what is wrong with this picture?

The Off-Topic forum for anything non-LDS related, such as sports or politics. Rated PG through PG-13.
_cinepro
_Emeritus
Posts: 4502
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 10:15 pm

Re: what is wrong with this picture?

Post by _cinepro »

The LA Times has this interesting observation in an op-ed by Jonah Goldberg:

Until the Aug. 21 chemical weapons attack in the Damascus suburbs, the administration was not primarily concerned with chemical weapons. It was concerned with doing whatever it could — short of intervening militarily — to see to it that Bashar Assad either step down or be forced out. In 2011, Obama said: "For the sake of the Syrian people, the time has come for President Assad to step aside." And, a year later: "I have indicated repeatedly that President al-Assad has lost legitimacy, that he needs to step down." And last May at a news conference with the Turkish prime minister: "We both agree that Assad needs to go.… That is the only way we're going to resolve this crisis. And we're going to keep working for a Syria that is free from Assad's tyranny."

That goal is now dead. The Russian deal Obama just agreed to amounts to a huge boon to Assad in that it brings him into the so-called international community America has spent the last two years trying to kick him out of. This "represents an astonishing victory for the Assad regime," writes Bloomberg's Jeffrey Goldberg (no relation). So long as Assad only massacres his own people — including children — with old-fashioned weapons, he's immune to international force. Worse, Assad is now our partner because getting his WMD is now more important than getting rid of him. We've gone from siding with the rebels to acting like a boxing ref with no investment in who wins so long as neither side strikes any low blows.

Obviously, in reality, the president's short-term goal was to avoid getting into an unpopular war precipitated by his own ill-considered statements or being humiliated by a congressional no vote precipitated by his decision to punt the issue to Capitol Hill. But what made that goal achievable was the curse of chemical weapons.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/commenta ... 764.column



I kind of feel sorry for Obama because this really is a no-win situation for him. But to a certain degree, he dug his own grave with his statements about "red lines" and the aforementioned stated goal of getting Assad out.
_cinepro
_Emeritus
Posts: 4502
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 10:15 pm

Re: what is wrong with this picture?

Post by _cinepro »

Sethbag wrote:Reagan: invaded Grenada, bombed Libya
H.W. Bush: invaded Panama, invaded Iraq/Kuwait
G.W. Bush: invaded Iraq, Afghanistan, started sniping people in other countries with drone-launched Hellfires

So far Obama has pulled us out of Iraq, started pulling us out of Afghanistan. He's continued, possibly even increased the drone-sniping in places like Afghanistan and Yemen. And now he wanted to bomb Syria. Meanwhile some Republicans are bashing him for wanting to go to war in Syria, while other Republicans are bashing him as weak because he hasn't already done it.


You included "bombed Libya" on Reagan's resume but left it out of Obama's list of accomplishments...
Post Reply