Syria: Another off teleprompter SNAFU for Obama

Posted by: Brenda Bowers on: September 5, 2013

• In: Barack Obama | Iran and Nuclear weapons | Iran and Nuclear weapons | Islam, Muslim, jihad, terrorist | Israel Fight for Survival | Isreal Fight for Survival | jihad in the world | Know the enemies of America | Middle East and Muslims | Muslims | Obama 2013 and beyond | Obama Against America | Obama and ethics | Obamanation | President Obama, Congress, Democrats, Republicans, Islam, Muslim, terrorists, | Subverting America by Uri Bezmenov
• Leave a Comment

In case you haven’t been watching the news this past week  this Heritage article will bring you up to date.    Obama got off the teleprompter last year and  we all know what happens when our amateur president fails to follow the written script:  he goofs!  but this time he goofed and will probably get our buns in the middle of a Middle East war.  Of course this is exactly what I believe he has been trying to do because  a war is the fastest way to totally bankrupt a country, raise the ire of the citizens to bring about riots in the streets so that (like the dictator’s script calls for)  he as President can for martial law and  call out the troops to put the riots down  and then he will have the country totally under his control.

Ours is a war weary country with a depleted and  exhausted  military.  If the Congress dares to go along and give Obama the power to go to war he will have the scapegoats he needs to blame the war that he gets us into.  He has already begun pointing the finger of blame in his speech in Sweden yesterday by blaming the rest of the world for “drawing the red line”.  No, it wasn’t his red line!  Then as is always the case the rest of his gang had their stories ready and both Kerry and Hagel echo Obamas words exactly during the hearings in the House.

Read the following article and bring yourself up to date then sit back and watch your country be dragged into a war in an area of the world that has been at war since the dawn of time!  BB

 

Obama’s Goals in Syria Remain Unclear

Brian Slattery

September 4, 2013 at 4:35 pm

Pat Benic/UPI/Newscom

Red lines work only when they are red. This is one of the foreign policy lessons President Obama has not learned.

The President has had to redefine what his “red line” on chemical weapons use constituted in Syria and has not explained a clear plan for America’s involvement in the conflict. Consulting with Congress before making such a statement would have been a better course of action. America is now faced with losing credibility if the President doesn’t follow through on his irresponsible ultimatum.    ( I BB personally do not give a damned what the rest of the world thinks of the US>  since we were stupid enough to elected this fool not once but twice we have no standing in the world anyhow.  We are laughing stocks!  Suck it up and elected  a President who will give us back our pride next time!  )

After the Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted narrowly to authorize the use of force in Syria, Obama may think the red line he wavered on in recent months is vindicated. Nevertheless, neither the President nor his top officials have indicated what they intend to accomplish by attacking Syria.

While seeking congressional approval for any involvement is a step in the right direction, many strategic and security questions remain unanswered. James Carafano, Heritage’s vice president for foreign and defense policy studies, examines a number of lessons Obama has not learned leading up to this decision.

One comes from the George W. Bush Administration: “Victory has a thousand fathers, defeat is an orphan.” The decision to take military action in Iraq and Afghanistan was broadly approved by Congress, the U.N., and the public. When the U.S. began to struggle in these conflicts and casualties rose, that support meant something.

The final lesson Carafano lists is “Think before you act.” Jim Phillips, Heritage senior research fellow for Middle Eastern affairs, argues that “military force is a blunt and bloody instrument for sending signals. Those signals may not have the desired consequences. If Assad brushes them off and continues his serial mass murders, then the Administration will look ineffective and irresolute.” If Obama directs the use of force in Syria, does he have an end goal? How will he achieve the defined objectives? Without answers to these questions, he likely cannot justify military engagement.

In discussing the use of chemical weapons in Syria on Saturday, President Obama declared, “This attack is an assault on human dignity. It also presents a serious danger to our national security.” While few would argue that the use of chemical weapons is morally egregious, the President has not articulated what the attack directly means for U.S. security.  (chemical weapons have been around a long time and certainly can be used on the united States and in the future no doubt in my mind they will be as soon as a Muslim terrorist groups gets their hands on them!   But short of qan all out war with so-called boot on the ground to find and do away with these WMD’s they will still be around.  these are the same WMD’s that Saddam hussein had in Iraq and was able to get over to Syria before President Bush could get a coalition of the world to go along with his attack of Iraq.  The WMD’s were then of course not found because they had been shipped across the border.  So unless it is a sneak and swift attack and the targets are the WMD’s then count on them being used on us sooner or later. With big mouth Obama giving the enemy a written script of our intentions this surely will never happen  so the probability is that we will only  mess around and piss the Muslims off  so they will attack us with the dreaded chemicals  sooner!  BB)

In yesterday’s Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on the use of force in Syria, Secretary of State John Kerry did not illustrate the specific threats to U.S. national security interests. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel did not clarify what the strategic objectives are in executing a strike. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey did not adequately answer how things had changed since his previous warnings on military force in Syria. Perhaps the President should reflect on the fact that his top defense and foreign affairs officials cannot articulate what we will be accomplishing by using military force in Syria.

In concluding his remarks, the President said, “I’m asking Congress to send a message to the world that we are ready to move forward together as one nation.” Yet congressional authorization alone does not justify the use of force in Syria or anywhere else. U.S. military force should not be used without first understanding and articulating the benefits of such actions to U.S. security interests.

 

(understand this: NOT ONE Country in the world is with the United States in this.  NOT ONE!  Even the arab countries which might be affected by this breach by the Syrian government do not want the United States to attack!  BB)

 

 

 

Tags: chemical weapons used in Syria civil War August 2013, war with syria September 2013, WMD's used by Syrian government 2013