As a defiant Barack Obama considered striking Syria when President Assad allegedly used chemical weapons against his own citizens, everyone turned against him, believing it to be a very bad idea. People in the United States, and governments around the world, wanted nothing to do with the violent civil war in Syria. Besides, for many it made no sense for Assad to use chemical weapons when he was beating the rebels with ease. Why attract attention with the use of chemical weapons?
Theories that the rebels used the chemical weapons against their own people have emerged, in order to draw the world in, to help them defeat the Syrian dictator that they found themselves losing terribly against. Obama took the bait (and sometimes I wonder if he was in on it all along). Obama threatened to use force. Obama threatened to launch a little strike that would do no damage, and take less than an hour, to send a message that he figured would make Assad nervous enough not to use chemical weapons anymore.
After they finished laughing at Barack Obama, Russia stepped in to move the volatile situation closer to diplomacy. The United States agreed to step back and allow the Russian-led negotiations and confiscation of Syria's chemical weapons take place. Thanks to Obama, America is taking a back seat in the Middle East, and effectively handing over to Russia carte-blanche when it comes to handling the weapons, securing the weapons, and continuing their ever-increasing influence, and flow of arms, into the region.
Can anyone say, "Magog?"
For many, this whole slew of events was confusing to a lot of people. The anti-war candidate from 2008 who now resides in the White House, and the recipient of a Nobel Peace Prize I might add, was pushing for a U.S. military strike against a country mired in civil war. However, the civil war in Syria is currently not threatening the United States, or her interests in the region, giving the President no national security justification to go into the hot zone with American fire power. The possibility of a strike against that country by Obama is being viewed domestically in a very unpopular way, yet President Obama was saying he was willing to launch the strike without congressional blessing (as Obama demanded was the right way to do things when attacking Bush's war efforts). Also, the threat of a strike against Syria has garnered almost no international support, except from that of France. Meanwhile, the Republicans, who in the past have supported military strikes when the world needs America have been also steadfastly against such a move (except some of them like McCain who feels Obama's plans were not forceful enough), that they are doing whatever they can to block the President.
It is a topsy-turvy world.
Insert, now, Syria's ally, Iran, who has been pursuing nuclear weapons, and may be ready with a small batch as they test their delivery system, a family of missiles they received from Russia.
President Obama says that Iran must not miss the meaning of any U.S. response against Syria. Essentially, he is saying that "we are attacking your ally, but not you, so don't be upset. Oh, by the way, we have not counted out acting militarily against you to stop your pursuit of nuclear weapons."
The Nobel Peace Prize Committee must be so proud.
A military attack against Syria is now not going to happen, it seems, and in an interview on ABC’s “This Week With George Stephanopoulos,” as a plan of diplomacy seemed to be materializing, Obama said Iran should not interpret the diplomatic response — coming after he threatened to use strikes — as suggesting that the United States wouldn’t attack Iran to stop the development of nuclear weapons.
Is Obama becoming the "hand-slapper in chief"?
What Obama was trying to say is, "Don't mistake my barking for a military response, and then not attacking, for weakness. If needed, I will still attack you."
Barry hates it when people don't think he is the tough and ready to rumble messiah of America.
Don't worry, Mr. Obama, Putin doesn't think you are a pussy because of Syria. He thought that of you already. The Iranians, too. And in fact, the entire right-of-center population of America, and a lot of your so-called followers, does, too. Quit trying to hide your weaknesses, you were exposed for the radical Marxist thug who has no idea how to run anything a long time ago.
This is not to say that a military response may still seem to be necessary in the dark recesses of Obama's mind. He still approached Congress, and reports are pouring all over his desk that troops on the ground will be necessary to secure the chemical weapons facilities in Syria.
Don't misunderstand The One. President Obama wants chaos. Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, Yemen and Syria are no accident. Obama decided long ago that fundamentally changing the United States from the Land of Liberty to a soviet-style socialist tyranny would not be enough. "President of the United States" is beneath him. The world is his oyster. But to change the world, chaos must ensue. Like Ahmadinejad, Barack Obama believes that chaos will bring peace in the long run. The only difference is that the former Iranian President sought a powerful Islamic Caliphate. Obama seeks a more powerful system of globalism, with him somewhere near the head, if not the ruler of it all.
That is why he is not even batting an eye over India testing a missile system that can launch nuclear missiles capable of reaching cities in China, or that China is working to build drones that reach beyond the capabilities of American drones. That is why Obama is making sure seventy federal agencies that normally have no need to be armed are armed to the teeth, and that is why the NSA surveillance thing is reaching levels we never thought possible and somehow he is being protected from the scandalous nature of the whole NSA thing. In fact, they are trying to convince you that being spied on is just the way it is, so get over it (unless, of course, if the President is a Republican, then it is an uncalled for loss of freedom that will not be tolerated by the Left).
The coup in the White House was not enough. Something big is coming, and President Barack Obama is excited about it, and is helping to bring it to fruition.
He hopes that the long awaited change he promised is finally here. All he needs is a few more puzzle pieces in place. He must, to achieve his hard left progressive goals, continue to diminish America's role in the world, and for the GOP to lose the House of Representatives in 2014.
War is upon us, and a strong conservative turn-out in the 2014 mid-term election is necessary if we are to fend off the tyranny, and madness.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
Obama says Iran shouldn't misinterpret U.S. response to Syria - Washington Post
Securing Syria's Weapons May Require US Troops - Military.com News
Agni-V missile successfully test launched from Wheeler Island off Odisha coast - Times of India
China builds fast to trigger drone race with America - The Sunday Times, U.K.
Armed EPA raid in Alaska sheds light on 70 fed agencies with armed divisions - Fox News
Google's Eric Schmidt says government spying is the nature of our society - U.K. Guardian
No comments:
Post a Comment