Okay it is not ancient history….but still history and one of those perspectives that irritates so many……(they will get over it)……
There has been lots of speculation why Obama did not give the order to bomb Syria back in 2013….most of which is coming from the GOP side of the spectrum….they use his lack of action as a sign of his weakness in foreign policy….and now with the 2016 election creeping closer I am sure that we will hear even more of the accusations…..
I admit it….I also offered up my ideas of what the president was thinking and why he chose not to go through with the bombing of Syria…..
Source: Let’s Talk Syria – In Saner Thought
Does anyone have a good idea of why he hesitated in giving the order to “take out Assad”?
There is a pretty good analysis of the situation and a fairly good explanation from PressTV…….
US President Obama’s reasons for backpedaling from his 2013 threat to bomb Syria were based on pragmatic and political concerns, an analyst says.
Source: PressTV-Why Obama didn’t bomb Syria in 2013
Just in case you happen to like to know the truth or at least a good explanation into the actions of the president…..we may never know for sure until the president makes facts known after he leaves office…..by then NO one will care for the election will be over and the politicos will have moved on to a brand new issue from which to speculate…..
With Russia pulling out of Syria and claiming success…..if they were truly successful then the question could be asked, would the US be able to claim success if they had started their campaign earlier?
In looking at the larger picture, which I try to do a lot, it seems to me the explanation for any current political decision is that there was no money to be made by doing whatever it is they didn’t do. If none of the corporate entities can see a profit to be made, then, it won’t happen…. Simple as that; follow the money.
gigoid
When a President explicitly says “Use chemical weapons and we’ll get you” and then you use chemical weapons and sweet fuck all happens, that’s a VERY bad precedent. You never say shit like that unless you mean it. Never pull a gun on somebody unless you’re prepared to shoot.
But later, after doing nothing, a few thousand idiots in pick-up trucks run around the desert killing people. They kill far fewer Syrians than Asshat did. Well, THEY have to be taken out, even if it means flying uninvited over Syrian territory and, by extension, supporting Asshat’s regime.
For a guy who resembles a Vulcan, this was VERY strange & illogical policy. It’s a precedent that looks bad from ANY perspective. And the context makes it look worse. Compare his doing nothing to Bush’s recent unprovoked invasion of Iraq, who didn’t do anything to merit it. And toss in Obama’s continuation of the Afghanistan War and the heavy drone use in places America isn’t even at war with! The inconsistencies are head shakers.
Not that I’m saying I was in favour, but If there was ever a time to take out a world leader and do some “regime change”, Syria 2013 was it. But Commander Pussy didn’t even launch one cruise missile assignation attempt (as Bush did just before invading Iraq.)
He drew a line in the sand then erased it and drew another…..good plan, eh?
Worse than that. He drew a line in the sand. When Asshat stepped over it, Obama said “Hey, you want me to help you throw rocks at those other kids who are trying to take your stuff?”