Obama's Waterloo?

E

eldorado

Long Time Member
Messages
8,636
LAST EDITED ON Aug-25-13 AT 04:46PM (MST)[p]There's no denying that the U.S. is preparing some kind of military strike against Damascus. The intense pressure to save the "Arab Spring" in Syria is too great to dismiss. Will this gambit atone for Egypt and Libya or will Syria become his Waterloo?

2026index.jpg
 
That will soley depend on how he handles it. One mistep and he is further down the ladder of popularity. He would be smart to make any call on the advice of good experts and not trust his own personal decisions as he does not have the experience to make the call.

RELH
 
Obama's gambits in the Middle East have not paid off. I doubt Syria will be any different even with the best of advice. Obama will be relegating this nation to another costly and catastrophic war if he decides in the end to attack Syria.

Eldorado
 
You make me laugh RELH.
All presidents consult with experts, then they make their decisions, its called being the president.
Whether its deciding to go to war in Iraq and how many troops to deploy or whether to go inside Pakistan and get Osama, they all consult and then make their decisions.
Are you some kind of a joker?
 
Nope not a joker a all. You noticed I said good experts. That is one of Obama's biggest failures in office. He appointed many advisors based on their politics and loyalty to him, not on their expertise in certain fields where they can give good advise.
In lanuage you will understand zigzag, his advisors have shown to be as big as a buffoon as Obama is in the area of foreign policy decisions.

At times I think he has you for a advisor.

RELH
 
Can we at least make up our minds as to who really is the enemy in this region?

"Courage is being scared to death but saddling up anyway."
 
If we must go in, let's do it without any boots on the ground nor any air force pilots being put at risk.

Send in two nuke subs off the nearest coast and have them launch 40-60 Tomahawk missles to remove the main military targets on a first strike. I would even ask Israel to send in Mossad agents before the strike and have them try to pinpoint where the Syrian president may be at and send 1-2 missles to that building to either get rid of him or to send him a direct message that he has a bulleyes painted on his back.

RELH
 
I don't see the U.S. destroying the Syrian state. It would likely lead to a wider and more destructive war. I think a more limited attack will be launched weakening the state and its ability to defeat al-Qaeda in the short term. Bleeding Syria slowly seems to be the long term goal of the U.S., EU, GCC and others.

Eldorado
 
40 GPS guided Tomahawk missles will not be destroying the Syrian state. It could remove enough military power where the rebels would be able to overthrow the goverment after the playing field was even up.

RELH
 
The SAA in the field will survive the Tomahawk missile strikes. Enough combat units with their heavy weapons along with the many Baath militias and NDF will remain intact to keep al-Qaeda in check.

Eldorado
 
Can we at least make up our minds as to who really is the enemy in this region?

"Courage is being scared to death but saddling up anyway."

No! Either side is a bad deal for the U.S.. I don't believe we owe them humanitarian aid as we can't sort the radical fundamentalists from the average Muhammad if there is such a thing. I know Syria will serve as a radical outpost if it falls we'll cross that bridge when we get to it.
 
> Can we at least make
>up our minds as to
>who really is the enemy
>in this region?
>
>"Courage is being scared to death
>but saddling up anyway."
>
>No! Either side is a
>bad deal for the U.S..
>I don't believe we owe
>them humanitarian aid as we
>can't sort the radical fundamentalists
>from the average Muhammad if
>there is such a thing.
> I know Syria will
>serve as a radical outpost
>if it falls we'll cross
>that bridge when we get
>to it.

Agree 100%

Anything we do over there will turn into a shyt sandwich.
***********************************

Margaret Thatcher: "The trouble with Socialism is, sooner or later you run out of other people's money."


"A Liberal is a person who will give away everything he doesn't own." - Unknown
 
Foreign policy has in modern times been by trial and error the examples of this are many. In many of the cases since WWII we have been at error.
 
I'm just waiting for the Libs to blame this one on Bush after Obama pushes the button.

RELH
 
So here we are again getting ready to attack another middle eastern country. Russia and China are voicing their opposition much like they did when we went into Iraq with their "staunch" warnings but do they fear the US as much today as they did back then?

Putin is already calling Obama Bush's clone and it has to cross the minds of logical people that we can only attack so many of their allies before they get fed up and fight back. Will Russia and China sit back and pound sand or will they get involved?

Maybe a better question is why do we care even slightly what happens in Syria? Obviously the rest of the world doesn't care about innocent women and children dying by chemical weapons so why should we? IMO this will only have a negative impact on our standing in the world, besides one minute we have defeated Al Queda and the next minute we are helping them overthrow a tyrannical government. What is the benefit to attacking Syria?
 
My opinion is no benefit to the U.S is possible in Syria. I guess I'm not just that much of a humanitarian to approve of getting involved. Saying this I feel sorry for the innocents involved, but I'm somewhat an isolationist.
 
Anything done in the middle east is a loser.

Even if the best possible action was made, later it will be easily to see the downsides and it would be impossible to know or prove what the upsides were.

This goes all the way back to the first Iraqi war, and every single thing done up till present history.

Nobody can tell you what we did was good or bad because it is impossible to turn back the clock and compare the "what ifs".

I will give Obama the benefit of the doubt on whatever he does, because he has better info than we do.

It is easy to second guess what any president has done in the Middle east, because it is always a mess.

Maybe it would be worse if we did nothing.
 
Isn't "doing nothing" what Egypt did? Now look at there situation.

"Courage is being scared to death but saddling up anyway."
 
The problem is that Obama opened his ass by drawing the red line in the sand. Now we either do something and be hated even more or we do nothing and look like pansies. I like Canada and Mexico's stance on this one, grab your popcorn, sit back and watch the movie.

There isn't much Arab League support for an attack on Syria and even Saudi Arabia is quiet about it so let it ride and see what happens, besides have any of us seen the "proof" that the Assad regime deployed the chemical weapons?
 
Obama screws this up an I'm not voting for him again. Obama has talked himself into a corner with his red line. I wasn't totally thrilled with the first term but the second term has been worse. I realize how lame duck presidents struggle but this feels like spinning wheels in the mud.

It irritates me the choices that voters have had the last few elections. Not just in presidential elections but in my case Congressional elections and state elections. I'm disillusioned with politics. Obama has been a poor leader but I have no reason to believe McCain or Romney would be better. Bush certainly deserves most of the criticism he has received. I've watched McCain since 2008 and really feel he has been a poor party leader.

The latest poll say that 26% favor military action in Syria so if we send the Tomahawk missiles it won't be popular in the U.S..
 
Obama has done more than put himself in a corner he has pulled the whole nation into a corner,Russia and the rest of the world has lost all respect for us and is not afraid of us with an ignorant Leader we have, it has worked out to a tee for our leader.
 
Russia would never do tht if Regan or JFK was in office. They are sure that Obama is a empty suit and will not carry though on his "Red Line" threat. A little show of force on the part of Russia and they feel Obama will back down and Russia gets the credit for backin down our President.

One of the bad traits of Obama. Making promises he can not keep or will not keep but he felt the masses would enjoy hearing what he can and will do.

RELH
 
I would agree about him playing to the masses but only 26% want missiles launched so he would play to the public opinion by not launching missiles. Unfortunately at this point its a bad play no matter what he does.
 
You are right. As it now stands he can not win from losing due to him shooting his mouth off and painting himself into a corner with no exits.
RELH
 
Russia has Obama's number and they now it. Putin is gonna run our POTUS around like a bully does to a wimpy kid on a school play ground. Obama's mouth should be taped shut or he should fire all his writers and strap a teleprompter around his neck. Just 3 more years with this idiot though...

"Courage is being scared to death but saddling up anyway."
 
Obama can't stop the US congress from debating this.....they are not debating it because they are as useless as he is.....
 
Meanwhile how many nukes will Iran have ready for use as we argue amongst ourselves, how many plans for terrorists attacks on our Country are being made,our Leaders are looking stupid and a lot of lives are at stake.
 
Obama would be even a bigger fool if he failed to cave in to Congress and allow them to vote on the issue. That is the only way he may save some face by pointing the finger at Congess for making the decision he is not able to make without some type of fallout.
Then we need to tape Obama's mouth shut as well as Biden's for the next three years.

RELH
 
> What happened
>to 440?he must have drawn
>a sheep tag.

I think he is busy running the still.....




When you go swimming in the ocean, it is very cold, and it makes my willy small
 
Shouldn't be a problem if it comes to a ground war we have 51% of the voters who voted for Obama can enlist.
 
Leave them be!! No Tomahawks! No new war.

Let's see... Syrians killing each other. What's the problem??

Stay the Hell out of there. No good can come to the U.S by attacking Syria.
 
The assessment report implicating Damascus for the CW attack was released today. It reads more like a PR handout from the opposition. Where is the "undeniable" proof of the use of CW? There's no evidence provided that conclusively implicates Damascus. It's all supposition and circumstantial. Hardly enough to justify more American blood and treasure in another Middle East war.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/164270521/USG-Assessment-on-Syria
 
My personal feelings. Let them kill each other off in a civil war. Our interferrence will not come to any good as we would be replacing one dictator with another and all of them hate the U.S.
If they are busy killing each other, they are too busy to make up attack plans on us overseas.

First there was Afiganstan, then Iraq, now Syria, and Iran will be next. We need to forget about Syria and worry about what we are going to do when Iran reaches the point of obtaining nukes. Gong after Syria then later following up with Iran will cost us billions in defense spending that we should not squander over every little hotspot in the middle east.

We need to tell the Saudies it is your problem, deal with it, you have the money to spend on weapons.

Congress will vote a "No go" and Obama will be able to save face and point his finger at Congress for defeating his plans of attacking. Something that he is very good at doing. No more blaming it on Bush, new motto will be to blame it on Congress for Obama.

RELH
 
The Saudis don't have the balls to do the job. They hire dumb azzholes to do their dirty work.

Guess who they are?

Eldorado
 
>The Saudis don't have the balls
>to do the job. They
>hire dumb azzholes to do
>their dirty work.
>
>Guess who they are?
>
>Eldorado
Every time we pay at the pump.
 
1393liberals_swore.jpg



***********************************

Margaret Thatcher: "The trouble with Socialism is, sooner or later you run out of other people's money."


"A Liberal is a person who will give away everything he doesn't own." - Unknown
 
The lack of international support for military action has forced Obama to seek cover from Congress.
A cynical yet clever ploy. Now will Congress bite?

Eldorado
 
He's miss directing the people trying to save face. Congress ain't gonna go for it so he can try an keep his image up but most watching his game already know the real reasons why he is putting this before congress. What a waste of time. If I pulled stunts like this dim wit I'd be looking for a new job. What a dooche bag...

"Courage is being scared to death but saddling up anyway."
 
I think Congress will not support any action in Syria and send Obama back to his room to sit in the corner.
My question to you Eldorado, what do you think of your president now that you probably voted twice for?

I still say he will go down as the worse president elected in the past 100 years as history will tell the story.

RELH
 
I thought Congress was in recess.

There should be plenty of time to move civilians into any high target areas.

Eel
 
>I wish Putin would run here
>in 2016.....

You don't mean that. It's just that Obama makes Putin look so good.

Eel
 
Eldorado there is a very big difference between Bush and Obama. When things went to crap under Bush, you did not see him pointing a finger at Clinton and blaming it all on him as Obama has been doing for the past 5 years on Bush.

Also Obama has critized Bush for this, for that, and turned around and followed his drum beat. Sometimes to a even larger scale. Syria is a very good example of that.

Bottom line is that Obama was never prepared to be President, has been a total failure on many fronts and will continue to screw up until he is out of office.

The biggest tragedy is the voting fools that still support him and still believe he can walk on water. P.T. Barnum was very right about a fool being born every minute. The fools in this country has proven that beyound any shadow of a doubt.

RELH
 
Embarrassing lack of leadership here.

I for one am willing to give Obama the benefit of the doubt on his decision to take military action in Syria.
I would like to think he is better informed than the rest of us.

That being said, if he truly believes this needs to be done to pass it off on congress is shameful.

This is the most unpresidential president in history.
I knew he was an empty suit and brought no real experiences to the table, but, this is pathetic.

***********************************

Margaret Thatcher: "The trouble with Socialism is, sooner or later you run out of other people's money."


"A Liberal is a person who will give away everything he doesn't own." - Unknown
 
RELH, you seem to be hung up on the blame game. But whatever. Obama has never blamed Bush for Syria. The consequences of his Syria policy will be solely his just as Iraq must be solely Bush's.

BTW, I don't hold you personally responsible for Iraq and other Bush failures.

Eldorado
 
Eldorado, what you really mean to say is he has not blamed Bush as of yet. He has blamed him for just about everything else. No! This time even Obama has figured out that he can not get away with blaming Bush. That is the reason he finally caved in and allowed it to go to Congress in order to save face and use them as his whipping boy this time on the blame game.

Bush had his failures, but compared to Obama they are very pale. I'm glad you do not hold me responsible for Bush, as I hold you and every other fool out there responsible for being stupid enough to vote for Obama the second time after he failed to deliver in his first term. You must love the circus.

RELH
 
Well it appears that Obama was going to go one up on Bush and his wars. Obama was fully planning to make a military strike on Syria without the approval or voting of Congress and without the aid of the British.

That is until Chief of Staff Denis McDonough took a stroll with Obama on the White House garden and had a private chat with him where no one could hear them. Would it have been nice if the public could have heard that private talk.

After the stroll Obama changed his mind and decided to allow Congress have their say so on the military intervention.

I would not be surprised if McDonough had told Obama this. Mr. President if you go ahead and proceed without Congress approval and the majority of Americans being against any intervention, you will be signing the death knell for many Democrats next election and in 2016.

yea! this president is never going to be a leader or have the slightest idea of what to do in any crisis and look how many fools voted for him the second time around.
I guess you could call it " an idiot leading the other idiots in this country".
RELH
 
Barry Soteroe ran on ending all wars the US was engaged in and closing GITMO within the first year. How's that going for ya barry?
The most inexperienced leader this nation ever saw and the most na?ve, is struggling with whether to engage Congress (as per the Constitution) or go it alone imperialistically. He is in way over his pay grade and shows just how limp he really is in the eyes of the world. Putin will eat his lunch and hand him a CD of old speeches...



Stop Global Whining
 
Interesting title for this thread, seeing as how hubris brought both to the place they were and currently are.
 
So... let's think about this for a minute. Bush made the case for going into Iraq on the premise that Saddam Hussein had WMD's and Congress voted in favor of an invasion. We now have Obama starting off not even making a case but wanting to use military force in Syria based on chemical weapon use on civilians which by all accounts has yet to be proven. Now Obama has decided to allow Congress to decide to launch an attack but still no proof that Assad is behind the CW attacks. From what is out there in public, there is more proof that the attacks came from the rebels and not the Assad regime. Where is the outrage from the left?

Remember Iraq was a huge mistake based on lies but nobody could possibly know the ramifications of attacking Syria and where is the evidence that the regime used the CW?
 
Heaven help you if you believe anything Kerry may say. He has alot in common with Al Gore.
As for the gas attack. It was not delivered by any rocket of size or there would have been thousands killed and not the small number they reported. If a larger rocket had been used, I would agree that it was more likely it was done by the goverment.
The rebels have access to smaller rockets and motars, they may also have access to nerve gas as Israel shot up a convoy in syria that was transporting suspected chemical weapons to Hezbolla rebels in Palastine.
Kerry is blowing smoke without 100% proof to support his President's stance on a strike.

RELH
 
>Heaven help you if you believe
>anything Kerry may say. He
>has alot in common with
>Al Gore.
> As for the
>gas attack. It was not
>delivered by any rocket of
>size or there would have
>been thousands killed and not
>the small number they reported.
>If a larger rocket had
>been used, I would agree
>that it was more likely
>it was done by the
>goverment.
> The rebels have
>access to smaller rockets and
>motars, they may also have
>access to nerve gas as
>Israel shot up a convoy
>in syria that was transporting
>suspected chemical weapons to Hezbolla
>rebels in Palastine.
> Kerry is blowing
>smoke without 100% proof to
>support his President's stance on
>a strike.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> RELH
+1
 
Al-Qaeda operatives have been captured with sarin in Iraq, Turkey, and Syria. Chemical labs have been discovered in Iraq and Syria in formerly controlled rebel held areas. They have made it clear they would not hesitate to use CW against the government. The opposition has agitated for the better part of a year for foreign intervention and what better way than a false flag operation involving CW.

Eldorado
 
Gee! Are you saying that Obama is planning to follow Bush's example of intervention based on possible faulty intelligence or faked intelligence?

Who would guess that Obama would stoop so low just to save face. Now where are the screaming liberals that appeared when Bush was accused of doing this?

RELH
 
RELH, you seem to be enjoying Obama's predicament. Looks like you want the nation to stumble into another war just to vindicate Bush. This is not about Bush or Obama but how our leaders are often quick to orchestrate needless wars based on dubious or suspect intel.

Eldorado
 
No Eldorado I am just bringing to point how two faced you liberals are and how foolish you were to vote for Obama twice after he screwed you in his first term.
Just keep your vaseline handy as you are going to need it in the next three years you have him.

RELH
 
RELH, you seem more concerned about evening the score for Bush rather that hoping Obama does not commit the nation to another needless war.

BTW, I have criticized both Bush and Obama on their Middle East policies. Can you say the same?

Eldorado
 
Yes I can. In fact I have stated on prior posts that Bush made two very bad mistakes right off the bat after being elected. Making Chaney his vice president and Rumsfeld his Sect. of Defense. Others followed later.

I also was considering voting for Obama the first time as I did not care that much for that Arizona Senator running on the GOP ticket. After doing a research on Obama, it was apparent he was to far in left field for anyone except a liberal and had no experience that would help him run this country,

The big eye opener was his Senate voting record where he voted present but not casting a vote on any major issue that could bite his butt later. That along told me he was a political con man that would ride the fence until he saw which way the wind was blowing to make his stance.

I guess that made me smarter then you liberals that was stupid enough to fall twice for his lies and promises, and fail to look at his dismal track record for delivering. I can understand you and others voting for him the first time in hopes he would deliver. I consider you and anyone else that voted for him the second time as being outright fools and too stupid to see that he was nothing but a empty suit that would never deliver on his so called promises.

RELH
 
And now our king is asking for a vote from congress whether to support Al Queda in Syria in September 11... Irony?

"Courage is being scared to death but saddling up anyway."
 
We have an anti American for a President so far he has gotten us a little closer to his agenda of making our Country to be like the rest of the World to live in fear of the Government.
 
He has also got closer to what I believe is his brotherhoods plan of bringing American and western type civilization down. Great successes have been made by them. Three more years of him. Its gonna be tough and gonna get rough.

"Courage is being scared to death but saddling up anyway."
 
He is toast. The Iranians just announced that they will kidnap one family member of every general, ambassador and one of Obama's daughters and rape and kill them if he bombs Syria. Now this mess is escalating to who can threaten who. McCain just got ripped here for trying to take us to war. There is no way the house will vote for this mess and you can bet the Senate will back off as soon as the idiots realize they are toast if they vote for it. This is what we get for electing people who are popular but totally ignorant of the job at hand.
 
Eldorado, except for ziggy and Piper, you are preaching to the choir here concerning that guy you fools voted for. Go find some liberal web site and educate them as they need it most.

RELH
 
RELH, maybe you should pass that same advice to those on the right who will be voting for war.

BTW, Obama is having troubles convincing many on the left to vote his way.

Eldorado
 
Eldorado, what you need to do is contact those Democrat House Reps and Democrat Senator you voted for to ascertain if they are going with Obama or against him. I think you already know the answer for the two Democrat Senators from CA. They are backing his decision for war. Party line all the way with them.

RELH
 
RELH, contacted both Sen.'s and Congressperson (a Repub) and requested that they vote no on any bill authorizing military action against Syria. Have you done the same?

Eldorado
 
Yep! and my GOP house of Rep.plans to vote no according to infro he put out. Now are you going to vote again for that female senator who plans to vote yes for military intervention or are you going to cast a vote for any candidate that may run against her next election.

Contacting Boxer or Feinstein is a waste of time as they plan to back Obama to the hilt on going to war.

RELH
 
RELH, I don't consider it a waste of time letting both Sen.'s know where I stand on this issue. I'm sure many other Dems are letting the party know about their feelings on the matter. Hopefully Congress will see the light and vote on what's best for the nation and not what's politically expedient.

Eldorado
 
Obama and his gang think they are above the law,so it doesn't matter what you come up with Eldo Obama has a mission to accomplish and that is to Divide and Conquer the American way of life.
 
Eldorado you failed to answer my question about if you still intend to vote for that female Democrat Senator even if she supports Obama with military action.

I have to take that as a "Yes" you will still vote party line like a good liberal even when she does not represent your moral objections on war. Just like you sold out your church by supporting a party that puts forth supporting ideas that your faith and church does not support.

You are a good liberal Democrat that speaks out both sides of your mouth while selling your soul. Then again maybe you are a
atheist like Dude and all is well.

RELH
 
RELH, your bitterness about the Bush legacy betrays you. You would smile if Obama where to attack Syria.
It would mean vindication and redemption for Bush but at the cost of another bloody and divisive war.

Yeah, go ahead and smile.

Eldorado
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

2023-09-02_13-22-58_015.jpeg
20220718_202012.jpg
F8276B80-2034-4209-B817-0EEE0F8FCA11.jpg
603FEE79-387A-4E61-9849-4B0431BBF6C9.jpeg
CBC76E2C-F5C8-4DF8-84AA-C51C0BBDA4EE.jpeg
F8C4AE34-A403-4BD9-AE06-2AD2213997C7.jpeg
New Mexico Muzzleloader Bull for Osprey
First Archery Buck for G-Hought3
F51A1804-D1A5-495E-A9FB-A51D93EAEFD0.jpeg
A0E5725E-CA3A-4DEB-BE4E-F548C0453757.jpeg
71BA152A-E18B-452A-AC99-86AF75C8FA2C.jpeg
IMG_9620.jpeg
Back
Top Bottom