Who is Althouse? * View only LAW posts * Contribute * Use my Amazon Portal
Straw man argument. Stay out of this. We don't have to get involved.
Barry wants to turn the Middle East over to the crazies.If not Al Qaeda, then to the Moslem Brotherhood.When you're a Jet, You're a Jet all the way From your first cigarette To your last dyin' day.Same for Moslems. Maybe he's only a Commie second.
Good thing the same logic applied to Obama while he was campaigning, in re to his remarks about Pres Bush, Romney, and McCain?
Obama has a real talent for homing in on the worst possible response at the worst possible moment using the worst possible means. Bush showed the way: if one elects to intervene, one must do so early and decisively. At this point, Obama cannot take credit for success and will be blamed for failure.
It is way too late to get into this. Ask the Libyan ambassador how that one worked out ?
If Arabs are busy fighting Arabs, perhaps they will leave the Jews alone for awhile. In that case, the longer this drags on, the better.
Could domestic politics have anything to do with this?I hate to agree with the NYT but I think they have it right on this one. I think they are correct for the wrong reasons however. @ Mogget 4:47 says it clearly " Obama has a real talent for homing in on the worst possible response at the worst possible moment using the worst possible means. Bush showed the way: if one elects to intervene, one must do so early and decisively. At this point, Obama cannot take credit for success and will be blamed for failure."
khesanh0802 said...Could domestic politics have anything to do with this?He's gonna have to wag the dog harder than he did in Labya.Of course, She Wolf of the SS will be all for it.
Sometimes I get Syria and Libya mixed up.I care about the ambassador and the bereaved families of our people that got killed in one of them. Libya. And that it seems likely that we will never find out what really happened that night in Benghazi.
At this point, Obama cannot take credit for success and will be blamed for failure. Hahahahahahaha. Please tell me you don't actually believe that.All policy failures for the next 80 years are Bush's fault.
The USA has no friends in Syria. Government or rebels, they'd all be pleased to murder a few Americans.Although it does seem strange that when perhaps 100,000 are killed in Syria it's no big deal, but when Israel kills one or two the world's outrage rises to the heavens.
It's their civil war, butt out. Let whoever killed the most win. Since not both sides can win, we will root for both sides to lose. The Great Satan would galvanize and strengthen whomever the Great Satan is against.In the Obama-Putin proxy war, the Chinese win.
Mr. Obama is a loose cannon.. The State Dept. lecture to Turkey on the handling of protests was a stunning example of over reaction and lack of understanding of a local problem. An insulting bit of "diplomacy".
why do WE have to change the course?
Seriously people.You know that Obama has to support his branch of Muslim terrorism.He is under orders after all.
a real talent for homing in on the worst possible response at the worst possible moment using the worst possible means.Around here, most people just say incompetent.
We shouldn't get engaged in Syria. It's good to see that the NY Times is speaking against this and Andrew Sullivan has been strong on that point as well. The NY Times is a great newspaper and Andrew Sullivan is one of America's best pundits, so hopefully people in the Administration will listen. This isn't criticism from knee-jerk critics who lack credibility.
Seriously, Baron Zemo, you're a crackpot.
The time to get involved was NEVER! There is no winning in this for U.S. interests. Never was. We cannot, and should not, continue being the world's policeman (read "imperialist.")
Dinah Washington - Call me Irresponsible
Sure Leslyn. When the Muslim Brotherhood comes out on top like they did in Egypt and Libya we can safely say that it was a mere co-winky-dink.Obama has done more to advance the cause of Muslim extremism than anyone since Yasser Arafat shuffled off to a warmer place.
We should not be intervening. Obama was right not to; he's making a huge mistake by deviating from that strategy.And fuck John McCain for demanding we do something. I swear, the only positive thing about Obama's election is that that senile piece of was kept away from the White House.
The Pentagon wants to close 20 bases in foreign countries. Good! How many countries have foreign bases on OUR territory?But the experts are not allowed to decide. Our elected "representatives" (when did they represent anything recently except getting into and keeping a cushy job?)--who have the collective intelligence of a gnat--say NO.
See here we can agree. Get our boys back home and fuck the rest of the world.America First, Last and Always!
Obama will not fight. His enemies are all here. There are no conservatives, no Tea Partiers, no Republicans over there.Wait, may be he will send our Republican voting troops there to decrease Republican votes. Hmmm!
Anyone sane should flee while they can. Let the crazies stay and fight it out until nothing but a scorched landscape populated by crackling skeletons and fat crows remains.Enough about Obamacare and Senate Democrats, though. To quote someone else who wants to see the world burn, "Why so Syria's?" -CP
He is not going to fully engage. Just put his thumb on the scale long enough for his buddies to win.You know like he did in Libya.
A drone strike here and a drone strike there strategically placed to tip the scale so the right bad guys win.That's the Chicago way.
It's interesting the "editorial" takes no position on whether Obama's plan to arm the rebels is the right choice. I suppose since they infuse their news articles with opinion it's only right they omit them from their editorials.
Stay out of it, Mr. President. We've seen well the consequences of adventurism in these places.
Obama is wagging the dog.
somefeller said...We shouldn't get engaged in Syria. It's good to see that the NY Times is speaking against this and Andrew Sullivan has been strong on that point as well. The NY Times is a great newspaper and Andrew Sullivan is one of America's best pundits, so hopefully people in the Administration will listen. This isn't criticism from knee-jerk critics who lack credibility.Althouse's Baghdad Bob rides again.Which critics are these that don't lack credibility?Those that have covered for him for 5 years?The ones who fudged their "criticism" of the NSA scandal before the ink was dry?leslyn said...The time to get involved was NEVER! There is no winning in this for U.S. interests. Never was. We cannot, and should not, continue being the world's policeman (read "imperialist.")Imperialist?Most of those bases are there because we fought to liberate the countries in which they're located from very nasty people.If we were the imperialists little leslyn really admires, we'd have turned half the world into what Eastern Europe looked like.Baron Zemo said...See here we can agree. Get our boys back home and fuck the rest of the world.America First, Last and Always!By all means, another World Trade Center is better than blowing up Baghdad.
As one can see from some, though certainly not all, of the comments on this thread, President Obama has been and is fortunate in the nature of many of his adversaries. He's lucky that way and it makes things easier for him. Perhaps too easy, and that's part of the reason for his recent stumbles.
Recent?Baghdad Bob does it again!This has been going on since he took office.Even with the Ministry of Propaganda, he needed a wholesale violation of the First and Fourth Amendments and a massive vote fraud machine to stay in DC and even that's collapsing on him.The last time somebody "stumbled" like that, Germany invaded Russia and declared war on America withing 6 months.
And as I was saying...
The reason for his recent stumbles is that he is an incompetent lightweight.Any reasonable judgement will term his Presidency as one of the worst in American History.
We should not overlook Russia having a legitimate strategic interest in this. There is only one base Russia has outside Russia (not counting the Crimean base Russia considers as 400-year old "Russian soil".That base is in Syria. And it helps guard the 40% of Russian trade and the trade of allies or quasi Russian allies as it passes through the Black Sea, Straits of Dardenelle, Suez, out past Gibraltar.Unlike Russia, the US has no vital strategic interest in Syria.And we are in a position where the same idiots like McCain, the neocons, and the liberal interventionists like Samantha Powers that gave us Iraq, Egypt and Libya are now hot to give us another spendid war to get up to our necks in. Arming al-Qaeda elements against a regime that while odious, is the last place in the ME that tolerates religious minority Christians, etc.I don't really care if "Assad kills his own people". That is what Abraham Lincoln, Queen Victoria, Gandhi, S Korean and S Vietnamese..and more nasty types of others in leadership have had to do when revolt and civil war is underway. It comes with the territory. And generally, foreign meddlers are made to pay for meddling, no matter which side wins.
Stay out of it. Let 'em kill each other. They hate us to begin with, and they'll hate us more for taking pity on them and "helping" them. I could care less after all this time. I used to care, but it's all over now. Iraq? Afghan? The rest of that blighted region? Fuck 'em.
See here we can agree. Get our boys back home and fuck the rest of the world.America First, Last and Always!edutcher -"By all means, another World Trade Center is better than blowing up Baghdad."And how does listening to senile John McCain about America arming factions of the very same al Qaeda that blew up the WTC - so they can fight against forces that have never attacked us Americans make any sense??
somefeller said...And as I was saying...We know, "Blah, blah, blah"
Please. Let the Russians have it. Let them expend treasure and blood for awhile.
We have one Iraq and now a bunch of alternate histories to compare. We'll get to see which works out best long term.
We're always better off when he dithers. Otoh, if the Russkies respond by delivering missiles to Assad and he fires on Israel and Israel retaliates and the other Muslim nations join in, why, Obama can blame others for the conflagration.Meanwhile his problem with Israel and the Jews and his bungling ME policy gets lost in the confusion.So why not give weapons to pals of alQ and billions to the Muslim Brotherhood?
Assad - the Abe Lincoln of Syria.
"He's lucky that way and it makes things easier for him. Perhaps too easy, and that's part of the reason for his recent stumbles."Yes, it is easy to see that his stumbles can be blamed on inarticulate adversaries - like Bush. Lol.Oblame-a. Or is it Oblayma?
We shouldn't get engaged in Syria. It's good to see that the NY Times is speaking against this and Andrew Sullivan has been strong on that point as well. The NY Times is a great newspaper and Andrew Sullivan is one of America's best pundits, so hopefully people in the Administration will listen. This isn't criticism from knee-jerk critics who lack credibility.Please reassure me that was satire.
bagoh20 said... Assad - the Abe Lincoln of Syria.===============Assad's got a long way to go to equal Abe Lincoln's 660,000 dead and 1.6 million net casualties. 1/5 of the value of the USA destroyed. Remarkable numbers, given the technology of the time.
Yes, Abe killed as many as it takes to keep his office for two terms. That's what the Civil war was all about.
Que Sarin, Sarin
Dan Drezner has argued that the administration is mostly interested in keeping the war going as long as possible, as a way of draining Iran and Hezbullah of resources. When it appeared that the rebellion was about to collapse we stepped forward with a proposal for arms. That's the "realist" position. http://drezner.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/06/14/why_obama_is_arming_syrias_rebels_its_the_realism_stupid
One can only wish that both sides lose ignominiously. Swine, the bunch.
Baathists and Islamists intent on wiping each other out? Suh-weet!
Thanks for citing that Drezner piece, Dale. If he's right and this is just realpolitik to bleed out all the Syrian factions, I feel better. Not good for the Syrians, but that's always been a tough neighborhood.
Yes, Abe killed as many as it takes to keep his office for two terms. Christ Almighty, B-H2o why did remind him of Abe?
Clinton, Obama, and McCain - Judas Priest, who can root for in that circle jerk of clowns.
Its too bad Obama, Clinton, and McCain couldn't fly to Syria for a "super-secret" mission to meet Syrian rebels, and then mysteriously disappear. Super-secretly of course. Not that I'm suggesting anything.
It's already too late. Obama armed the terrorists... I mean "rebels". He seems to prefer transnational (i.e. Caliphate) Muslims, in Egypt, Libya, and Syria. There are other places, but his press has managed to keep them out of the news, for now.Anyway, while America continues to lurch leftward in a progressive embrace of fascism, redistributive change, and other forms of corruption, its focus abroad is also converging on left-wing interests of a preferred kind, mostly international and fanatical.
Why get involved in a quagmire?What's the goal, I wonder.
Abe Lincoln's 660,000 deadWhat do you call 400,000 Confederate casualties?A good start. :)
For a little perspective, the Taiping Rebellion was taking place in China at the same time the Civil War was being fought in America. The casualties of the rebellion, led by the younger brother of Jesus Christ [hey, that's what he said] totaled at least 20 million dead and are usually thought to be much greater. Our little rebellion only seems to be big if you ignore the international context.
Dale Light, per capita?
rcocean said..."Not that I'm suggesting anything."Glad you are not, else the NSA will disappear you.Dale, I meant % of population.
Speaking of faulting Mr. Obama:http://www.stripes.com/judge-obama-sex-assault-comments-unlawful-command-influence-1.225974
One can only wish that both sides lose ignominiously. Swine, the bunch.Yep. The best outcome for us is a completely depopulated Syria. We should arm whoever is losing.
In 1860 the US population was about 31.5 million people while China's was approximately 413 million [a rough guess]. Official deaths in the US Civil War were reported at about 640,000 but recent estimates have raised the count to about 850,000. This would represent about 2 to 2.7 percent of the population. The Chinese estimates of 20 to 25 million dead in the Taiping Rebellion would represent something like 4.8 to 6 percent of the population.
Poorly worded line from the article: It was a cheap shot leveled at an event hosted by Sen. John McCain, Republican of Arizona, a leading advocate of aggressive action in Syria.The 'at' should have been 'during'. Using 'at' implies that Clinton's comment was about the event hosted by McCain. Anyway, the NYT charge that this was a 'cheap shot' is itself unfair. Obama put himself in this position by drawing a line in the sand. If the NYT has a term other than 'lame' for Obama's position now, they need to state what it is; otherwise Clinton's charge that Obama looks lame stands as called.
But I agree with the folks here that say we need to stay the hell out of this.And any thought of giving night vision goggles to the rebels is insane.
... a modest escalation of American involvement...The Times editorial board is so fucking genteel. They write the most vile shit, but they make sure all the players are called "Mr."A modest escalation of involvement? Well if they do it modestly, it must be okay. I guess if 18 people a day are killed instead of 14, that counts as "modest."It would be nice if the Times editorial board demonstrated a modest escalation of common decency.
Hat tip to Madison Man for bringing in the Q word. That's what I was thinking...Q...and if no one else had mentioned it yet, I was going to.Realpolitik makes sense though. Squeeze the zit and drain the cheese.
Blogger somefeller said... Thanks for citing that Drezner piece, Dale. If he's right and this is just realpolitik to bleed out all the Syrian factions, I feel better. Not good for the Syrians, but that's always been a tough neighborhood. 6/14/13, 8:51 PM___________________________________The Iranians are all-in for Assad. We need to give enough aid to the Sunnis to have them bleed out the Shias in a long protracted stalemate.
No explanation is forthcoming because the US cannot do that. All our involvement will mean is that the bad guys will get to win, again, ace Libya, Egypt, Iran, etc., etc., ad nauseum. The best possible outcome is that both sides continue to kill each other as long as possible.
Post a Comment