This absurd headline on the Fox Radio 3PM newscast yesterday describes Barack Hussein Obama's position on action (or inaction) in Syria perfectly.
If the truth be told, Barry has done a lot of things when it comes to Syria. he has dithered around, he has trotted key members of his administration out to telegraph exactly what he plans to do to Syria should he decide to do anything, he has told us that whatever he decides to do, it won't include removing Assad. In other words what he will decide to do if he decides to do anything will probably be to lob a few cruise missiles apparently without the consent of congress, accomplishing exactly nothing.
Meanwhile all this dithering has given the Syrian government plenty of time to prepare for whatever we might do, including putting civilians in places they think Barry might target with his cruise missiles. It's given Russia and China plenty of time to issue us stern warnings about taking unilateral action without the approval of the worthless United Nations, something Barry said he would do just two days ago. It's given Syria and Iran plenty of to threaten to attack our staunchest ally Israel.
Why does Barry dither? Why does he give formerly lesser countries than us that have committed atrocities against their own people opportunities to lecture us and give us warnings about taking action? Why has Barry spent the last week telling the world exactly what he plans to do if he decides to do it? Because this is what a spineless president who projects weakness does. This whole exercise illustrates perfectly the problem with electing a dithering fool as the leader of the free world.
Barry is spineless and self-centered. Barry likes the trappings of the presidency -- the White House, the celebrity, the parties, the golf outings, the lavish vacations on the taxpayer dime. What he doesn't like is governing -- making the tough decisions a president is required to make. And taking action against a country that has gassed its own people is a tough decision Barry doesn't want to make. So he dithers around and by the time something happens if it happens, Syria will know exactly what is going to happen.(For God sake, Fox News is talking about how many missiles and possible targets this morning!)
Bottom line is this: We shouldn't be attacking Syria at all. It's not in our national interest. But Barry feels he has to because he's puffed up the rhetoric for a year now and backed himself into a corner. If we had a real leader who was respected around the world and projected U.S. strength without using force, we could effect change without having to talk about launching cruise missiles. So if we do launch missiles at Syria it will be because a weak president has to massage his own ego. And that's no reason to go to war.
The
President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally
authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve
stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation,” - See more at:
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-president-does-not-have-power-under-constitution-unilaterally-authorize-military#sthash.Vd9NhZko.dpuf
The
President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally
authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve
stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation,” - See more at:
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-president-does-not-have-power-under-constitution-unilaterally-authorize-military#sthash.Vd9NhZko.dpuf
"The
president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally
authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve
stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation," - See more at:
http://www.cnsnews.com/blog/terence-p-jeffrey/obama-president-does-not-have-power-under-constitution-unilaterally-authorize#sthash.5ktkaCbK.dpuf
The
President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally
authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve
stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation,” - See more at:
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-president-does-not-have-power-under-constitution-unilaterally-authorize-military#sthash.Vd9NhZko.dpuf
The
President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally
authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve
stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation,” - See more at:
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-president-does-not-have-power-under-constitution-unilaterally-authorize-military#sthash.Vd9NhZko.dpuf
No comments:
Post a Comment