we or don't we? What are the advantages or disadvantages of either. Attacking Syria is not like the times we went into Iraq. No UN resolution so far. No Arab league or nation support. No support from the US populace. Now what we do have is an aggressive Russia sending warships to the region to thumb their noses or actually disturb our five destroyers in the region. Russia has been supplying arms and training and intel to the Assads forever so they have skin in the game when it comes to this regime staying in power.
To steal some comments from Ann Coulter this afternoon she stated that every limited war a democractic president has engaged our military in has ended with a disastrous effect to the region. Clinton in Somalia. Carter in Iran. Now with Obama funding and arming a relatively unknown opposition group that as we saw last month beheaded a Coptic priest to crys of Allah Akbar. So far the Obama led Arab spring is an utter failure. Prime example being the catastrophe we now have in Egypt. Now the president is literally posting our plans in the mainstream media who sees no problem now going into Syria unilaterally.
You left wing tree hugger hippies were crying about no proof of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. There has been no proof of WMD's in Syria, but because your president made a ridiculously stupid red line in the sand he has to fire a few cruise missiles to save face. Russia all along is sitting and watching and waiting to call out Obama for the paper tiger he is and help Syria give the US a black eye. Before we jump on the we can take Russia bandwagon remember who Putin is. Putin was at the highest level of the the KGB this man knows how to play chess. Our president was a community organizer who barely knows how to play checkers.
We feel for the people of Syria who are suffering. Where are the Arabs who are outraged at this situation? Why not Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Kuwait, the UAE take care of it's own and protect Arabs and Muslims? Curious the silence.
No comments:
Post a Comment