.Iran is enduring economic sanctions designed to slow the country's nuclear weapons program, but President Obama's team thought the regime might abandon dictator Bashar Assad over his use of chemical weapons in Syria's civil war.
Samantha Power, the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, hoped that a team of UN investigators — many of whom, presumably, have a longstanding relationship with Iranian leaders -- could write a report that would convince Iran to abandon its ally at the behest of the United States
It makes sense that the Iranian regime would oppose the use of WMDs, as they claim to have a religious edict against such and they would want to show their resolve/commitment in not allowing such things. Now we know, that religious edict is not worth crap.
Why would they condemn something that did not happen.
.
Obama team thought Iran would not tolerate Bashar Assad's use of WMDs | WashingtonExaminer.com
That's an amazingly new level of collectively naive stupidity. Stunningly so.
I really hope the administration isn't this naive, because this is embarrassing
And you wonder why Obama cant get any national or international support when you have this much ignorance in the administration.
who wants to follow an idiot into a war
Taking a head-in-sand position is hardly respectable. The US president has presented an outline of the evidence in his possession, which includes recordings of Assad officers and video of preparation, deployment and after action investigation by the Assad regime.
Nothing that is happening with regard to Syria is respectable,
Btw, did you hear/see the Syrian/American woman's passionate appeal to senator John McCain at his town hall meeting?
.That's an amazingly new level of collectively naive stupidity. Stunningly so.
I really hope the administration isn't this naive, because this is embarrassing
And you wonder why Obama cant get any national or international support when you have this much ignorance in the administration.
who wants to follow an idiot into a war
Absolutism and false equivalence are the last refuge of nonsense.
I would care about the passionate ramblings of a random X/American only slightly more than that of the average hysterical fundie posting on this website.
Ill repeat then, you are a very calloused individual.
NO, we don't, not so fast Eco. Again and still it is FAR from confirmed that president Assad used chemical weapons against his own people. And as pointed out on this board and elsewhere every single day, you are in a very tiny minority if you believe he did. So it makes complete sense that Iran has the position that it does. Why would they condemn something that did not happen. Thankfully your not a diplomatic negotiator.
It shouldn't matter who used chemical weapons. Obama said he was going to act, no matter which side used them.
No, I'm an individual whose foreign policy positions are not determined by random individual people. Anyone whose position is determined by such is a moron.
I doubt anybody believes that Obama meant he would attack his ally's that he's been supporting all this time. You have to realise that the criticism should be toward Obama for making the silly ultimatum, not that he isn't acting on the silly ultimatum.
What in the world does that mean? Who, here or anywhere is basing their foreign policy position on a random individual?
In reality, there is criticism for both. It was dumb to throw down the gauntlet; even dumber not to carry through.
[/b]If it was dumb (and it was) to throw down the gauntlet, then the smart thing to do is pick it back up and back away.[/b] Going forward with a second dumb action to save face makes no sense. Who wants us to start bombing Syria, killing people and destroying infrastructure, to save face?
You're proposing that someone ought give a crap about the rantings of a random person. Further, you propose that someone who does not is a "very calloused individual". Your attempt at personal demonization is BS, both in its premise (which is a plea for emotion-based positions) and its conclusion.
The enemy will see that as a sign of weakness and exploit it. It would be totally idiotic to just back down.
Who's the enemy apdst?
The Iranians, Hezbollah, AQ, The Russians...plenty of bad guys around the world who are willing to take advantage our lack of resolve.
The appearance of a lack of resolve encouraged AQ to attack us on 9/11. Doing nothing has never worked.
AQ is fighting against Assad! How does it look weak to not attack a country that hasn't attacked us? Even rummy (you know, your hero from the previous admin.) says Obama has no case for a war with Syria.
It looks weak to not carry through with a threat. Do you have kids?
You advocate people following through with stupid threats. Here's the thing. Maybe Americans don't want Obama to follow through with a stupid threat. That's what the polls say. That's what congressmen are saying as their phones are blowing up with Americans telling them no to military action in Syria. All but the warmongers that is.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?