I wash my hands of Obama if he tries to overthrow the government of any more countries.

[Comrade Grumpy]

Such as Syria.

I kind of liked the guy in 2008 and still think he is personable and intelligent. I appreciate that he is hampered by having to deal with Congress.

I was happy to see him get us out of Iraq, not so much with withdrawal from Afghanistan that isn't really.

But this meddling in the affairs of sovereign states is not our right. And it's not our fight. And we sure as hell have better things to spend our money on.

Omama wears proudly the mantle of leader of the Single Unified Capitalist War Party, a party whose hypocrisy knows no bounds. I'm not a member of that party. I want an alternative.

[Comrade Grumpy]

2. I dunno. You tell me.

[graham4anything]

5. I trust Kerry& Biden & Susan Rice on Syria and will agree to whatever he tells the President.

so whatever he says, I will back them.

[Luminous Animal]

6. Susan Rice backed Bush's invasion of Iraq. So did Biden. Trust, indeed.

[graham4anything]

13. Do you trust Biden and Kerry?

[cali]

94. On Iraq? Fuck no. I trusted Leahy and Jeffords. THEY WERE FUCKING RIGHT.

[graham4anything]

99. Democratic supporters know what John Kerry said, that Bush distorted. I'll go with Kerry/Rice/Biden/

after Ted Kennedy died, John Kerry was the single most liberal democratic senator in the senate, lest you forget up to the day he became SOS.

and I do regret one thing, my hyperbole when he took the SOS,centering on the pick for the senate (I wanted Vicky and said some things in the heat of the moment I would rather have not said), because John Kerry is a great choice for SOS and the voters of
Mass. are indeed going to elect Markey.

And I worked hard when Kerry was the nominee to get him elected. He would have made a great President, and he is a great SOS.

So, I will trust him and Rice and Biden as they are more informed of what is going on, instead of Rand and Jeb.

BTW, I am still awaiting Rand Paul to vote to defund the entire defense department, same with Jeb Bush and Peter King
and all the others.

[Comrade Grumpy]

8. Sorry, I don't worship people just because they have a (D) after their names.

And I don't "trust" any politician.

Like Reagan with the Russians, perhaps: "Trust, but verify."

And Susan Rice is a war pig who never met a military intervention she didn't like.

[premium]

9. Jeeeeeez dude,

your angelic view of Pres. Obama is disturbing in the least. Really, really creepy IMO.
Suppose they said that Pres. Obama needed to employ nuclear weapons? Would you still agree with them?

[L0oniX]

21. Are government shill brown coats becoming more plentifully on DU?

I've been seeing a lot of blind obedience lately.

[premium]

36. Sure seems that way. nt.

[aquart]

58. Plentiful but they seem to be fewer than libertarian isolationists.

And concern trolls whose mission is to demoralize Democrats into not voting which is how monsters who hate women got control of our statehouses. Obama will never run again. An assault on him is an assault on women's rights. Unless you're as shortsighted as most Republicans.

[madokie]

102. Spot on

[cali]

95. Yes. Look at it this way:

I'm no radical as most long time duers know, but du has become so partisan and bent to the right, I look like I'm a flaming lefty.

[LWolf]

12. That's your problem. Trusting politicians. nt

[sibelian]

90. TRUST?

You TRUST a politician? Why? Why don't you go and find out about the issues and decide for yourself?

[graham4anything]

91. I do. I trust the opposition to be looking to cull votes whilst 2 senate seats are now being decided

I look to see who benefits, and I see the repubs picking up 2 senate seats.

Therefore I trust Kerry, Biden, Rice and the President and Bill Clinton to be smarter than me.
How the hell do I know what is going on there? I trust the people I hired (Obama, Kerry, Rice, Biden) in the same way
when a plug is down, I trust my electrician to fix it. How the hell would I know how to fix it.

I trust whom I hire, otherwise, I wouldn't have hired them
(note-voters hire someone to do their jobs. I hire politicans when I vote for them.)

Why else would anyone vote?

And 100% I trust John Kerry and Joe Biden and Susan Rice to tell me what their expertise says.
Because I sure have no idea about the nuances involved. But they do.

And I 100% trust the opposition to the people I hired, do NOT have my interests in mind.

No?

[randome]

92. "...I trust my electrician..."

But some don't even trust the electrician.



[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[sibelian]

97. Well I might trust my electrician to fix my electrics...

... but if I wandered off and went shopping for three days, leaving him in my house while he did the "fixing" and came back and my stereo and furnishings were missing... it would kind of be my own fault.

[sibelian]

96. No.

Nuances, huh?

It sounds like a way of pretending things are more difficult than they really are.

I've never understood this concept of "trusting" a politician that seems so prevalent in the US. I'm from the UK. In my country, you don't get what you want out of politicans by trusting them, particulary on issues that potentially give the Government more powers over it's citizenry.

David Cameron, current UK PM, is trying to get gay marriage sorted out over here. I'm damned if I'm trusting him. There's no way he's doing it for anything other then further his own political advantage.

[sabbat hunter]

3. so people like

assad should be allowed to gas their people with impunity?

I am against going to war for no reason. But if Assad is using Sarin gas against his own people, something must be done.

[pipoman]

4. What if, like the last time,

we find out there was no sarin gas?

[Tx4obama]

10. They have proof there was gas used.

And altogether over 90,000 people have died in Syria so far - that can not just be ignored.

[Comrade Grumpy]

15. Are these the same guys who had "proof" of Saddam Hussein's chemical weapons?

We ignore massively bloody civil wars all the time, unless it suits our interests.

Congo, anyone? How about South Sudan? Or Colombia? (Oops, we were helping make that one worse.)

I don't doubt that you are honestly appalled by the killing, as am I. But I am as appalled by the stunning hypocrisy of Washington, London, and Paris. This is not about saving poor Syrians--and will have quite the opposite effect--but about our nice little proxy war against the Russians and Iranians. And we have such charming allies: the Gulf Arab monarchies and Al Qaeda.

[pipoman]

17. Yep..

unless there is fiduciary or territorial interests we don't care how many die..

[L0oniX]

24. Of course ...and they have gotten much better at it since then.

[randome]

41. Those other guys were in the other administration.

'Hypocrisy' doesn't even enter into it. A new administration is not required to follow the dictates of the previous one. Or would you rather Obama marched across the Middle East in conquest as Bush did?

Screw the previous administration. Is Syria worth the intervention? I'm no expert but my gut instinct is to say 'Yes'.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[BlueDemKev]

63. Righties are claiming that Saddam...

Moved his WMD's to Syria prior to the U.S. invasion ten years ago.

[magellan]

18. Why can't it be ignored?

What business is it of ours?

This isn't about gas being used and people being killed. That's nothing but window-dressing. There are plenty of places that we don't rush into where people are slaughtered horribly.

[L0oniX]

26. They'll put us in another war but won't enact national gun purchase background checks.

The NSA will snoop on us but they won't enact gun purchase background checks. Maybe if we all owned semi automatic hand guns the NSA would stop snooping on us. Bottom line is that they will not do the will of the people but will do the will of the blood thirsty war pigs.

[magellan]

59. +1000

I'd just like to know, why this war. Why Syria? Is it solely because of Israel? Because for the life of me, I can't think of another reason to stick our noses in there. And that one isn't a good one.

[snappyturtle]

34. Or worse yet (imho) dying of hunger. nt

[magellan]

64. No doubt about that.

We could shake down the 1% in this country and feed everyone. It's heartbreaking to watch how we ignore those truly in need of our help, here and abroad.

[randome]

42. The same questions could be asked of you when you are injured in a car wreck.

Why can't it be ignored? What business is it of ours?

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[magellan]

56. Oh please

That completely ignores that we completely ignore some while not others, which is a major component of my question. But thanks for trying.

[randome]

75. Our foreign policy is not consistent. We behave with hypocrisy sometimes. No argument there.

But Syria using nerve gas is worth doing something about. Gas has a tendency to not respect map borders. Do we want to take the chance to see how many other countries might be inadvertently poisoned?

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[magellan]

81. Why is that OUR responsibility?

Seriously. A straight answer would be nice for once.

[area51]

89. No, it's something for the Arab countries to do something about.

We're not the world's policemen.

We have 100,000 people per year in this country dying due to lack of health care. That's a medical emergency which we need to solve. GingrichCare, with its forced buying of lightly regulated extremely expensive insurance, and a few extra clinics, won't stop this from happening.

Also, our infrastructure is crumbling, which needs to be addressed.

We're a fading empire, the Arab countries need to step up to the plate.

[randome]

93. Unfortunately it appears we ARE the world's policeman.

The truth is America pretty much owns the world. That's not right but it's reality. That should have been all too obvious once we invaded Iraq with no consequences.

The Muslim world is too busy, like our Tea Party world, trying to screw with people's lives and obsessing over how best to control the evil women in their midst.

If this becomes a coalition to stop or even overthrow Assad, it will be a 'real' coalition, unlike Bush's pseudo-coalition.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[BlueDemKev]

66. Yeah, like China after Tiannamen Square

Or Yugoslavia in the early '90s.

[magellan]

67. I'm not sure what anyone thinks we could have done there

We aren't the world's police and we can't afford to go to war to save everyone. Even IF our government was actually that altruistic.

[David__77]

54. The insurgents used it in Aleppo.

The US should be supporting the Syrian government if anything, not sending arms to al Qaeda.

[nomorenomore08]

78. Yet going to war with Syria would probably kill even more. Just look at Iraq, hundreds of thousands

of dead civilians thanks to the "coalition" invasion.

[Laelth]

7. I feel differently about that.

Lots of dictators commit lots of heinous crimes against their own people. We don't "have to do something" about each and every one of them, imo. Are you suggesting we arm the dissidents in Turkey, as well?

No. We are (basically) at war with Iran. Syria is Iran's proxy. We have to take down Syria before we take down Iran, or so the hawks tell us. That, I think, is all that's happening here.

-Laelth

[Comrade Grumpy]

11. Are you regularly led around by the nose?

This is a civil war in which about 100,000 people have been killed, nearly half of them Alawite supporters of the government. And you want US military power to come to bear over the possible deaths of 100 of them?

The US has been deeply involved from the beginning. The CIA has been working with those friends of democracy, the Gulf monachs, to send dozens of planeloads of weapons to Turkey for the rebels.

Now, the rebels are losing, and the CIA suddenly confirms the use of chemical weapons by the regime. How convenient.

Intervening in Syria in a mark of imperial hubris.

[premium]

16. +1000.

Nothing good can come of us intervening in Syria's civil war.

[Eddie Haskell]

53. Yea, we shouldn't have started it in the first place.

[dixiegrrrrl]

33. Those 'Alawis have been a religious minority heading the country for decades.

Most of Syria is Sunni, with a minority also of Kurds and of Druze.
same as Iraq.
while Iran has a Shia majority.

Meanwhile, Syria's christians have been driven out since the fighting started.

There is almost no coverage of the fact that the battles and uprisings have been about the divided factions of Muslim population, Shi'a and Sunni.

Good info, on how the 'Alawis came to power can be found here:
http://www.danielpipes.org/191/the-alawi-capture-of-power-in-syria

[Monkie]

43. im sorry, but daniel pipes is not a good source of info for anything

well, hes a good source for racist hate and right-wing warmongering, but other than that.

in 1990, Pipes wrote in the National Review that "Western European societies are unprepared for the massive immigration of brown-skinned peoples cooking strange foods and maintaining different standards of hygiene...All immigrants bring exotic customs and attitudes, but Muslim customs are more troublesome than most."

seriously though, how a democratic and peace loving person could see this as good info is beyond my comprehension

[Comrade Grumpy]

49. Pipes notwithstanding, that's essentially correct.

It is a minority Alawite regime and a repressive one. Sort of a mirror image of Iraq before we invaded: They had a minority Sunni government headed by Saddam Hussein that repressed the Shiite majority.

But Pipes is definitely an Islamophobe and not to be trusted. He implies the Christians are fleeing Syria because of the regime, but it's the jihadi rebels who are driving them out.

[Monkie]

55. pipes is a racist but not stupid enough to make mistakes on which population is in the majority

its just a lot more complex than he tends to portray things, you have moderate sunni's, and radical sunni's, and the same for shia.
and i firmly believe they will work out a way to "all get along" if we just leave them in peace to work things out.
to me the issue goes back to colonialism, "we" loved to divide up countries splitting natural/historical borders and installing minority governments with no popular support, one only has to look at the map of the ME to see this, historical borders are not normally straight lines, the follow the land.
untill the west stops arming and supporting tyrants i dont think we have a right to lecture anyone about anything, and i totally agree with your original post in this matter.

[dixiegrrrrl]

79. Thakns for that info.

The history of the current leaders of Syria is valid, even if he was a bad choice for the source I picked.

[premium]

14. I'm 100% against any intervention in Syria,

it's not our fucking problem, we've got enough problems right here at home, let's take care of them first and let the middle eastern countries solve this problem.

[KoKo]

71. PBO had to do it...Post here said Bill Clinton called him a WUSS and

Clinton had John McCain on his side.

It was a set up for the "Project for New American Centuries" last requests. It was the last on the "To Do List" after they had accomplished their other goals.

We, the People, must be subjected to the endless "Sequesters" to pay for the wars, though. So far...we've not been complaining. It is ...what it is.

[L0oniX]

22. We should hook him up with Monstanto.

[SomethingFishy]

27. oh man...

Not sure who's worse, you for saying it or me for laughing at it..

[L0oniX]

30. -

[totodeinhere]

44. But sometimes we have situations where there is no good option to be done.

On one side we have Assad backed by the Iranians and Hezbollah. On the other side we have the rebels backed by Al-Qaeda. Just who do we help in this situation? One side is probably no better than the other and the rebels have also been accused of committing atrocities.

[Number23]

45. Thank you.

[Eddie Haskell]

48. Believe that, and they'll have a pile of WMD's to sell ya.

[avebury]

69. Assad should not be allowed to gas his people. But

no should the whole world expect the US to fix all of the worlds problems. Let some other countries step up to the plate for once. We need to focus on fixing are own problems of which there are many. If the Republicans were to ever achieve total dominance in this country, how long do you think it would before they committed horrendous crimes against the 99%?

[Romulus Quirinus]

86. As long as it's only bullets, knives, rockets, and bats, then it's no our problem. nt

[sibelian]

104. Well...

Who sold him the gas?

[msongs]

19. feel free to turn off your computers and go to syria to fight for the side you support :-) nt

[Eddie Haskell]

50. I'll be in DC

[Comrade Grumpy]

51. I don't have a dog in this fight. I wish that were US policy.

[PCIntern]

20. Oh noes! They'll be sitting shiva in the White House!

The've lost YOU!!!! YOU!

The horror...the horror.

[Cha]

23. Yeah, you do that, again.

[bluestate10]

38. Yep. The latest stroke of outrage. But Obama outrage is predictable from some DU members. nt

[liberal N proud]

28. Would have denied Roosevelt WWII?

If there îs real evidence that the government is using gas on its people unlike the trumped up WMD's you would still deny him.

[Scootaloo]

85. So the appropriate response is to hand weapons and money to...?

Open question there, so far our options seem to mostly be nuts-as-all-fuck salafist jihadists who have been filmed taking hearty (ha ha ha) bites out of people they kill. And they've sort of killed a lot of people to date, just with what they already have

Now, I'm not an Assad fan - no doubt you and your sort will be trying to paint that picture, just as you and your sort did back in 2003 - but I do think that he's better than "Option B" in this particular case.

[snappyturtle]

35. The farm bills are about to cut billions from food assistance but we have

enough money for more warlike activity.

I just don't get it. Wars are the heinous result of human beings not using their best asset...brain power. I don't care how someone dies in a war. They are dead whether from a bullet, grenade or chemicals. Dead is dead. Most of the dead Syrians did not die from chemicals but that is the justification for more involvement by the U.S. President Obama needs to smooth over the line he drew in the sand. IMHO

[bluestate10]

37. Weren't you one of those recently washing your car of Obama bumper-stickers?

Your outrage with Obama's policy moves has more lives than a cat.

[Cha]

39. No, that wasn't Grumpy.. well, it was grumpy but not Grumpy.

[arely staircase]

40. I love the bumper sticker posts

I have seen several over the years.

[Comrade Grumpy]

46. You've apparently mistaken my for someone even grumpier.

I don't put any bumper stickers on my vehicle, and I'm not one who's perpetually outraged at Obama. I kind of like the guy, but I really don't like this neo-imperial crap or our seemingly perpetual wars. I salute him for ending Bush's war in Iraq, but wish he would hurry up and get out of Afghanistan (why are we there, again?), and get over this endless war on terror/national security state stuff. Other than that...

[Psephos]

83. Perhaps he's trying to win a second Nobel Peace Prize. n/t

[octoberlib]

47. If he was really gung-ho about doing this , I think we would have been over there a while ago.

The BBC thought he sounded half-hearted and said that Britain and France are pressuring him . "Something must be done!" And they pointed out that you don't hear the same cries of "Something must be done" from Brazil , China or Sweden. Just the imperialist powers.

[randome]

52. At the very minimum, Obama is going to give CONSIDERABLE thought to this.

He takes his job as CIC a hell of a lot more seriously than the previous administration.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[octoberlib]

62. Agree. If we go to war , it won't be because he lied us into it. It'll be reluctantly. nt

[BlueDemKev]

57. While I strongly oppose any U.S. intervention in Syria...

...My support for Democratic candidates at ALL levels of government won't be diminished one iota! If the tea-baggers get into power, we'll not only be sending weapons to Syria, we'll be launching a new series of CRUSADES into the Middle East.

[aquart]

65. Any? Feeding refugees is not cheap.

Although cheaper than anti-aircraft weapons.

[BlueDemKev]

70. Okay, maybe some humanitarian aid.

But that's IT.

[aquart]

77. What's the tab when it's one million for breakfast?

Lunch? And dinner?

And we've volunteered to take some as legal immigrants.

[nomorenomore08]

80. Exactly. Anything else will not only not do any good, but be needlessly destructive.

I don't know about anybody else, but I'm not willing to have several thousand more young Americans die just because Assad is a psychopath. We've certainly ignored plenty of other murderous dictatorships, past and present.

[KoKo]

72. We are already down that road, though.

[Catherina]

76. I strongly differ. The plans were drawn up long ago.

There were 6 countries we needed to knock out of the way before getting to the grand prize, Iran.

When it comes to foreign policy, there's not much difference between the two parties and even if there were, nothing much would change- especially now that Congress doesn't even make decisions anymore, it just rubberstamps what its told to. The differences are domestic and for domestic consumption.

Look at the Syria statement. Why is the White House informing Congress? It's supposed to be the other way around, with the representatives of we-the-people deciding what we are going to do. Instead we-the-people are informed, or even worse, given classified briefings you can't even talk about and debate.

There was a list of 7 countries to knock out: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and last, but not least, Iran.

This is all part of the same old crusade, from the same 15 year plan the MIC put into motion in 1997 with the same board of directors guiding things.

Map is purely for illustrative purposes and not technical accuracy. Besides, a technically accurate map is classified at the highest levels.

[yellowwoodII]

101. I Agree

Although I agree that this was the "Axis of Evil" that we all heard about a decade ago, I don't believe that this expansion of military involvement was Obama's idea. I believe that he's done a lot to prevent our getting more involved. But I agree, if we get into Syria, it's a dealbreaker for me.

[dogknob]

60. So you'll stay home in 2014, then?

= more and prolonged GOP obstruction.

Stay home in 2016 = You vote for Rick Perry or whoever they dig up to run...

Nope, we gotta get rid of the GOP completely before we can start saying fuck the Dems. Gotta go with the people who will hurt us the least... for now... until the people who are hurting us the most are GONE.

Sucks ass, but that's where we are.

[BlueDemKev]

68. Agreed.

Our support of Democratic candidates and thus opposition to tea-bag candidates must be absolute.

[Catherina]

61. I don't think Obama's the problem except for that part about proudly wearing the mantle

He's just the CEO of a corporate state complete with a Board of Directors and long-term corporate strategic and corporate business plans. He's just managing the system we need to change if we want any quality of life for ourselves and any respect for the lives of people in countries we think we can get away with exploiting and pushing around

I read this today and it pissed me off.

Members of Congress don’t want to spend time on oversight. They’re too busy raising money. New members of the House of Representatives this winter were told by the Democratic Campaign Committee that they should spend between four and six hours a day dialing for dollars. They have no time to do the public’s business. They’re too busy begging for money. President Obama himself attended 220 fundraisers last year. Where does he get the time to be president when he’s spending so much time asking wealthy people for money to support his campaign?

http://www.democracynow.org/2013/6/13/chris_pyle_whistleblower_on_cia_domestic

A bunch of MBAs out to make money, outsourcing our constitutional business for profit (which means giving it to the lowest bidder) and their careers in and out of those revolving doors.

And the same MBAs trying to corner the world's food, water and oil supplies for profit while we, the people, finance their adventures on our slave wages.

What could possibly go wrong?

[octoberlib]

73. +1

They're writing legislation(or having the lobbyists write it) and voting to please their wealthy donors.

[geek tragedy]

74. So he doesn't have your vote in 2016? nt

[Rowdyboy]

84. I won't vote for him again either! He campaigned as a moderate Democrat and then the SOB

had the gall to govern as a moderate Democrat. What gives with that?

Obama never hid what he was but many people projected their philosophy and ideology onto him and apparently its his fault for not living up to their expectations. I got exactly what I expected-not what I wanted but what America chose. Such as it is most every 4 years.

[still_one]

82. I have already made my mind up, I will not vote for him for another term

[Fire Walk With Me]

87. You'll have to include the government of the United States of America on that list

because with the death of the 1st, 4th, and 5th Amendments, it's happening here as well.

[Fire Walk With Me]

88. Also, note that Syria are an Iranian ally, so is the US doing Israel wants to somehow, any way they

can, get Iran into a war?

[DCBob]

98. Which governments of which countries did Obama overthrow?

I must have missed that.

[malaise]

100. It hasn't stopped since the Platt amendment or the Monroe Doctrine

All American Presidents are hawks - that is official US imperial foreign policy. All hawks believe that the only sovereign state is the US.
The thing is you can't pretend to defend freedom and democracy and practice US foreign policy and all the myths have been shattered.

Like you I'm against any involvement in Syria. When I hear them discussing how many Syrians have been killed I wonder why they still won't admit how many Iraqis were murdered for Bushco's lies.

[Harmony Blue]

103. And that is the problem

we need to find a President that bucks that grisly tradition.

[malaise]

105. No the entire political system has to change

No one President can change that