Obama owned on Syria, folds like a Wet Noodle. Putin & Assad 1- USA 0

[michal1980]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...03b068-1cb3-11e3-80ac-96205cacb45a_print.html

Obama removes the threat of force from Syria if it doesn't destroy its chemical weapons.

not only that but it seems like Russia will be taking the weapons and destroying them? LOL. Yes those super trust worthy Russian will destroy there buddies weapons.

What a fucking worthless leader. Even a 3rd world ruler Assad is able to outplay him.

 

[Doppel]

President Obama has said that the unilateral U.S. use of force against Syria for a chemical attack last month remains on the table.

Although he has no intention, clearly, of following through on it.

Washington and London have now backed off the use-of-force provision, and a revised French draft being circulated at the U.N. Security Council has weakened it. Instead, the draft calls for continuous review of “Syria’s compliance . . . and, if Syria does not comply fully, to impose further measures” that are unspecified.

I agree that, in the absence of something not publicly released at this point, the US has been played hard over this.

We've gone from possibility of imminent attack to "you have a year to disarm, and if you don't, well we're not even sure we'll attack then."

If there is one lesson learned here it is that a president should not make a threat he is unwilling or unable to follow through on. But it's not just his red line failure, it's the handling since then; it has been poor.

On the other hand I need to be glad as most of us should be that one way or the other Obama has not attacked against international and domestic condemnation, so although he looks weak here he has also, ultimately, honored the wishes of the people to not attack.

 

[Lash444]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...03b068-1cb3-11e3-80ac-96205cacb45a_print.html

Obama removes the threat of force from Syria if it doesn't destroy its chemical weapons.

not only that but it seems like Russia will be taking the weapons and destroying them? LOL. Yes those super trust worthy Russian will destroy there buddies weapons.

What a fucking worthless leader. Even a 3rd world ruler Assad is able to outplay him.

Please post the part where he removes threat from the table. Then think about it for a second.

 

[fskimospy]

Yeah, a mod should probably change this title.

 

[Ventanni]

It prevents war, for now. Isn't that what we all wanted?

 

[Dari]

The president never should've opened his fucking mouth in the first place. If Syria falls, EVERYBODY loses. Israel loses. Iran loses. Iraq loses. Turkey loses. Lebanon loses. Jordan loses. The West loses.

Nothing good would've come from Al Qaeda taking over.

 

[shira]

Please post the part where he removes threat from the table. Then think about it for a second.

Yeah. What I see in the linked story is:

President Obama has said that the unilateral U.S. use of force against Syria for a chemical attack last month remains on the table. But consideration of that action, already under challenge by a skeptical Congress, has been put on hold pending the outcome of the Geneva talks.

And note that reference to a "skeptical Congress." Somehow, it's "worthless" to pursue alternatives when Congress isn't going to allow you to attack anyway.

The OP wants it four ways: Obama would have been a power-hungry despot if ordered attacks against Syria without consulting Congress. But Obama was a wimp for consulting Congress. But Obama would be a ruthless dictator if he ignored a Congressional thumbs-down and attacked anyway. But Obama is a worthless leader for pursuing an alternate solution in the face of a Congress that was probably going to give him a thumbs down.

 

[DominionSeraph]

John Kerry: U.S., Russia Reach Deal On Syrian Chemical Weapons

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/...d=maing-grid7|main5|dl1|sec1_lnk2&pLid=375159

 

[thraashman]

Yeah. What I see in the linked story is:



And note that reference to a "skeptical Congress." Somehow, it's "worthless" to pursue alternatives when Congress isn't going to allow you to attack anyway.

The OP wants it four ways: Obama would have been a power-hungry despot if ordered attacks against Syria without consulting Congress. But Obama was a wimp for consulting Congress. But Obama would be a ruthless dictator if he ignored a Congressional thumbs-down and attacked anyway. But Obama is a worthless leader for pursuing an alternate solution in the face of a Congress that was probably going to give him a thumbs down.

michal1980 owned in thread, looks like a retarded noodle-brain. Shira and P&N sound-minded people 1, michal1980 0

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

This is.... terrible?

 

[brycejones]

Yeah. What I see in the linked story is:



And note that reference to a "skeptical Congress." Somehow, it's "worthless" to pursue alternatives when Congress isn't going to allow you to attack anyway.

The OP wants it four ways: Obama would have been a power-hungry despot if ordered attacks against Syria without consulting Congress. But Obama was a wimp for consulting Congress. But Obama would be a ruthless dictator if he ignored a Congressional thumbs-down and attacked anyway. But Obama is a worthless leader for pursuing an alternate solution in the face of a Congress that was probably going to give him a thumbs down.

Pretty much this. OP has already demonstrated that Obama can't take a leak without doing something to enrage the OP.

 

[michal1980]

Yeah. What I see in the linked story is:



And note that reference to a "skeptical Congress." Somehow, it's "worthless" to pursue alternatives when Congress isn't going to allow you to attack anyway.

The OP wants it four ways: Obama would have been a power-hungry despot if ordered attacks against Syria without consulting Congress. But Obama was a wimp for consulting Congress. But Obama would be a ruthless dictator if he ignored a Congressional thumbs-down and attacked anyway. But Obama is a worthless leader for pursuing an alternate solution in the face of a Congress that was probably going to give him a thumbs down.

Wrong.

If the USA says we will attack if you do XYZ, and then you do XYZ, then the USA should attack.

otherwise no one will take anything we say seriously. Just like in this case. Syria gassed it's citizens, and what consequences does it suffer? Handing over its weapons to its buddy? Wow.


You libertards will defend whatever shit Obama gives you.

 

[michal1980]

Please post the part where he removes threat from the table. Then think about it for a second.

Senior administration officials had said Friday the Obama administration would not press for U.N. authorization to use force against Syria if it reneges on any agreement to give up its chemical weapons.

You libertards please think about it.

If Obama isn't willing to pull the trigger after his red line is crossed. What changes in a year?

 

[Nintendesert]

Wrong.

If the USA says we will attack if you do XYZ, and then you do XYZ, then the USA should attack.

otherwise no one will take anything we say seriously. Just like in this case. Syria gassed it's citizens, and what consequences does it suffer? Handing over its weapons to its buddy? Wow.


You libertards will defend whatever shit Obama gives you.

So follow a moron off a cliff. I think Obama is a fucking retard for making his retarded threat. I think all of you thinking we should follow him off a cliff for making a retarded threat are even more retarded than he is.

Recognize he's a moron and say WOAH, I'm not going to war over your retarded threat, let's rethink this. :awe:

 

[Oyeve]

So the op wants a war because the prez said something stupid last year. Op, why don't you hop on a plane to Syria and do it yourself?

 

[waggy]

Wrong.

If the USA says we will attack if you do XYZ, and then you do XYZ, then the USA should attack.

u.

maybe then you shouldn't have fucking idiots who have the power to send kids to there death saying stupid shit then?

nobody should die because the president opened his mouth. the US does not look weak its OBAMA who does. but if he bombs he looks foolish because he is willing to kill over a stupid remark.

That is not the sign of a true leader.

 

[sourn]

Ya, because we really need to get into yet another conflict over bs.

Let the bastards kill each other.

O just to be clear I think all politicians are full of shit and a bunch of scum. I'm not naive enough to believe either party actually cares about the people anymore.

 

[shortylickens]

So the only time Obama does the right thing, is when he's bullied in to it by dirty stinking bums?

 

[michal1980]

maybe then you shouldn't have fucking idiots who have the power to send kids to there death saying stupid shit then?

nobody should die because the president opened his mouth. the US does not look weak its OBAMA who does. but if he bombs he looks foolish because he is willing to kill over a stupid remark.

That is not the sign of a true leader.

What has the USA gained in Syria? Nothing.

All Obama has done true his through retardation is further wane America's power. And you libertards are all to happy to give him credit for it.

His red line comment was stupid. His response to the gassing was stupid. His further folding to Russia's & Syria's pressure is stupid.

And yet you fucktards continue to defend him. What has he done in Syria that has furthered America's interests? The only answer is that we lost in Syria.

 

[Paul98]

What has the USA gained in Syria? Nothing.

All Obama has done true his through retardation is further wane America's power. And you libertards are all to happy to give him credit for it.

His red line comment was stupid. His response to the gassing was stupid. His further folding to Russia's & Syria's pressure is stupid.

And yet you fucktards continue to defend him. What has he done in Syria that has furthered America's interests? The only answer is that we lost in Syria.

WOW the amount of stupid is turned up to 11

You think we should have attacked because Obama made a stupid comment? Rather than come up with a good way to get rid of chemical weapons. And you think this is somehow defending Obama....

 

[monovillage]

We can always trust Russia and Syria to be accurate and honest with the US in the elimination of the threat. They wouldn't be dishonest with the international community................would they ?

 

[michal1980]

maybe then you shouldn't have fucking idiots who have the power to send kids to there death saying stupid shit then?

nobody should die because the president opened his mouth. the US does not look weak its OBAMA who does. but if he bombs he looks foolish because he is willing to kill over a stupid remark.

That is not the sign of a true leader.

Obama is the leader of the USA, if he looks weak America looks weak.

 

[michal1980]

WOW the amount of stupid is turned up to 11

You think we should have attacked because Obama made a stupid comment? Rather than come up with a good way to get rid of chemical weapons. And you think this is somehow defending Obama....

He didn't come up with a good way to get rid of the weapons.

What force is there in this UN resolution to enforce the destruction of weapons? nothing.

 

[waggy]

What has the USA gained in Syria? Nothing.

All Obama has done true his through retardation is further wane America's power. And you libertards are all to happy to give him credit for it.

His red line comment was stupid. His response to the gassing was stupid. His further folding to Russia's & Syria's pressure is stupid.

And yet you fucktards continue to defend him. What has he done in Syria that has furthered America's interests? The only answer is that we lost in Syria.

LOL did you read and understand what i said?


i gotta admit thats the first time i been called a libtard. hahaha

 

[Paul98]

We can always trust Russia and Syria to be accurate and honest with the US in the elimination of the threat. They wouldn't be dishonest with the international community................would they ?

We can't just take them at their word, we will have to look at the actions. Trying this is much better than having to attack another country before we even try another way.