
“What good would ‘a shot across Syria’s bow’ actually do? A ‘limited strike’ is not going to bring down the Assad regime and it is certainly not going to end the bloody civil war that has been raging inside Syria. The al-Qaeda affiliated rebels that would take power would almost certainly be even worse than Assad. Even in the midst of this bloody civil war, the rebels have taken the time and the effort to massacre entire Christian villages. Why is Barack Obama so obsessed with helping such monsters? There is no good outcome in Syria. The Assad regime is absolutely horrible and the rebels are even worse. Why would we want the U.S. military to get involved in such a mess?”
Related posts:
Florida: Website Fights Back Against Ticket Quota
Debt Market Cracks Expanding as Cycle Impact Intensifies
Glenn Greenwald: Congress ‘forced to learn about what the NSA is doing’ from newspapers
Reality Check: Does Libya Attacks Change U.S. Foreign Policy Moving Forward?
"They Kidnapped Our Child": Why CPS Needs Transparency Now
Putin: Syria chem arms handover will work only if US calls off strike
In a World of Tax Hells, a New Haven Emerges
MLK Spent the Last Year of His Life Detested For Being Anti-War
George Galloway British Parliament Debate On Syria Military Action
Internet Sales Tax Tops NetChoice’s List of Ugly Internet Laws
Exposed: Covert, Real-Time Spying on Youtube, Facebook, Blogs
Canadian Group Protests Missing Signs In Speed Camera Zones
Author Demands Copyright Takedown Over Interview Given 20 Years Ago
The room with 260 million surfaces: 3D printed architecture is here
Snowden plans to settle and work in Russia – lawyer to RT