4 Sep

Obama melts down

                                       

obama not my fault

Maybe it’s jet lag.

Maybe it’s the sleeping pills.

Whatever. Barack Obama has melted down. Reality has slipped his grip like a wet salmon. Obama has always been one to take credit for everything (“I got Bin Laden”) and own everything (“my military”) yet never, ever take responsibility for anything. At his news conference in Sweden he said things that a rational person could never utter.

STEVE HOLLAND, REUTERS: Have you made up your mind whether to take action against Syria whether or not you have a congressional resolution approved? Is a strike needed in order to preserve your credibility for when you set these sort of red lines? And were you able to enlist the support of the prime minister here for support in Syria?

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Let me unpack the question. First of all, I didn’t set a red line. The world set a red line. The world set a red line when governments representing 98 percent of the world’s population said the use of chemical weapons are abhorrent and passed a treaty forbidding their use even when countries are engaged in war. Congress set a red line when it ratified that treaty. Congress set a red line when it indicated that in a piece of legislation titled the Syria Accountability Act that some of the horrendous thing that are happening on the ground there need to be answered for. And so, when I said, in a press conference, that my calculus about what’s happening in Syria would be altered by the use of chemical weapons, which the overwhelming consensus of humanity says is wrong, that wasn’t something I just kind of made up. I didn’t pluck it out of thin air. There was a reason for it. That’s point number one. Point number two, my credibility is not on the line. The international community’s credibility is on the line. And America and Congress’ credibility is on the line because we give lip service to the notion that these international norms are important.

The world set the red line? Which world is that??? Not this world. Let’s crank up the Wayback machine.

wayback

WaPo:

Obama issues Syria a ‘red line’ warning on chemical weapons

“We have been very clear to the Assad regime, but also to other players on the ground, that a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized. That would change my calculus,” Obama said. “That would change my equation. . . . We’re monitoring that situation very carefully. We have put together a range of contingency plans.”

That sounds very much to me like he set a red line.

Obama said Syria does not pose an imminent threat:

“We may not be directly imminently threatened by what’s taking place in a Kosovo or a Syria or a Rawanda in the short-term but our long-term national security will be impacted in a profound way and our humanity’s impacted in a profound way.”

Wait- what? That’s not what he’s been saying.

YouTube Preview Image

Again, the Wayback machine:

In a speech at a 2002 anti-war rally, Obama, then an Illinois state senator, conceded that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein was “a brutal man,” “a ruthless man,” “a man who butchers his own people to secure his own power.” He noted that the Iraqi dictator “has reeatedly defied U.N. resolutions, thwarted U.N. inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity.”

In short, there was no question that “the world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.” Still, Obama said, “Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States.” Hence a U.S. invasion aimed at overthrowing him would be “a dumb war,” “a rash war,” “a war based not on reason but on passion.”

Notably, Saddam’s crimes against his own people included using chemical weapons against Kurds in northern Iraq, a campaign that killed some 5,000 men, women, and children. That murderous assault, in Obama’s view, did not justify U.S. intervention.

Today, by contrast, Obama says a sarin-gas attack that caused about 1,400 of the 100,000 deaths so far in Syria’s civil war demands an American response in the form of missiles aimed at President Bashar al-Assad’s forces. “What message will we send if a dictator can gas hundreds of children to death in plain sight and pay no price?” Obama asked in a speech on Saturday. Presumably the same message he was willing to send when he opposed war with Iraq.

And BTW, his credibility is not on the line. Ours is.

“My credibility is not on the line. The international community’s credibility is on the line and America and Congress’s credibility is on the line because we give lip service to the notion that these international norms are important.”

Huh?

WASHINGTON (AP) — For more than a week, the White House had been barreling toward imminent military action against Syria. But President Barack Obama’s abrupt decision to instead ask Congress for permission left him with a high-risk gamble that could devastate his credibility if no action is ultimately taken in response to a deadly chemical weapons attack that crossed his own ‘‘red line.’’

The stunning reversal also raises questions about the president’s decisiveness and could embolden leaders in Syria, Iran, North Korea and elsewhere, leaving them with the impression of a U.S. president unwilling to back up his words with actions.

This is astonishing, even for Obama.

Let’s be very clear here. Obama blurted out the “red line” thing. Not the world. Obama put his credibility on the line- not ours. He is now desperate to drag us into something most Americans oppose. I do not believe it has to do with anything other than pulling his ass out of the fire alone. We have seen no compelling evidence for action. He has not made the case to the UN. Speaking which, the UN Secretary General said that any action by the US without UN approval would be illegal.

And that makes things very interesting.

Should the US act alone- is it an illegal act in the eyes of the world? What would that do to our credibility? Would Russia be justified in responding to such an illegality? Would Iran? Would Assad be justified in tossing some munitions at US bases in Iraq?

Hardly anyone supports action right now, especially in the absence of proof and has been posted here and here, there are a lot of doubts.

It is only fair for the rest of us to wallow in the same self-righteous indignation Senator Obama so enjoyed prior to sitting in the big chair.

It’s not so easy, is it?

This is about Obama’s ego more than anything else. I hope that liberals will finally catch on to this charlatan, this empty suit. If it’s the world’s problem, let the world take care of it. If the world set the red line, let them handle it. It can’t be our credibility on the line for something the world did.

It’s time to put on the big boy pants, Barack, and stop blaming everyone else. As you sow, you know….

About DrJohn

DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education. DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed. Except for liberals being foolish.
This entry was posted in American Intelligence, Anti-Americanism, Barack Obama, Global Regions, Liberal Idiots, Obama Euphoric-Rapture Syndrome, Politics, propaganda bureau, Syria, Uncategorized, WtF? and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Wednesday, September 4th, 2013 at 10:29 am
| 7,521 views

276 Responses to Obama melts down

  1. Richard Wheeler says: 251

    CORP. CORPS CORPSE

    ReplyReply
  2. Petercat says: 252

    @Smorgasbord: #247
    I would guess that they are already fighting as hard as they can, and committing as many monstrous, sadistic acts as they can. I doubt if treating their corpses with disrespect will make things any worse.
    Personally, if I must fight, I would rather fight an enemy who is raving with anger. It is more likely that they will make mistakes and/or do stupid things.
    No, urinating on a corpse is not going down to their level. To reach that level, we would have to rape and torture captured enemies and civilians on a massive scale.
    I’m talking real torture, of the flensing/burning/bleeding/raping/breaking/amputating variety, not the merely uncomfortable but not physically damaging type, such as waterboarding.

    ReplyReply
  3. UpChuck.Liberals says: 253

    @James Raider: Regarding our ‘Community Organizer’ has ‘anyone’ seen that Barry DID ANYTHING even remotely useful during his stint converting the masses to being a drag on society..errrrr Socialism?

    ReplyReply
  4. Redteam says: 254

    @Smorgasbord: Smorg, I certainly agree with you, no one should disrespect other humans such as apparently was done, but that was not what this was about. It was about the White House putting pressure on the Marine Commandant to ensure that the persons were convicted. And then the Commandant then, apparently, gave orders that they were to be ‘crushed’ in a court martial. Every person that is guilty of a crime is entitled to a fair trial. One that the outcome is not determined prior to the trial. This is what was going on here. I don’t think it is the role of the President to determine guilt, nor do I think it is the role of the Commandant. Both should be removed legally from their office for illegal activity.
    I wouldn’t expect RW to agree with this.

    ReplyReply
  5. Redteam
    when the troops are push beyond their limit, things happen so to release the pressure,
    or you get sick

    ReplyReply
  6. UpChuck.Liberals, #253

    His record, obviously brief, and whatever it may contain, has been cleaned and scrubbed very effectively – accomplishments = Zero. This has evidently been a very masterfully manufactured President.

    ReplyReply
  7. Smorgasbord says: 257

    @Petercat: #252
    I have never been in a battle, so I’m not speaking from experience. If the enemy can show videos of our guys doing bad things to their dead, it will be a great recruitment tool. The more the enemy believes they will be tortured if captured, the harder they will fight. If they have their families with them, they will fight even harder to keep their family from being tortured. If we were known for mercy when the enemy surrenders, the enemy is more likely to give up, especially if they are sick and hungry.

    I forget which island it was, but the Japanese leaders had convinced their people on one island that we tortured prisoners until they died. They were so fearful of being captured and tortured, that when they saw they were going to loose the battle, the soldiers killed themselves, and the women jumped off of a cliff with their children so they wouldn’t be tortured. Who knows how many of our guys died because they weren’t going to give up for fear of being tortured.

    ReplyReply
  8. Smorgasbord says: 258

    @UpChuck.Liberals: #253
    Regarding our ‘Community Organizer’ has ‘anyone’ seen that Barry DID ANYTHING even remotely useful….

    It depends on which side of the fence you are on. The freeloader side is doing great.

    ReplyReply
  9. Smorgasbord says: 259

    @Redteam: #254

    Every person that is guilty of a crime is entitled to a fair trial.

    Not in the military after our puppet-and-chief took command. I really believe obama looks at our military as the enemy. Remember how he said he wants a civilian security force that is equally strong, equally powerful, and equally funded as the military? You don’t need a for that big to handle domestic violence, unless you intend to start it. He is doing everything he can to bring down our military, and one way is to demoralize them like he is doing now. Has he ever sided with a soldier? I bet it tears him up to have to put medals on some of them..

    ReplyReply
  10. Petercat says: 260

    @Smorgasbord: #157
    Yes, I remember reading about that island. The story was written by a Marine who stood near the edge of the cliff, trying desperately to think of a way that he could approach the villagers, convince them not to jump.
    Watching in impotent horror as the women jumped to their deaths, often holding children by the hand, or infants in their arms.
    Sadly, there are some things that even a Marine can not do.
    This is a religious war, the most virulent and vicious kind of war, and our enemies are already about as motivated, sadistic and merciless as they can get. Their wounded try to kill our medics, they maim and torture their own people as well as any soldiers they capture, and they see uninvolved civilians as legitimate targets.
    When you believe yourself to be a faithful follower of Allah, it is easy to convince yourself that anything that you desire, no matter how depraved by civilized standards, is the will of Allah and thus not only acceptable, but commendable.
    Their actions will neither get worse, nor better, no matter what we do. The only limit to the horrors of this religious war is the availability of weapons.
    May God help us all when Islam gets nukes.

    ReplyReply
  11. Petercat says: 261

    @Smorgasbord: #257
    I can not be certain of this (oldtimerz disease) but I believe that news accounts from other than our own MSM were saying that the Taliban was having trouble recruiting, in particular, that the cost of hiring suicide bombers was increasing rapidly, until events in Libya and Egypt gave them new heart. It wasn’t Marines urinating on corpses helping their recruiting as much as it was gutless, appeasing politicians.

    ReplyReply
  12. Smorgasbord says: 262

    @ilovebeeswarzone: #258
    As I mentioned before, I have never been in a battle, and don’t know what it is like, or how I would act if I was attacked. I could be the one that looses it and goes out and starts killing the women and children.

    This is one reason I say when we go to war, we have three steps:

    (1) Go in hard.
    (2) Kill the bad guys until the give up, or there isn’t any of them left.
    (3) Come home.

    I can live with SOME “innocent civilians” being killed instead of loosing our guys when they go door to door to look for the enemy. The sooner we defeat the enemy, the fewer of the “innocent civilians” the enemy kills. We don’t usually hear about the ones they kill.

    I’m going to leave it that you have the right to your opinion, and I have the right to mine, but they aren’t the same.

    ReplyReply
  13. Smorgasbord says: 264

    @Petercat: #260

    Yes, I remember reading about that island.

    Not long ago there was a documentary with a video of the women jumping off the cliff. Some of them holding their children when they jumped.

    This is a religious war….

    I think those are the worst king. When both sides know they are going to Heaven if they kill enough of the enemy, they don’t have much of an incentive give up, even if they know they will loose.

    May God help us all when Islam gets nukes.

    What happens if both sides go to the same Heaven when they die? With nukes, there will be a lot more going there.

    ReplyReply
  14. Smorgasbord says: 265

    @Petercat: #261

    It wasn’t Marines urinating on corpses helping their recruiting as much as it was gutless, appeasing politicians.

    I’m guessing that most conservatives are wondering why obama gave the enemy so much warning time. Has he figured out yet just who is OUR enemy? It’s like a spy movie where we found out when and where we were going to be attacked, and have time to prepare for it.

    I have asked many time who’s side people thing obama is on, and this is one good example of how he wants to look like he is serious, but he wants to give his friends as much time and information as they need.

    ReplyReply
  15. Smorgasbord says: 266

    @Petercat: #263
    We know that obama has purchased over 3,500,000,000 rounds of ammo, and that the Army doesn’t have that much ammo. Some police departments are running short on ammo. The administration is trying to hide the purchases by having agencies who hardly ever fire a weapon buying hundreds of millions of rounds each. Do we know how many armored vehicles and guns he has bought across the country?

    ReplyReply
  16. Smorgasbord
    of course BEING IN A POSITION TO BE THERE I would not incite MILITARY TO DO IT,
    but they are smart enough, to not need punishment because of it,
    after they come back from hell, only a talk is enough
    they are on a war stage, and they are human doing contrary to who they are meaning killing enemies they know why and they have been given the task to rid the earth of human beast,
    whatever, however they do it is not important only the end is,
    and they must survived to come back and raise their family and be humanly happy,
    no punishment for them on what they did on the war zone, unless they did it to their own,

    ReplyReply
  17. Smorgasbord says: 268

    @ilovebeeswarzone: #267

    no punishment for them on what they did on the war zone….

    I disagree, but what our soldier did would only be a minor offense that might result in a one rank reduction, or something like that. No jail time or hard punishment needed. Just enough that it would make others think very seriously about doing something like that.

    ReplyReply
  18. Smorgasbord
    it’s the one taking the picture who should be reprimand,

    ReplyReply
  19. if you as a COMMANDER IN CHIEF DON’T STAND BEHIND THE MILITARY,
    YOU MUST BE TAKEN OUT OF THAT TASK,

    ReplyReply
  20. Petercat
    I saw 4 videos relating it by different sources, they where military warning the people in one of them,
    showing the long convoys of armor trucks, it was scary to see it pass on that video,
    the other where different but same subject,
    I remember ONE ARMY COLONEL SAYING, THE MILITARY WILL NEVER ATTACK THE AMERICANS
    EVEN IF THEY HAVE THE ORDER,

    ReplyReply
  21. Petercat says: 272

    @Smorgasbord: #265
    “Has he figured out yet just who is OUR enemy?”
    The State Department has denied refugee status to white South Africans, statistically the most murdered group in the world. In violation of UN treaties that we have ratified.
    http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/15460818-australia-says-no-to-white-refugees
    (Warning: Graphic description. The part about our role is in the body of the story.)
    The Syrian rebels (and fighters from other areas) capture a Christian town and, yep, kill the inhabitants and destroy the churches but Obama says nothing.
    http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/M/ML_SYRIA?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-09-08-05-37-13
    Obama may not have figured out who OUR enemies are, but it is clear that he knows who HIS are.

    ReplyReply
  22. Petercat says: 273

    @Smorgasbord: #268
    Agree completely.

    ReplyReply
  23. he said nothing to the brotherhood in EGYPT about the killing of THE COPTIC CHRISTIANS,
    he is choosy yes,

    ReplyReply
  24. Redteam says: 275

    @Smorgasbord: #258 And the Muslim side is also.

    ReplyReply
  25. Smorgasbord says: 276

    @Petercat: #272

    The Syrian rebels (and fighters from other areas) capture a Christian town and, yep, kill the inhabitants and destroy the churches but Obama says nothing.

    Sometimes when a person is silent on an issue, that means they are for what is happening. obama has said he will stand by the Muslims if he needs to. Why is anyone surprised that this is ONE PROMISE HE IS KEEPING? His side is winning in some parts of the world.

    ReplyReply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>