fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com
It is highly instructive that when General Martin Dempsey of the Joint Chiefs of Staff was asked in Congress this week, just what it was that (the administration) was seeking, he couldn't answer the question. To do so, he would have had to turn to President Obama and pass the question to him. And Obama wouldn't have answered it either.
Look how has Obama has waffled and wandered all over the map. After proclaiming last year that any use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime would be a "game changer", Assad (presumably) went ahead and did it. Now Obama wants to act, but he sees that he has next to no support. So what is it he wants to do/? Well, we are not going to put boots on the ground even though a "top secret" analysis provided by his crack intelligence team of John Brennan, Jim Clapper, and Susan Rice has concluded that it would take 75,000 troops to secure the chemical weapons sites. Nor are we seeking regime change although Obama, Hillary Clinton and John Kerry have been saying for over a year now that Assad "must go". It seems now that Obama is desperately trying to find international and congressional support for firing a shot over Syria's bow to warn them not to do it again. What kind of policy is this?
Add to that all the possible consequences of Iran and Russia getting involved, who we will be supporting, who might attack Israel, and how this could escalate into the next, Iraq, Afghanistan or Libya, and it is clear that Obama is way in over his head. he knows it. Congress knows it. We all know it. Obama has put his country's prestige on the line and now that everybody is laughing at us, some feel the need to pull his chestnuts out of the fire and support him.
It still comes down to this: We need to learn our lesson about this part of the world, which we still have yet to do. There is only one civilized and friendly country in the region; Israel. It is time to stop sacrificing our blood and treasure trying to bring the 20th century to the region-let alone the 21st century. However, there is one clash we will not be able to avoid-unless the Iranian people-succeed in toppling the mullahs from power. We need to focus on Iran and their nuclear weapons capability instead of wasting our time on hellholes like Syria. Right now, there are multiple groups of bad guys all trying to kill each other in Syria (including Iranians) and doing a pretty good job of it. We can't do anything about it nor I suspect, should we. Yet this president wants to insert us in the middle of what is largely a sectarian war between Sunnis and Alawites. I strongly suspect this is really part of his support for the Muslim Brotherhood.
That is reason enough for Congress to keep us out of this war.
2 Comments - Share Yours!:
Add to that all the possible consequences of Iran and Russia getting involved, who we will be supporting, who might attack Israel, and how this could escalate into the next, Iraq, Afghanistan or Libya, and it is clear that Obama is way in over his head.
This debacle doesn't promise to be just another "Iraq, Afghanistan or Libya". Russia has already placed The Nuclear Option™ on the table. These stakes are in another category altogether.
It still comes down to this: We need to learn our lesson about this part of the world, which we still have yet to do. There is only one civilized and friendly country in the region; Israel. It is time to stop sacrificing our blood and treasure trying to bring the 20th century to the region-let alone the 21st century.
The only, repeat only, policy we should have with respect to the MME (Muslim Middle East) is one of "smash and grab". Go in, break the bad boys' toys and get the hell out.
No boots on the ground. None of this ludicrous "nation building" nonsense amid the quicksand of Islamic cesspits. No "exit policy" save sending them a bill—payable in oil thank-you-very-much and goodbye—for our expenditure of military equipment and manpower. Anything more than that should involve the back of our hand and some enemy's face, preferably at one or another well-attended UN function.
Right now, there are multiple groups of bad guys all trying to kill each other in Syria (including Iranians) and doing a pretty good job of it.
Hey, it's what Muslims do best. Namely, killing other Muslims.
We can't do anything about it nor I suspect, should we.
Oh, yes we can. Much as with the Iran-Iraq war—which consumed between five hundred thousand and a million Muslim lives—whenever one side or the other begins to lose ground, ship them a few container loads of arms and breathe new life into a meat grinder that, in all other respects, should be self-operating.
If Russia and China want to stick their hands into the rotating blades, so much the better.
Only supreme idiots like 0bama and his ilk, or America's treasonous petro-corporations manage to see any sort of upside to dealing with Islam.
Most of us little guys have, by now, purchased a clue and are beginning to understand that there is no upside to dealing with Islam. THERE NEVER HAS BEEN. Not throughout all history.
Only in recent times has cash flow and the obsession with bottom line profits so superseded all other values (e.g., patriotism, racial solidarity, cultural unity, genetics, etc.), to where the thought of laying down with Muslims and not walking away with some jihadist fleas has become even remotely imaginable.
Obama has the anti-Midas touch. Everything he's touched has turned to crap - why does anyone thing this would be any different?
The very fact that he wants to do it (whatever 'it' is) is a good enough reason not to.
Post a Comment