It’s hardly surprising the administration was eager to paper over a story that showed the cracks in its jerrybuilt Syria policy. After all, just last August Obama pledged that “seeing movement on the chemical weapons front, or the use of chemical weapons” by Assad would mean the Syrian dictator had crossed a “red line” and would trigger a U.S. response. If Assad had already used those weapons, that would mean Obama blinked.
Ya know it is almost as if Obama is actively working towards a world caliphate.
All the strength and resolve of a jellyfish full of hot air.
eastern paul, Obama’s resolve to reduce the U.S. superpower to a jellyfish is as strong as ever.
Seems to me that this is what the UN was set up to handle. I guess they are just too busy working on their Agenda 21 and checking our Indian reservations to intervene.
It’s the Americans’ problem.
I stopped giving a flying [beep] when Obama was elected.
After they re-elected their own sworn enemy it qualified the Americans as bumb a$$es, laughing stock of the world. When 50% of population in a country with 97 IQ believe that a career member of terrorist organization whose background could not be verified is a good fit for their president, all that’s left is to laugh.
Since then I rely on Norinco to supply my guns and local tire shop to supply lead for casting. US can hit the road, I don’t need them anymore.
Ah, yes, “peace in our time.” So I guess that settles the matter, then: not only does he not understand what he said, but he’s also not capable of assessing threats against the United States and rising to the occasion of meeting them.
The old red line as moving target meme: hmmm, let’s see…the Rhineland, Austria, Czechoslovakia; or, Khobar Towers, East African Embassy Bombings, USS Cole; or Iran, Benghazi, Syria. Where do we move that immoveable red line to next? And all three sets under Democratic presidents, no less.
“The concern, said Panetta “is what steps does the international community take to make sure that when Assad comes down, that there is a process and procedure to make sure we get our hands on securing those sites?””
I dunno, Leon, you COULD start with 17 United Nations Security Council resolutions threatening “serious consequences” for non-disclosure of all information pertaining to WMD, for failure to surrender all stockpiles thereof and for failure to meet the required burden of proof that Syria has completed the first two items. As part of those UNSC resolutions, you COULD require that the Assad regime submit to UN weapons inspectors and to co-operate fully therewith. Finally, you COULD have Congress pass a Syria Liberation Act. And all of this could be modeled on Iraq (just a little Liquid Paper and a pen to write in the new name — easy, peasy).
But then again, Leon, you of all people would certainly know that none of that goofy stuff could ever work under a Democratic president, since you were also a senior member of the previous Democratic administration, led by Bill “Nobody did anything about Rwanda, but I was the only one to apologize” Clinton, who sponsored all that stuff in respect of Iraq.
So I can certainly understand your dilemma on this one.
Thank God the red line is nonexistant. One of the very few upsides to the Obama administration is that the Neocons can’t cram every war they want down America’s throat.
SO, I guess that’s a pink line then eh?
but he’s also not capable of assessing threats against the United States and rising to the occasion of meeting them
– David Southam
Gotta disagree with this David. I think he’s excellent at assessing the threats and rising to … enable them.
I think the LEFT has its Reagan and that he, like Lincoln, will join the fairytale pantheon of “great presidents”.
Barry is a serial liar. Can’t believe anything that comes out of his mouth.
LAS, if it were true that Obama’s agenda is against war, then, why even bother with the threats of a ‘red line’?
Oh, and why sit down, every other night, and, plot and plan ‘Who Shall My Drones Kill Today’, unless you are, ah, ‘at war’ against those who Shall Be Killed By Me.
Obama has no connection to reality. He lives entirely in Words. His own words. Therefore, he’s easily seen as a pathological liar.
But in a very real sense, it’s not lying, because for Obama, his words don’t reference reality nor express a lie against that reality. His words ARE reality. Therefore, what he says one day is real. He’ll say the opposite the next day, but that’s real too. And so on.
Remember his lofty words about the US ‘helping all who are oppressed’. Heh. The thousands killed by Assad don’t fit into this class, do they.
He belongs on the pulpit in a backwords revivalist mission. He can’t harm anyone there. But as President, all he does is harm Americans. And the world.
I said he wouldn’t let every neocon war get crammed down people’s throats, not any. He’s still a liberal interventionist.
“[I]f it were true that Obama’s agenda is against war, then, why even bother with the threats of a ‘red line’?”
Exactly, ET — why, indeed? This threat wasn’t made by a neo-con; it was made by Barack Obama. Apart from which, we now know that none of his prospective supporters were voting on MENA policy anyway, so he gained nothing politically by making the threat.
And if your choice is to repudiate your predecessor’s foreign policy (as stupid and unprecedented in the post-WWII period as such a move is, as far as I’m concerned), then so be it: don’t offer to get involved. But to go out there and slag your own evidence about something you swore you wouldn’t allow to happen just looks Keystone Cops (or Keystone XL, according to taste), and tells the perpetrators that the consequences of defying America are non-existent — and, as we know, that just emboldens the perpetrators.
But everything MENA is half-baked and half-hearted — Afghanistan (which he said would be his focus), Egypt (a virtual repeat of Carter’s handling of the Shah), Syrian “red lines”, Iraq thrown to the wind and not even on the radar screen, remote-controlled drone attacks as a substitute for forward-reaching engagement and policy, Green Revolution abandoned and Iran off the hook. Even with Libya, where Gaddafi had a target on his back since Lockerbie, Obama had be dragged into against his will — a fact made manifest by the Benghazi debacle and the administration’s inept attempt at cover up.
Wow, ‘Peace in our time’ Obama says, I sure as hell hope Al-Quida gets the Memo.
L-ASS
U ever tire of being the resident village idiot????
do U know that “neo-con” was a term coined by liberal democrops to address their more conserative bed fellows???
and why would U think that neo-cons cram wars down amerca’s throat, do those who start wars not carry any responsibility in your make-believe world? Try reading (and comprehending) some history!
mean while, U do add some entertainment value here, plus you present a challenge, as, the lefties have to work a little harder to steal the stupid trophy of the day
do U know that “neo-con” was a term coined by liberal democrops to address their more conserative bed fellows???
You should go back in time to inform Leo Strauss, the guy who basically founded the Neoconservative movement. And ideally you should stay there and not call people idiots while using ‘U’ for you.
“forward-reaching engagement and policy”
WTF does this mean? Endless tire-spinning in Iraq (thank God America’s out of there)? More ‘allies’ like Pakistan?
“Gaddafi had a target on his back since Lockerbie, Obama had be dragged into against his will”
Wrong. Obama was only to happy to prove how tough and decisive he was by dragging America into a completely pointless conflict.
This whole discussion is ridiculous given that Obama’s foreign policy is so similar to Bush’s except it’s even dumber and less coherent.
LAS >
“This whole discussion is ridiculous given that Obama’s foreign policy is so similar to Bush’s except it’s even dumber and less coherent.”
It’s illigal to steal someones online moniker and make comments that make sense!
Whoever you are leave LAS alone.
Is There Nothing That Obama Can’t Do?
You got that right. If people would view his actions instead of his mouth. They are in perfect alignment with the Jihadi cause. Of course he has the press thinking hes a god. Being black they can pretend to have ended prejudice. So to preserve the fairy tale they see no evil, hear nothing but a song bird. See only what there own socialist doctrine confirms. Which isn’t hard because Islam is a form of socialism In league with Totalitarianism. While academics of all stripes know a fellow traveler when they see one. Being very rich even the poor love him because he steals from the Middle class to the upper middle class. To give to his voting pals, the grabbing hands of the fake poor.
He has even admitted hes Muslim, than lied as he always. Does again & again, but nobody calls him on it in the MSM. Which is a Muslim duty to the kaffir as Dawa.
Ask yourself how many Islamist Nation this peace maker has created. Than tell me hes not part of the problem.
He has even admitted hes Muslim, than lied as he always. Does again & again, but nobody calls him on it in the MSM. Which is a Muslim duty to the kaffir as Dawa.
And the Jews were really behind 9/11.
Las , This is an absurd comparison.
You trolls get more desperate every day.
I rely on Obamas actions.
As well as his own words. Besides how many Sharia law States has his policies created.
I could go on but I don’t usually answer leftist Trolls. Its like explaining yourself to a statue.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/muslimfaith.asp
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tCAffMSWSzY
Um. The snopes link is clear that you are taking the quote out of context.
Obama has no intention of stopping Assad in any way, shape or form. He now backs Egypt militarily, speaks to Iran without pre-conditions (as he promised), has been aiding Libyans with American arms (re: Benghazi), has insulted and isolated Israel and has defend Islam and Islamism. Whoever cannot see the red line Obama has drawn for his agenda is a fool (re: LAS).