Obama is mulling the bombing of Syria with cruise missiles and long-range bombers? Bomb what? At what will he aim the cruise missiles? What're the targets?
Assad isn't in his palace. The chemicals, if there are any, are hidden in civilian areas. The command-and-control infrastructure is primitive and diffused...i.e., worthless for targeting from the air. That jackass Karl Rove advised last night on Greta that we should take out his air force, but Assad isn't using his air force against the people. That will accomplish nothing.
How many Syrian civilians will be killed by American bombs? I'll wager far more than those killed by the chemicals supposedly used by Assad to begin with. This will be a political sortie to appease Obama's critics who say he's a war dove and to ease the queasiness of the American media that find it unpleasant to see images of chemicals in war from their comfy couches in Georgetown.
Nothing good can come from our involvement in Syria. We need to sit this one out and let Europe deal with it.
18 comments:
Clinton did the same thing...lobbed a couple of cruise missiles somewhere, i forget now.
WE HAVE NO BUSINESS IN SOMEONE ELSE'S CIVIL WAR.
It is NOT "someone else's civil war."
It is U.S. backed insurgents meddling in another nation's internal affairs to advance the West's selfish interest at somebody else's expense.
Okay then, let's get the heck out of there and give (civil) war a chance.
"Obama has no targets" And no grand strategy, no long-term or short-term objectives. At least none that have to do with the well-being and security of the U.S writ large. The focus is on what's in it for Obama and the probably democratic successors.
And we go to work each day to support this crap. A good deal if you can get it.
Actually, there is a grand strategy, David. As on writer said:
"These allegedly 'limited strikes' coming up are intended to provoke a military response from both countries, and lure both Syria and Iran into a larger war.
I would add that there is an even larger objective, the start of WWIII to include Russia and China.
Isaac,
You are a grand, grand strategist.
David
Save you sarcasm, David. It isn't becoming.
It long has been known that WWIII is a necessary prelude to global governance/New World Order/one world government. If that seems incredible to you it simply means that you haven't been listening, did not comprehend, or did not care.
But don't mistake your ignorance for brilliance. It isn't.
Okay.
Somewhere there is a cabal: a Ouiji Board, some dice, and political aspirations together in a room. They are waiting to be joined by their friend, U.S. citizenry indifference, before they can start their game.
It is appalling that so many voters haven't a clue about what's going beyond the latest Kardashian sex tape. But then, that's the key to getting elected if you're a democrat and more and more if you're republican too.
That is an interesting comment, since you and David are two who appear to be completely uninformed about the push for a one world government, the false flag operations used to advance that agenda, or a single name of the many wealthy and influential people who have openly identified themselves with those goals.
Isaac,
Stop teasing us and please reveal what you know of the plan.
David
Clearly you think that you know everything about everything, David. Thus, if you don't already know it, it sprang full-blown out of the fertile imagination of kooks and whackos.
Well I've got some bad news for you. You aren't the repository of all wisdom. There are some gaping holes in you education and knowledge.
And don't ask me to fill those gaps for you. I'm not your research assistant.
If you really want to know something about the subject (which I very much doubt), start the way I did. Turn off the damned TV and start digging.
Those promoting global governance aren't hiding in a corner. They openly boast about their plans. They think those plans identify them as noble and good and special.
Open your eyes (and your mind) and you will find.
David: "What false flags? I don't see no stinkin' false flags?"
Ed: "There is no such thing as false flags. False flags don't exist."
HEADLINES
Ron Paul: Syria Chemical Attack A ‘Flase Flag’
Flashback: Israel Lobbyist - We Need a False Flag to Start War with Iran
US-Israeli False Flag Gas Attack Unravels
Galloway: 'If US so confident of Assad's crimes, why don't they publish evidence?'
Experts: U.S. Case that Syrian Government Responsible for Chemical Weapons Is Weak
US's Kerry caught using fake photos to fuel Syrian conflict
Putin to Obama "Present your 'Supposed' evidence, Assad committed the Chemical Weapons attack to Security Council"
John Kerry ‘fails’ to provide key evidence in Syria
CNN Caught Staging News Segments on Syria With Actors
Isaac,
I am not being sarcastic. I simply want to hear your thoughts.
David
And I do not watch TV or read People magazine, for the record.
Pat Buchanan: Chemical Attack ‘Reeks Of False Flag Operation’
September 2, 2013
During an interview with Newsmax Thursday, three-time presidential adviser Pat Buchanan joined the GROWING NUMBER OF MAINSTREAM VOICES now specifically labeling the recent chemical attacks in Syria as a false flag.
Isaac, I'm not discounting the possibility that the rebels might have had a role in the chemical use. I used the phrase, "supposedly used by Assad" in this very post to convey that possibility.
There are numerous reasons not to interfere in Syria as jackasses McCain and Graham advise, but certainly one of them is the false flag possibility. Personally, I doubt the rebels are organized enough to kill that many of their own civilian supporters and nobody know about it, but who really knows.
Post a Comment