• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Obama on Syria--Stay the course, steady as she goes, etc, et

littlejoe

Well-known member
WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—Attempting to quell criticism of his proposal for a limited military mission in Syria, President Obama floated a more modest strategy today, saying that any U.S. action in Syria would have “no objective whatsoever.”

“Let me be clear,” he said in an interview on CNN. “Our goal will not be to effect régime change, or alter the balance of power in Syria, or bring the civil war there to an end. We will simply do something random there for one or two days and then leave.”


“I want to reassure our allies and the people of Syria that what we are about to undertake, if we undertake it at all, will have no purpose or goal,” he said. “This is consistent with U.S. foreign policy of the past.”

While Mr. Obama clearly hoped that his proposal of a brief and pointless intervention in Syria would reassure the international community, it immediately drew howls of protest from U.S. allies, who argued that two days was too open-ended a timeframe for such a mission.

That criticism led White House spokesman Jay Carney to brief reporters later in the day, arguing that the President was willing to scale down the U.S. mission to “twenty-four hours, thirty-six tops.”

“It may take twenty-four hours, but it could also take twelve,” Mr. Carney said.

“Maybe we get in there, take a look around, and get out right away. But however long it takes, one thing will not change: this mission will have no point. The President is resolute about that.”
 

Steve

Well-known member
at times you start to think the left has no sense of humor.. then they pull one out of the hat that is to the point,.. and funny...
 

Faster horses

Well-known member
Allen West had this to say on his facebook page:

"Listening to Sec. of State Kerry address the Syria chemical attack incident, and he is not convincing at all in his bloviating diatribe. What is the strategic, operational, and tactical objective? If we are not going for regime change, then what is the purpose? If we are just going to fire off some missiles -- and understand Assad has already shifted his resources since we told him what the targets are -- what is the purpose? A year ago President Obama fired off his mouth and now he wants to fire off missiles. To borrow his own words, he "acted stupidly." If Obama launches an attack against Syria, a series of unintended consequences shall ensue over which he will have no control. Obama's strategic incompetence was evidenced when there was no Status of Forces agreement to keep a residual force presence in Iraq. Now we see the consequences from that faux pas."
 

Mike

Well-known member
When fired on by the U.S., I fear Syria is going to retaliate against Israel which may start a whole chain of events that could be disastrous for Israel and the whole Middle East.

Russia & China will get involved too.................
 

smalltime

Well-known member
I believe Israel would welcome the chance to go to war disaster or not.Our strategic interest is to keep cheap oil flowing.Will attacking Syria accomplish that goal?
 

Steve

Well-known member
smalltime said:
I believe Israel would welcome the chance to go to war disaster or not. Our strategic interest is to keep cheap oil flowing.Will attacking Syria accomplish that goal?

Obama and the far left liberals do not want cheap oil,.. they want green ineffective energy...

so if energy prices necessarily skyrocketed.. they would consider that mission accomplished...
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
Steve said:
smalltime said:
I believe Israel would welcome the chance to go to war disaster or not. Our strategic interest is to keep cheap oil flowing.Will attacking Syria accomplish that goal?

Obama and the far left liberals do not want cheap oil,.. they want green ineffective energy...

so if energy prices necessarily skyrocketed.. they would consider that mission accomplished...

Except that no one country can ever control the price of oil for very long.

My opinion is that Reagan did one of the best jobs ever of manipulating oil prices when he encouraged the Saudis back in the mid 80's to produce full-bore. This drove down short-term per barrel prices and also drove the Soviet Union to bankrupcy as they tried to keep up with US military spending.
 
Top