This requires a serious and harsh castigation. BO would be well advised to deal with Syria in no uncertain terms and have the NCAA mete out the severest of punishments. After all........we wouldn't want Dear Leader to appear weak of mind or knees.
Sorry to see you delete that Hugh. I was either amused or disappointed ........ amused that you thought the strategy would work twice or disappointed that you (of all people) truly failed to grasp the layers of sarcasm.
LOL......Love it.......Yes, actually, I remember the post well (hopefully your recreational Hookah use has not blurred your ability to read between the lines). After some years of peace and quite, you've inadvertently removed me from your 'ignore' list. Should you find my sarcasm or pointed responses intolerable......might I suggest your returning me to that honored position. I find your "creepy" reference particularly amusing. In a 'creepy member' poll, I am confident you'd approach an SEC-esque ranking. As for the FFL being the Du Jour thread, I completely understand........vainly lobbing a few 1.5 million dollar cruise missiles or the potential loss of life (ours, Israeli, French or Arab) pales in comparison to "drafting" the correct QB.
Well, now it seems that Obama is going to wait to do anything until Congress gets back from recess, saying, that "anything he has in mind can be just as effective a month from now."
Geez ... he has also said that the military strike is just to punish Assad ... but if said punishment is not painful enough for Assad to change his nasty ways, what has been accomplished?
Is my memory bad or would this be he first time the US has taken the risk of a military action that could have grave repercussions and there is absolutely no intent to "win" anything? In truth, there seems to be no chance of winning anything, so why do something this futile?
I'm thinking that he regrets his "red line" now, and if something is going to be done, he wants Congress to take the blame for approving it. And, if they don't approve, and something goes wrong by inaction, he can blame Congress for that. He gets to walk away without taking any responsibility for the outcome either way.
There seems to be no good reason for taking military action that could set off a chain of events that results in another ME war ... and this one more far-reaching than the more localized exploits in Iraq and A'stan. The pots in Libya and Egypt are already ready to boil over.
It is tragic that civilian innocents are being targeted, but, as one commentator has mentioned, is this use of gas any more despicable that the horrors that have killed 5 million in the Congo? We have felt no compulsion to step into the Congo and stop that carnage.
President Abdicates Responsibility for His Personal Red Line
By Bing West
August 31, 2013 3:56 PM
The president is clever, but in a disturbing way:
1. In the heat of an election race, the president invented a red line where none existed before. For instance, from 1983 to 1988, Iraq and Iran in their war used hundreds of chemical weapons — and President Reagan did nothing. This is Obama’s personal red line.
2. He has proposed a limited strike (≈150 cruise missiles) that will kill thousands of people, but not kill Assad or drive him from power. That is not a strategy; it is an act of pique.
3. In 2011, he bombed Libya for six months and never asked Congress. But now he has abdicated responsibility for his own red line, and dramatically escalated the stakes.
4. He is trying to make his personal mistake appear to be a matter of national honor. The more it is portrayed as such, the more agonizing the vote.
From National Review
Latest news now is the King O..wants to go to Congress for approval/Agreement! First he had Kerry step in front of him, now Congress...no doubt he will do something after he has enough people in front of him to blame for any problems that come from his token effort!