Rob's House Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 This is what so many soft lefties don't get about foreign policy. A President who talks a tough game and backs it up may piss people off, but at least they fear you. A President who takes a neutral approach doesn't have as much influence, but avoids international backlash. A president who speaks softly but acts decisively when necessary will generally have the respect and fear of the international community. But a President that talks tough and then crumbles like a waif when the **** hits the fan is seen as nothing more than a shite talking pu$$y boy that no one fears or respects, but everybody hates. That's Obama for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 Maybe a reason for hesitation http://frontpagemag.com/2011/frank-crimi/al-qaeda-joins-the-syrian-rebellion-2/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted June 7, 2013 Author Share Posted June 7, 2013 Maybe a reason for hesitation http://frontpagemag....an-rebellion-2/ “I ended the war in Iraq, as I promised. We are transitioning out of Afghanistan. We have gone after the terrorists who actually attacked us 9/11 and decimated al Qaeda.” -- Pres. B. Obama 9/18/12 at the Waldorf Astoria Hotel in New York "Our systematic effort to dismantle terrorist organizations must continue, but this war, like all wars, must end." --- President Obama's War on Terror is over" speech 5/25/13 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 perhaps decimated doesn't mean what you think it does Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 perhaps decimated doesn't mean what you think it does You're not going to argue that Obama was using the classical Roman definition, and not the modern meaning, are you? Please tell me you're not that big a shill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 You're not going to argue that Obama was using the classical Roman definition, and not the modern meaning, are you? Please tell me you're not that big a shill. bigger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 This is what so many soft lefties don't get about foreign policy. A President who talks a tough game and backs it up may piss people off, but at least they fear you. A President who takes a neutral approach doesn't have as much influence, but avoids international backlash. A president who speaks softly but acts decisively when necessary will generally have the respect and fear of the international community. But a President that talks tough and then crumbles like a waif when the **** hits the fan is seen as nothing more than a shite talking pu$$y boy that no one fears or respects, but everybody hates. That's Obama for you. He's petty and a punk. In short, he's the perfect President personifying the Left. He's an empty suit that's lost for words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 bigger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 bigger I respect the honesty, really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 (edited) IMO our policy towards the Syria conflict has been botched so bad from the start it should raise impeachment discussions; at a minimum all the "analysts" advising Hillary and Obama should be fired. Analysts: Foreign militant Islamists streaming into Syria to face Hezbollah ".... there are signs now that an increasing number are remaining in free-standing units that operate independently and are willing to clash with other rebels and Syrian communities to implement their own rigid vision of Islamist governance." “The numbers are increasing, with more radical groups inside now,” said Salman Shaikh, director of the Brookings Institution’s Doha Center in Qatar." On Friday, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a pro-opposition research center in London, posted a video from Aleppo on its Facebook that purportedly shows members of the Nusra Front, a fighting group manned in large part by non-Syrians, replacing a Syrian revolutionary flag with the black flag associated with their al Qaida-aligned movement. The Observatory noted that “local civil activists have voiced much anger as a result. Read more here: http://www.mcclatchy...w#storylink=cpy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yhTTqKeIVo&feature=youtu.be Edited June 9, 2013 by Joe_the_6_pack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 Analysts: Foreign militant Islamists streaming into Syria to face Hezbollah ".... there are signs now that an increasing number are remaining in free-standing units that operate independently and are willing to clash with other rebels and Syrian communities to implement their own rigid vision of Islamist governance." “The numbers are increasing, with more radical groups inside now,” said Salman Shaikh, director of the Brookings Institution’s Doha Center in Qatar." On Friday, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a pro-opposition research center in London, posted a video from Aleppo on its Facebook that purportedly shows members of the Nusra Front, a fighting group manned in large part by non-Syrians, replacing a Syrian revolutionary flag with the black flag associated with their al Qaida-aligned movement. The Observatory noted that “local civil activists have voiced much anger as a result. Read more here: http://www.mcclatchy...w#storylink=cpy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yhTTqKeIVo&feature=youtu.be Could it possiblty be that your point is that nobody over there deserves our support? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 IMO our policy towards the Syria conflict has been botched so bad from the start it should raise impeachment discussions; at a minimum all the "analysts" advising Hillary and Obama should be fired. "Bad policy" is not an impeachable offense, any more than your dumbshit posts are reasons to be kicked off the internet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted June 10, 2013 Share Posted June 10, 2013 "Bad policy" is not an impeachable offense, any more than your dumbshit posts are reasons to be kicked off the internet. Hence the phrase "... should raise impeachment discussions ..." versus a conclusive " ... Actions are clearly an impeachable offense." I'd like a light shined on the back dealings of the Obama admin in foreign affairs. He was the president elected to end this BS, and its not happening. Discussing impeachment would be a catalyst for this. It was tossed around at Bush for this reason, why is Obama getting a pass? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 10, 2013 Share Posted June 10, 2013 Hence the phrase "... should raise impeachment discussions ..." I'm sorry, let me rephrase... "Bad policy" is not an impeachable offense, hence shouldn't even raise impeachment discussions any more than your dumbshit posts are reasons to raise discussions about you being kicked off the internet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted June 14, 2013 Share Posted June 14, 2013 So, we are now going to support the rebels militarily as some of them pledge support to Al Qaeda? BEIRUT A Syrian rebel group's pledge of allegiance to al-Qaeda's replacement for Osama bin Laden suggests that the terrorist group's influence is not waning and that it may take a greater role in the Western-backed fight to topple Syrian President Bashar Assad. The pledge of allegiance by Syrian Jabhat al Nusra Front chief Abou Mohamad al-Joulani to al-Qaeda leader Sheik Ayman al-Zawahri was coupled with an announcement by the al-Qaeda affiliate in Iraq, the Islamic State of Iraq, that it would work with al Nusra as well. http://www.usatoday....ection/2075323/ http://www.cbsnews.c...ssing-red-line/ The Obama administration has concluded that Syrian President Bashar Assad's government used chemical weapons against the rebels seeking to overthrow him and, in a major policy shift, President Obama has decided to supply military support to the rebels, the White House announced Thursday. "The president has made a decision about providing more support to the opposition that will involve providing direct support to the [supreme Military Council]. That includes military support," Deputy National Security Adviser for Strategic Communication Ben Rhodes told reporters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 14, 2013 Share Posted June 14, 2013 So, we are now going to support the rebels militarily as some of them pledge support to Al Qaeda? BEIRUT A Syrian rebel group's pledge of allegiance to al-Qaeda's replacement for Osama bin Laden suggests that the terrorist group's influence is not waning and that it may take a greater role in the Western-backed fight to topple Syrian President Bashar Assad. The pledge of allegiance by Syrian Jabhat al Nusra Front chief Abou Mohamad al-Joulani to al-Qaeda leader Sheik Ayman al-Zawahri was coupled with an announcement by the al-Qaeda affiliate in Iraq, the Islamic State of Iraq, that it would work with al Nusra as well. http://www.usatoday....ection/2075323/ http://www.cbsnews.c...ssing-red-line/ The Obama administration has concluded that Syrian President Bashar Assad's government used chemical weapons against the rebels seeking to overthrow him and, in a major policy shift, President Obama has decided to supply military support to the rebels, the White House announced Thursday. "The president has made a decision about providing more support to the opposition that will involve providing direct support to the [supreme Military Council]. That includes military support," Deputy National Security Adviser for Strategic Communication Ben Rhodes told reporters. "We have evidence that Assad has used WMDs, and in response we are going to not get directly involved while we ensure those weapons fall in to the hands of people we can't control who will use them against us." Not that there's any sort of particularly good policy for the situation in Syria....but this is a really, really bad one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted June 14, 2013 Share Posted June 14, 2013 So.....were going to supply weapons to an al qaida backed militant Islamic force....???? How long till they are used against us?? I guess this is a fitting response by the most transparent administration in history who brought us fast and furious and the benghazi cover up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted June 14, 2013 Share Posted June 14, 2013 Look out what you ask for, you just might get it: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/06/11/report-syrian-rebels-executed-a-14-year-old-boy-for-insulting-islam/ "When a 14-year-old boy from the Syrian city of Aleppo named Mohammad Qatta was asked to bring one of his customers some coffee, he reportedly refused, saying, “Even if [Prophet] Mohammed comes back to life, I won’t.” According to a story reported by two grassroots Syrian opposition groups, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights and the Aleppo Media Center, Qatta’s words got him killed. A group of Islamist rebels, driving by in a black car, reportedly heard the exchange. They stopped the car, grabbed the boy and took him away. Qatta, in refusing to serve a customer coffee – it’s not clear why – had used a phrase that the Islamist rebels took as an insult toward the Prophet Mohammed, the most important figure in Islam. That offhand comment, made by a boy, was apparently enough for these rebels to warrant a grisly execution and public warning." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted June 14, 2013 Author Share Posted June 14, 2013 Geez, every time you think that this administration could not get more incompetent............. ADMIN CONSIDERS RESETTLING THOUSANDS OF SYRIAN REFUGEES IN AMERICA... The Obama administration is considering resettling thousands of refugees who left Syria during the country's ongoing civil war to multiple towns and cities across the United States, the L.A. Times reports. A resettlement plan under discussion in Washington and other capitals is aimed at relieving pressure on Middle Eastern countries straining to support 1.6 million refugees, as well as assisting hard-hit Syrian families. The State Department is "ready to consider the idea," an official from the department said, if the administration receives a formal request from the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees, which is the usual procedure. The United States usually accepts about half the refugees that the U.N. agency proposes for resettlement. California has historically taken the largest share, but Illinois, Florida, Pennsylvania, Maryland and Virginia are also popular destinations. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted June 14, 2013 Share Posted June 14, 2013 Yes, let's hasten our civilization's demise. Forward! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts