Is Syria Obama's legacy and what he will be remembered by in future ?

Flint

Legionnaire
Jan 28, 2006
7,016
0
United States
#41
So that should settle whether Obama was right in setting a precedent or not.
Before making a plug for Obama, let me point out that Obama and his administration have said they are going to do it anyway. Looks like you were listening to Rand Paul today but chose not to quote him when it doesn't suit you.
 

IPride

National Team Player
Oct 18, 2002
5,885
0
Toronto, Canada
#42
Before making a plug for Obama, let me point out that Obama and his administration have said they are going to do it anyway. Looks like you were listening to Rand Paul today but chose not to quote him when it doesn't suit you.
When did Obama say he was going to strike Syria anyway? I think it's all being presumptuous. If it was so explicitly stated then Rand Paul wouldn't act like a broken record today asking the same question 19 times.
 

Flint

Legionnaire
Jan 28, 2006
7,016
0
United States
#43
Paul asked Kerry repeatedly if he could pledge to the Congress that they would NOT strike if the vote was a no. He declined. What hearing were you watching anyway?
 

Mahdi

Elite Member
Jan 1, 1970
6,999
497
Mjunik
#44
Your terrorist DNA is shining through, Mr. anti salafi+wahabi+al-qaeda. You mean to tell me if someone who is living on some farm and hasn't even heard of this debate needs to be killed because some douchbag politician voted for the war? How are you different from run of the mill suicide bombers? You are not, not that I had any doubts.
Guys like him are great...whatever argument we have, animals like Playboy/Farhad/Chief/Whateverthefuckhisname remind us that some are animals and others are human beings and this, despite our arguments and differences we have on political views, unites us and lets us see the what really matters.
 
Last edited:
Jun 9, 2004
13,753
1
Canada
#45
I tend to agree with IPride that this was a good, if not a master move, by Obama. He does not have the allies out there (other than the French and to a much lesser extent Turkey and some of the Arab league) and he wanted to make sure that he at least has bipartisan support within the US. This is a HUGE decision which can have serious repercussions not just for Democrats in the US but possibly for US foreign policy in the ME and the entire region for years to come.

He left himself between a rock and a hard place with his "red line" comment and interestingly enough, that was made after Bibi's red line comments on Iran. One way or another, this is the blue print for how to deal with Iran, which is a much more complex situation than any of the wars the US has been involved with in the ME. He either has to go through with this and set a precedence, or the only way to back down at this point was if he didn't get support from congress.

He also realizes that this would be buying time while applying pressure at the highest levels and that seems to have paid off already. We've already had a major defection in Syria and Putin is not saying that he might drop support for Assad if they're given more evidence. All in all, he may come on top in this battle without firing a single cruise missile.
 
Oct 18, 2010
6,271
849
#46
american people take war very seriously unlike the 3rd world mentality of most the fob posters here who are ready to follow the pack.you need to lose your 3rd world mentality if you want to live as an american and enjoy the full freedoms it offers you.being afraid to express your opinions no matter how controversial is not part of the american experience.if there is anything americans hate more than anything else is the cowards who hide their opinions and go along with the pack just to please them.nobody is going to arrest you here if you express your opinion,this is not the 3rd world country you left and you need to lose that mentality.it's very clear that the american people are starting to understand the issues confronting them.the overwhelming opposition to declaring war on syria is very well documented:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/09/03/obama-syria-poll-pew-abc/2758597/


i believe this opposition is very real and americans know very well that once they declare war on another country they become targets.this is not a joke.it's reality the american people understand very well that in war they don't serve cookies and coke they serve bullets and blood.
 
Oct 18, 2010
6,271
849
#48
just voted NO to an email inquiry by my congress person about military action in syria.i don't recall ever getting any inquiry like this before.aipac will be terrified if they keep doing this on every issue related to military and the middle east.
 

Flint

Legionnaire
Jan 28, 2006
7,016
0
United States
#52
I tend to agree with IPride that this was a good, if not a master move, by Obama.
You'd expect me to instinctively come out agains Obama, but I won't. It remains to be seen if it was a "master move". Politically he has divided the Republicans, but has done the same to Democrats. Watching Dem after Dem come out and support a strike while gong ho Republicans go the other way is a sight to behold. Nobody knows where the safe political ground is. For me, even if this does not do Assad in, I like to see Iran and Hezbollah watch helplessly as missiles rain on him. Le't see what they do about their red line.
 

Flint

Legionnaire
Jan 28, 2006
7,016
0
United States
#53
the pro war and supporters of the jihadist terrorists in syria are as confused as a baby in a topless bar.here is a slap in their face for some reality adjustment.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/09/04/americans-hunger-study/2764955/
Those "food insecure" households probably have two cars, couple of HDTVs and high speed internet, a lot faster than Tehran for sure. Oh, one more thing. There is no "hunger" in America. Come on over and I'll get you a 99 cent cheeseburger. Throw in couple of more bucks and I'll get you a happy meal, complete with a drink.
 
Oct 18, 2010
6,271
849
#54
another legacy that obama is creating in confronting the syrian crisis is exposing the aipac agents in the u.s. congress.this is an invaluable gift to the american public and american politics in general.aipac and their most loyal agents in the u.s. congress and the senate are absolutely terrified of the coverage they are getting in the media.their exposure and the unplugged introduction to the american public is going to be devastating for them in the future.in fact this is the beginning of the end of aipac as we have known.the vigorous opposition of the american people to declaration of war on syria has given activists like myself a grand opportunity to introduce the american public to the dirty past and present activities of aipac.never in the past,at a grass roots level,aipac has been exposed to this extent.they have always operated under the radar as far as ordinary americans were concerned.it is getting so bad for them that they have to do 3rd world style censorship on nyt website to limit the damage:

A reference to the pro-Israel lobbying group AIPAC was mysteriously cut from a New York Times article published online Monday and in print Tuesday:http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2013/09/ny-times-scraps-aipac-from-syria-story-171669.html

even some of their agents in the congress are now speaking out against them:http://dontattacksyria.com/

in summary,most americans are beginning to understand that the civil war in syria is a proxy war between the shia and sunni powers in that region.they correctly and intuitively know that their national interest will not be served by getting involved in this proxy war for domination in the middle east.i hate to quote her but as far as americans are concerned palin had the right idea when she said "let allah sort them out"!