Obama was asleep at the wheel while the world was crumbling.
Trump blasts Syria.
- Thread starter Krgrecw
- Start date
Obama was asleep at the wheel while the world was crumbling.
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
Negotiated with Russia to have them destroy the weapons.
This is almost blatantly a conspiracy.
I'm gonna guess what happens next.
Trump and Putin posture, markets go into disarray, Trump and Putin in a few months meet and iron out a peace treaty where Putin leans on Assad and in returns the sanctions get lifted. A classic win-win for Putin.
Has anyone seen the drone footage of the place we bombed? It's like they weren't trying to hit it.
Julio3000
<B>A Chip Off the Old Rock</B>
Didn't commit us to another invasion and open-ended occupation, with associated blowback and consequences?
In other words, he took the safe route. This is the perpetual gripe that I've lodged against Obama, in policy both foreign and domestic. He rarely got his hands dirty or went out on a limb to cement any one particular initiative or platform.
500K dead, 35 million displaced, a festering ISIL proving ground, significant Russian entanglement, continued regional destabilization ... and no end in sight.
And the hallmark 'deal' you've highlighted? Well that worked out well didn't it?
Yet there is even the question that another path, literally any path, might not have been better?
Yeah, plus I can't believe they were dumb enough to use Adam Lanza as a Syrian crisis actor.
The only two lunatics I've heard advocate for boots on the ground are Captain McCain and Tennille.
Julio3000
<B>A Chip Off the Old Rock</B>
I think I was pretty realistic about the results of that deal. You might be confusing me with someone else.
And I will certainly grant that another course may have saved some of the suffering, but that's as far as I think anyone can realistically go.
Julio3000
<B>A Chip Off the Old Rock</B>
Do you think we could've gotten rid of Assad and ensured a stable succession (for Syria proper, as well as for the neighbors) with air power and diplomacy?
Julio3000
<B>A Chip Off the Old Rock</B>
Yeah, it just takes the willingness to go out on a limb and to get your hands dirty.
State control of the media, a pet parliament, and a multi-billion dollar private slush fund also help, which is why freely elected leaders accountable to their constituents are at a slight disadvantage.
Oklahomahawk
Boras' Client
Wait, I thought they broke up.
Julio3000
<B>A Chip Off the Old Rock</B>
Never. Lindsey will probably throw himself on McCain's funeral pyre.
Oklahomahawk
Boras' Client
I thought Bill Maher said Lindsay "Just hadn't found the right girl yet".
Hypothetically, yes.
There are a number of ways, but I think between the Israelis, Turks, and Jordanians (with Saudi backing) there was a diplomatic angle. Might it have involved the dissolution of the Syrian state as we know it? Yes. Might it have involved leveraging Iran vis-a-vis the nuclear deal? Yes.
And I'm sure those avenues (and many others) were considered, but, for one reason or another, we never saw any traction. I suspect it's because the Obama administration acted from a one foot in, one foot out standpoint until it was clear that the foot was out.
Julio3000
<B>A Chip Off the Old Rock</B>
OK, I appreciate the answer. It was a legit question, not an attempted rhetorical trap, and I'm glad you treated it as such.
And, you're quite possibly right. I'm skeptical that Iran could've been leveraged, but that's something we'll never know.
Or just the ability to sense a power vacuum in a dynamic with friendly subordinate players (Lebanon, Iran, Turkey) and the opportunity to knife the (newly re-minted) opposition in the back.
But I'm not taking anything away from the guy who sold Russia on going back into the Middle East, despite all his dictatorial accouterments.
For the record, I don't support boots on the ground unless it's a part of a broad, sizable, and real coalition. And the end game would have to be substantially more significant than simply deposing Assad.
If I was dragged into supporting a combat force in Syrian territory, it would have to be with at least 500K men (a la Desert Storm) and not 5K (what McCraham is lobbying for).
Julio3000
<B>A Chip Off the Old Rock</B>
I really do get your characterization of Obama's foreign policy as being ... lukewarm, let's say. It'll be part of his legacy, and some people will consider it a feature, and some a bug.
As for that over-arching criticism of his administration, foreign and domestic, on that score... I think it's a little lacking in context. After 2010 midterms, how on earth was he supposed to swing for the fences? Hell, even the Republicans who are now cheering a missile strike yesterday on an air base that is, at this hour, operational, were all Rand Paul in 2013.
He's not President any more, though. Using the old maxim of "follow a fat pope with a skinny pope," it seems like you've got your wish. A calculating and reticent cool-running thinker has been replaced with an impulsive, hypersensitive, hot-running doer. We'll see how that plays.
As for that over-arching criticism of his administration, foreign and domestic, on that score... I think it's a little lacking in context. After 2010 midterms, how on earth was he supposed to swing for the fences? Hell, even the Republicans who are now cheering a missile strike yesterday on an air base that is, at this hour, operational, were all Rand Paul in 2013.
He's not President any more, though. Using the old maxim of "follow a fat pope with a skinny pope," it seems like you've got your wish. A calculating and reticent cool-running thinker has been replaced with an impulsive, hypersensitive, hot-running doer. We'll see how that plays.
Negotiated with Russia to destroy the bombs and how did that turn out?
Julio3000
<B>A Chip Off the Old Rock</B>
Agreed. Also pretty much convinced it'll never happen.