|
Commentary
Imagine
this. A man who won a Nobel Peace prize for doing
absolutely nothing - just on the anticipation of the reality of
the mythology that has been created around this miscreant -
deciding on multiple occasions to seek military solutions to
problems that have no impact on American sovereignty or
security.
In Libya, we had
the plan to oust Kadafi Duck rather than just to rattle his cage
like the old fart Reagan had done. Yet,
somewhere along the way, President Constipation, our current
dear and glorious dictator and progressive tyrant, decided that
removing Kadafi Duck was just what the doctor ordered - and then
while President Constipation was conjuring up war plans, he
melted into the background to play golf and to have dinner with
Moochie and the brood at 5 pm just like on every other
day. So instead of leading on his "Obama
Doctrine" he just sat on the sidelines and allowed things
to happen. Things got so bad for our President that
the phrase "leading from behind" was created to at
least turn his indecisiveness and lack of particular energy in
the situation into some whimsical form of leadership by
inserting it into the title and hoping no one noticed the
"behind" part.
Make no mistake -
President Constipation is particularly skilled in the arts of
hide and seek and shifting things to make himself look like more
than the pimple of a man he truly is.
Given the chance
to resolve Afghanistan toward a favorable one for America, when
confronted by his generals to do a troop surge, little President
Constipation took weeks and months to decide the scope of the
"surge". And when a final decision emerged
almost everyone forgot that a surge was asked for and, of
course, President Constipation lead from behind and allowed some
troops to be added but not enough to make the plan actually
meaningful. President Constipation added enough
bodies to get killed but not enough bodies to make the deaths
meaningful in a victory or success.
But that is how
our President works - he wants to look like he is all important
but when it comes down to making a decision, he just is wholly
incapable of making one on foreign affairs.
This is
particularly odd because President constipation knows full well
what he wants to do with America - he is blatantly decisive with
who will be made to pay for past ills, who will be the props to
be exploited for his political gain, and which party he will lambaste
in his intent of looking like the royal pimple of a man he wants
to be.
One wonders why
this President doesn't just paint Al Qaeda and militant mooslims
as Republicans and evil conservatives and tea party members and
go all out on them. That would make sense if this
President actually viewed Al Qaeda, the Mooslim Brotherhood, and
their derivatives as the enemy. He invites the
militants to the White House on numerous times and has many of
those members on his staff and in upper levels of the agencies
in the United States. He obviously doesn't view the
Mooslim Brotherhood as an enemy and that would explain why he
worships the Arab Spring like a Solstice to the druid
worshipers.
That brings us to
the Syrian fiasco where President Constipation has once again
run his trap trying to fluff himself up into looking like a bold
General and ultimately looking like Sergeant Schultz on a
vegetarian diet.
President
Constipation has not uttered the use of the "red line"
just a few days or weeks ago after the gassing of over a
thousand Syrians.
Nope.
Our pimple of a president ran his trap last year about the red
line and even the New York Times, the official mouthpiece in
written form for this regime, has had to admit, "Mr. Obama also is a victim of his own rhetoric. He first drew a “red line” last year, vowing that any use of weapons of mass destruction by Bashar al-Assad would be unacceptable. It seems clear, say lawmakers who have been briefed, that Mr. Assad ordered the most recent attack, and it wasn’t the first."
(New
York Times)
We can take away
from this New York Times analysis that this recent gassing
wasn't the first and our President Constipation set the standard
of retaliation months or a year ago and is now faced with having
to do something regardless of whether doing something is
justified.
|
It is striking that
weapons of mass destruction should suddenly be exploited by the
very miscreants who have spent the better part of a decade mocking
it and attacking the prior administration. Even
though the progressive pigs would like you to forget this,
Congress approved the attack on Iraq and even President Clinton
argued that Iraq had WMD's and even his hag wife has stated her
complicity in this position. Ultimately the case
for the existance of the WMD's fell apart like an episode of
"Perry Mason", but one has to wonder did the Iraq WMD's
actually end up in Syria as was speculated a decade ago and now
Assad is hell bent on taking as many with him on the way to 72
toothless, 200 year old virgins with vajayjays so enticing they
are like a cross between a belt sander and the sahara desert.
President
Constipation opened his cake hole on the aftermath of the gassing
of 1400 or so Syrians and immediately went to Red alert as if he
had just seen a killer rabbit off the port side of the USS Fuckup.
And for a brief moment, the world was nearly on his side, but as
is the case with President Constipation, he waited and slowly any
country that would support attacking Syria over this gassing
disappeared faster than revenue sent to the Federal
Government. In the end, it appears that the coalition
of Constipation is now reduced to France and a few south pacific
islands.
What about
"gassing" citizens in a clear civil war is grounds for
the US or any other country to attack? This
situation in Syria is a clear civil war - and in war, people
die. That happens. Some are blown up, some
are shot, some are beheaded. And some are shot, blown
up, and hearts eaten.
This hand-ringing
over "chemical weapons" is pretty senseless in my humble
opinion. Honestly, dead is dead. How
you get there is no more or less wonderful than the
other. It seems that having a bullet to the head
is no less outrageous with the skull being shattered and brains
blown out with the gushing of blood from a still beating heart
than having sucked in air tainted with a gas. Are we
going to suggest that the victims are going to experience a more
joyful final end in a bullet to the head than in
choking? Seriously - after a few minutes of time, the
brain is starved of oxygen and you die in both cases - having your
head partially blown off and not dying instantly is not a walk in
the field of daisies death scenario - lying there for minutes as
you have enough brain left to run the heart and you ultimately die
from not having any blood left to pump as it pools underneath you.
Are we basing
policy on the number of victims removed from this earth and that
the quantity of those who die trumps the actual
method? Does that make a machine gun more
reprehensible in a civil war than a hand gun? Is a
bomb fired as part of a missile worse than a grenade?
It became apparent
in the trials of the Bush WMD's that it wasn't enough that Saddam
had used them in the past just like Syria. Afterall,
Saddam used chemical weapons we gave him - and not once has the
militant progressive leftist pig neo-hawks stopped to wonder if
the Syrians are using gas we gave the Iraqis which make them still
our chemical weapons used by another miscreant tyrant.
Or maybe the Syrian chemical weapons are the actual home-brew of
Saddam that was shipped off on that mysterious truck convoy
captured on film during the opening days of "Operation
Saddam's Comeuppance".
So how is it that
we can now applaud the actions of President Constipation for
pursuing a nation which has used Chemical weapons on his
countrymen while slamming Bush for undertaking a payback that his
predecessors (including a Democrat) failed to
administer? If it is okay to attack a nation in
a civil war that has no actual national security threat to the
United States just because it used chemical weapons, then I
suggest the same pathetic progressive neo-hawks like President Joe
Bite Me apologize for
threatening to impeach
George W. Bush over doing the same damned thing if he didn't seek
Congressional approval - and Bush didn't need to be cajoled into
going to Congress as an after thought like President Constipation.
In conclusion, we
should not attack Syria - this is a civil war and this is what
happens. There are no friends to save in this
fight as Assad is just as culpable in supporting terrorism as the
"rebels" who include Al Qaeda and militant members of
the mooslim brotherhood. And since it is
repugnant to become Al Qaeda's air force to administer destruction
the rebels have yet to done, we sadly should sit on the sidelines
and let our enemies kill each other and pray that the civilians'
God will see them out of the country during the
process. But there is no case that we can
fabricate to support attacking Syria given our leftist,
progressive saps' prior opinions and positions in other situations
that happened before a friend of the mooslim brotherhood became
President.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment