Obama's Nation Address Sept 10 2013.....

[Sharona]

Anybody believes Assad and Putin is giving up their WMD because out of the goodness of their hearts ...I have the Brooklyn Bridge to sell you.
Obama's finger on the trigger ..is what's creating this.

And I think in the end Obama will strike Assad and weaken his army.....and provide arms to the rebels to finish the job!

Ultimately Assad can no longer lead Syria and his stance is only causing more death ....the best thing for everyone is for Assad to meet the same fate as Khadaffi!!

Who would you suggest replace Assad and lead Syria? Its an Alawite dynasty... Do you think it would be a Druze, a Christian, a Sunni or Shia?

 

[Fisher]

Solving problems is not about equivocation .. Its about multilateral negotiations .. Obama has tried sanctions, diplomacy.... and now he has reached some sort of tentative agreement with Putin. Of course I don't have much regard for policy wonks..

We can hope that it works.

Presidents possibly on the brink of war need to not equivocate when they speak to the nation.

 

[DDD]

Hopefully the Russian proposal will work out.

Did I miss anything new? What did they propose?

Never mind. I saw it on the news now.

So Russia will destroy and control their Allies' chemical weapons huh? How convenient.

I think Putin is just media bombarding Obama's every effort to go into attacking Assad. This is like saying "Do not worry about chems, we'll handle them , In the meanwhile stay the fvck out of our interest fields!"

 

[DDD]

Who would you suggest replace Assad and lead Syria? Its an Alawite dynasty... Do you think it would be a Druze, a Christian, a Sunni or Shia?

Someone representing the majority and who protects the rights of the minority.

 

[Sharona]

Presidents possibly on the brink of war need to not equivocate when they speak to the nation.

Keeping the public informed about a new possibility is not equivocating.

 

[Sharona]

Someone representing the majority and who protects the rights of the minority.

Are you assuming that if a majority won the day, the rebels, terrorists, dissidents and those with other political ideas would practice democracy if their candidate lost?

 

[DDD]

Are you assuming that if a majority won the day, the rebels, terrorists, dissidents and those with other political ideas would practice democracy if their candidate lost?

Nope. These things take time young one.

But that is what we should aim for.

 

[Fisher]

Keeping the public informed about a new possibility is not equivocating.

We are not the world's policemen, but we are maybe going to bomb Syria because we are the world's policeman is equivocating.

 

[Sharona]

Nope. These things take time young one.

But that is what we should aim for.

I am not a young one and I have been following events in the ME very closely for over 50 years. They have to want peace for themselves more than we want it for them. We can't impose democratic process on them.

 

[ttwtt78640]

I thought it was a good speech .. and an effort to keep US citizens informed of unfolding developments.

Sure it was. Obama initially drew a "red line", then insisted that the world did that, but it was then back to Obama's idea which pushed Assad to "negotiate". Obama wanted a "mini war" to punish Assad for killing with "bad weapons", but did not want to "go it alone" so he wanted congress to vote for it then, lacking the votes, decided to tell congress not to vote on it. Obama says that Syria (Assad?) is no direct threat to U.S. security, but any threat to "the people" in Syria (anywhere in the world?) is an indirect threat to whirled peas, and thus perhaps (kind of, sort of) U.S. security "interests". Obama now thinks things might "be better", in Syria (and the U.S.?), if Assad makes a deal to stop using chemical weapons, teams up with Russia and gets more conventional arms to kill any oppostion forces in Syria, while Obama now thinks the U.S. should stand down (while still arming the opposition in Syria?). Let me be clear on this; Obama is very informative, indeed.

 

[Sharona]

Sure it was. Obama initially drew a "red line", then insisted that the world did that, but it was then back to Obama's idea which pushed Assad to "negotiate". Obama wanted a "mini war" to punish Assad for killing with "bad weapons", but did not want to "go it alone" so he wanted congress to vote for it then, lacking the votes, decided to tell congress not to vote on it. Obama says that Syria (Assad?) is no direct threat to U.S. security, but any threat to "the people" in Syria (anywhere in the world?) is an indirect threat to whirled peas, and thus perhaps (kind of, sort of) U.S. security "interests".

Obama now thinks things might "be better", in Syria (and the U.S.?), if Assad makes a deal to stop using chemical weapons, teams up with Russia and gets more conventional arms to kill any oppostion forces in Syria, while Obama now thinks the U.S. should stand down (while still arming the opposition in Syria?). Let me be clear on this; Obama is very informative, indeed.

I hate ideologues and policy wonks. An opportunity has presented itself in the form of Putin. Let's see where it goes.

 

[ttwtt78640]

I hate ideologues and policy wonks. An opportunity has presented itself in the form of Putin. Let's see where it goes.

So now you like Putin's idea to help keep Assad in power? I thought that you liked Obama's idea to punish Assad. :roll:

 

[Sharona]

So now you like Putin's idea to help keep Assad in power? I thought that you liked Obama's idea to punish Assad. :roll:

Putin has the capability of reining in Assad ... Syria is in the Russian sphere of influence and Syria's only ally.

The first objective here is to stop the use of chemical weapons.

 

[DDD]

I am not a young one and I have been following events in the ME very closely for over 50 years. They have to want peace for themselves more than we want it for them. We can't impose democratic process on them.

My statement "young one" has more to do with the number of your posts here than with your biological age in real life. It is a forum thing rookie. We all went through it.

But you cannot impose anything even piece for that matter. But if this should work the majority should have their representative there. Then the representative should not bully or oppress the minorities there neither for that too would cause problems. Hence the representative of the majority should watch out for the rights of the minorities.

See I know that this may be both un-welcomed and unwanted from them at the beginning. But this is the formula.

 

[DDD]

I hate ideologues and policy wonks. An opportunity has presented itself in the form of Putin. Let's see where it goes.

It would go to a dead end. Russia supports oppression and use of force to that degree. It is what they do. So they may claim that WMD's will be done for, they will not do it. If anything they will teach Assad how to hide them more properly.

 

[Sharona]

My statement "young one" has more to do with the number of your posts here than with your biological age in real life. It is a forum thing rookie. We all went through it.

But you cannot impose anything even piece for that matter. But if this should work the majority should have their representative there. Then the representative should not bully or oppress the minorities there neither for that too would cause problems. Hence the representative of the majority should watch out for the rights of the minorities.

See I know that this may be both un-welcomed and unwanted from them at the beginning. But this is the formula.

I have been posting here for two years or longer.... Had a massive system failure and had to re register.

If we choose a new leader for them.. or support a particular party... he will be perceived as another American stooge.

 

[Misterveritis]

Rand paul's unofficial reply should earn him a trip to the gallows. He is a TREASONOUS mother **&*

This endorsement tells me I need to go find Rand Paul's response. When the One came on my radio I turned the radio off and clipped my toenails. It was a much better use of my time than listening to the Great Mistake.

 

[Ockham]

Assassination is not a credible foreign policy.

Yet Obama increased assassinations via drone strikes from the Bush years and continues to do so. Disappointing.


Re: the OP

Equivocation speech at it's best. I heard one of the MSNBC talking heads this morning say it was more of a "briefing" - which sounds about right. American's are still left clueless as to what the goal of Syrian involvement is and what effect the unbelievably small "not pinprick" strikes would have on the region. Obama and team has no strategy, no proof it can share with the public that empirically shows Assad gassed his own people, and did little in his speech to sway anyone. In fact, I think he spent the time arguing with himself in front of the camera.

Best thing about the speech was: It was only 16 minutes. It invariably takes him that long to answer a WH Press Core softball question like, "How do you believe the G20 meetings went?"

 

[Sharona]

It would go to a dead end. Russia supports oppression and use of force to that degree. It is what they do. So they may claim that WMD's will be done for, they will not do it. If anything they will teach Assad how to hide them more properly.

Putin is not an ideologue.. he's all about pipelines and commerce.

 

[Misterveritis]

The fact of the matter is ... they will criticize him no matter what he does.

And...
The fact of the matter is ... you will support him no matter what he does.

 

[Sharona]

Yet Obama increased assassinations via drone strikes from the Bush years and continues to do so. Disappointing.

You want boots on the ground in YEMEN??????

 

[DDD]

I have been posting here for two years or longer.... Had a massive system failure and had to re register.

If we choose a new leader for them.. or support a particular party... he will be perceived as another American stooge.

I see.

Perhaps the first one might be perceived as such. What of the other leaders they will be voting?

Surely not always is the case when it may be an American stooge!

 

[Sharona]

Yet Obama increased assassinations via drone strikes from the Bush years and continues to do so. Disappointing.

You want boots on the ground in YEMEN??????

 

[MMC]

It took an invasion to find that out. I hardly think that ten years of evasion followed by five years of war is a winning strategy to follow in Syria.

If the president feels it is in the US interest to launch an attack, he should do it. And no, I would not scream for impeachment. Even if congress says no to military action, Obama could still strike since he never needed their authorization in the first place. That said, he would never do it. He went to congress because he lacked the courage to act alone and sought congressional approval for political cover. If they don't give it to him, he wont act.

More than likely......he did it to get the heat off him. This way if Congress says no. He could then Blame them. Except he thought he would only be blaming those on the Right. Until some top Democrats came out and said they were against. Then that's where those little Pin pricks got under his skin. But at least he had his fall back position. Which he could blame Congress.....and then Ultimately the American People. Anybody and anyone.....but himself.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Someone representing the majority and who protects the rights of the minority.

Just like in Egypt?