“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:
Australia to Strip Dual Citizens of Citizenship for Suspected Terror Activities
Greece Closes Banks and Stock Markets, Introduces Capital Controls
Jeffrey Tucker: A Message about CryptoCurrency Conference, October 5, 2013
Texas Police, Looking for More Military Hardware, Tout Its Use In Harvey Relief
The Secret Plot to Prop Up the Municipal Bond Market
‘Forget About The Price Tag’ wins HHS grand prize for promoting Obamacare
Eric Clapton Cites Security Hassles as Reason He’ll Stop Touring
ECB Money Printers Tip Hedge Funds In Private Meeting
3 Acts of American Education System Insanity
‘Hotel Hell’ manager now a Guantanamo prison supervisor
A New Backdoor Around the Fourth Amendment: The CLOUD Act
Philip Giraldi: The Mystery of TWA 800
Sam Brownback digs in on “Made in Kansas” gun exemption law
7 Ways The Obama Administration Has Accelerated Police Militarization
Tea partier at Ted Cruz town hall: ‘Canada is not really foreign soil’