The Syria Situation: “For, I Have Promises to Keep”…

michelleobama2You’re the President of the United States. Over the past few years, as part of Smart Power!, and your promised outreach to the Muslim World, you have met several times with representatives from the Muslim Brotherhood and other Radical Muslim Terrorist groups. Over course, no one will ever know that, as a judge has now ruled that the White House Visitors’ Log may remain private and sealed from view.

You recently announced that President Assad of Syria had released chemical weapons on his own people, and, in the process, he crossed the “thin red line” that you warned him about crossing, several months ago.

So now, you are ready to sooth your bruised ego by launching U.S. Navy Missiles into Syria, in what you euphemistically refer to as “a surgical strike”.

In order to accomplish your goal. you sought to gather support from America’s European Allies, the UK, France, and Germany.

German told you to go jump. Then, England’s Parliament formed an Amen Chorus, backing up what Germany said, much to the chagrin of Prime Minister Cameron. That leaves you with France, who may or may not desert you.

Given their War Record, it’s even money whether they will stand by you, or drop their rifles, in the manner in which they always do..

If you are Barak Hussein Obama, you are asking yourself why you cannot get any support from America’s traditional allies.

Well, Mr. President, perhaps these other world leaders do not think that throwing over Assad to replace him with an al Qaeda-led government is  a good idea.

And, they would be right.

The problem for Obama is the fact that he has acted like a horse’s rear on the world stage. His alligator mouth has written a check that his humming bird rear end cannot cash.

You thought that you were a beloved president. Then, you saw the poll which shows that 8o % of Americans oppose your proposed attack on Libya.

That’s a bummer, because during the trips which the Radical Muslim Leaders made to the White House. you promised them “things”, such as your support for Arab Spring. of which the overthrow of Assad in Syria is simply another “show of democracy”. (*COUGH*COUGH*)

You know in your heart, that, if you take out Assad, the Muslim Brotherhood and al-Qaeda will “owe you” and therefore, be willing to come to the Negotiation Table, perhaps gaining you another Nobel Peace Prize.

So, you go on TV on Saturday, and tell the world, that you are going to let Congress decide whether to attack Syria, or not.

Even though, you are

leaving the door open to moving ahead with a military strike on Syria even if Congress votes against it, adding to the confusion over the president’s evolving position.

…One senior State Department official, though, told Fox News that the president’s goal to take military action will indeed be carried out, regardless of whether Congress votes to approve the use of force.

Other senior administration officials said Obama is merely leaving the door open to that possibility. They say he would prefer that Congress approve a military attack on the Assad regime, in response to its alleged use of chemical weapons, and will wait to see what Congress does before making any final decisions on authorizing military force.

Yet the possibility that Obama would move ahead without the support of Congress is sure to stir confusion among lawmakers, who had – for the most part – applauded his decision to seek their input first, though others claimed he was “abdicating his responsibility” by punting to Congress. It would raise questions about why he decided to seek congressional input at all, after having moved military assets into position immediately, and then waited days and possibly weeks for a debate in Washington.

The senior State Department official told Fox News that every major player on the National Security Council – including the commander-in-chief – was in accord Friday night on the need for military action, and that the president’s decision to seek a congressional debate and vote was a surprise to most if not all of them.

However, the aide insisted the request for Congress to vote did not supplant the president’s earlier decision to use force in Syria, only delayed its implementation.

“That’s going to happen, anyway,” the source told Fox News, adding that that was why the president, in his Rose Garden remarks, was careful to establish that he believes he has the authority to launch such strikes even without congressional authorization.

Other senior administration officials, outside of the Department of State, would not confirm as much, telling reporters only that the door had been left open for the president to proceed without congressional authorization.

This is what is known as a political ploy, boys and girls. Obama does not care what Congress thinks. He has already made promises to his new “Allies” which he intends to keep.

Former Governor of Alaska Sarah Palin  nailed it yesterday, as she usually does, during this post on her Facebook Page:

* We have no clear mission in Syria. There’s no explanation of what vital American interests are at stake there today amidst yet another centuries-old internal struggle between violent radical Islamists and a murderous dictatorial regime, and we have no business getting involved anywhere without one. And where’s the legal consent of the people’s representatives? Our allies in Britain have already spoken. They just said no. The American people overwhelmingly agree, and the wisdom of the people must be heeded.

* Our Nobel Peace Prize winning President needs to seek Congressional approval before taking us to war. It’s nonsense to argue that, “Well, Bush did it.” Bull. President Bush received support from both Congress and a coalition of our allies for “his wars,” ironically the same wars Obama says he vehemently opposed because of lack of proof of America’s vital interests being at stake.

* Bottom line is that this is about President Obama saving political face because of his “red line” promise regarding chemical weapons.

* As I said before, if we are dangerously uncertain of the outcome and are led into war by a Commander-in-chief who can’t recognize that this conflict is pitting Islamic extremists against an authoritarian regime with both sides shouting “Allah Akbar” at each other, then let Allah sort it out.

‘Cuda is right. America has no vital interest in inserting ourselves into a Middle Eastern Civil War, in which there are no “Good Guys”.

HOWEVER, PRESIDENT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA DOES.

May God protect us.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

10 thoughts on “The Syria Situation: “For, I Have Promises to Keep”…

  1. What if Obama is looking for a way out? Hide behind the Constitution, let Congress vote no (the House of Repr. has a Repub majority, after all), heed the will of the people like a good “constitutional scholar” and then blame the Republicans for the suffering of the Syrian people until the next election.

    After all, he can always help the “rebels” in secret.

    And in the meantime, nobody is talking about all those “phony scandals”…

    Like

Leave a comment