Why Americans are Saying 'No'

I can't believe you're still parroting that BS claim. Have you checked how "free" they are there these days? I still see lots of news reports about the violence we've left them with.

 

We must be. I've heard nothing but support for engaging Syria. The only contention is why is Obama stalling, is he too soft, or how is he handling the issue.

 

I am pretty sure they are not being arbitrarily raped and murdered by a sadistic dictator. Thats a step in the right direction, wouldn't you say?

...which is nothing compared to what they were enduring before.

And if nothing else, it is now within their power to change it. They have options now that they did not have before.

 

"We" didn't leave them with violence. The terrorists "we" were fighting were the source of the violence, which is why the fighting continues without our presence.

 

Terrorists? What terrorists? The US didn't go into Iraq because of terrorists. Neither did we go in there to liberate anyone, even if that was a working excuse for it. There are plenty of not-so-free systems around the world the almighty USA might go try toppling, yet every single one we've gone after since 9/11 has been in the Middle East, all grouped around Iran. Golly.

 

So you don't think terrorists are blowing stuff up in Iraq right now in the name of religion? Call them whatever you want, I know that you know the people I mean. Who is fighting in Iraq then? Why is it not peaceful after the US left?

 

There were no terrorists there when Bush went charging in. We didn't go there because of terrorists, just as the liberation angle was propaganda as well. It was part of an economic strategy involving a series of countries in that region.

Thousands have died for the sake of the petro-dollar. Are they "free" today because of that? I suppose that is debatable. We know they're free to get blown up by terrorists today, thanks to us.

 

President Obama does not need the approval of the American people. He is determined to replace the secular Assad-government with the Jihadist Muslim Brotherhood, no matter what the cost in U.S. blood and treasure. Obama, of course will come out looking like a rose, as always.

 

Why should Obama of all people want that? Think about it. There's no way such a thing is his desire alone. He's just playing his part.

 

Oh they were there. Maybe Saddam held them in check? There really is no way to know, because the world only got to know what Saddam wanted the world to know about Iraq. The terrorists there now are the same ones across the Middle East, destroying govts and causing anarchy.

Here's an analogy:

Westboro Baptist Church = Al Qaeda.

Does WBC represent the views of most Americans, or even a considerable minority? No, they don't. But let's say US was occupied by Iraq, and WBC were really good fighters. Would ordinary Americans who were naturally inclined to resist because of a foreign invader on their land cooperate with WBC in that situation? Yes, I believe they would.

And I believe that is how AQ is gaining support. Even though they are nuts, they fight well vs the US, which is considered by the populations over there as not so nuts compared to the US. But what happens to WBC when Iraq leaves the US in the above situation? The answer is they try to hold on to any power they have acquired, and try to have a big of say in forming the new US govt as possible. But I have faith, that over time, once again, most Americans would consider WBC as loons, and wouldn't give them a say in anything. I'm sure this will be the case in the Middle East.

 

... which means at the very least that we are drawing terrorists into every country we touch.

Of course, we shouldn't fail to mention that we're buddy-buddy with AQ in Syria right now. I think think it's as simple as you're describing it here.

 

People like WBC or AQ do not dictate US strategy. We have other concerns in the ME, and we are going to be there securing those concerns, until we feel they are secure without our presence. Right now, in many countries, a US or European citizen can't even take a job without an armed security detail to protect them while they do that job. That's a very good indication that the area is not secure.

 

Obviously. I for one question those concerns, though. I don't support the fiat currency, central bank system, which appears to be what's behind these wars. I don't see how it's justified to go get people killed to maintain an international ponzi scheme.

 

Few Americans are saying NO because they care about Syrians, most don't, as they do not care about Iraqis or Libyans. Most care about themselves only but at least they are saying NO.

 

Come full circle as far as Al Qaeda/Mujahadeen is concerned eh?

 

The thought had crossed my mind

AQ are a convenient tool for the administration. They also seem to be a CIA product.

 

As are the Taliban. Al Qaeda was a CIA code word which as far as anyone can work out meant 'something terrible; as in 'The Boogy Man' that was in the days of the US backed Mujahadeen.

The Taliban were refugee boys taken from camps and put in Saudi paid for schools and trained by ...yup ... the CIA. Often the schools were empty 'cos the 'boys' were off fighting some where or other. They had a deal with the US but when in power, horror of horrors, started to burn the poppy fields their religion got the better of them, they decided the West was too wicked and didn't want to keep their pact with the Devil when it came to all sorts of sh'it., bite the hand that fed them, ...............: well, we know what happened next and here we are again

 

I suppose there also remains the possibility that their spectacular attack on us was either arranged or left alone by someone in our own government a/o intelligence apparatus. Certainly 9/11 got put to great use..

 

Weeeeell I have come to believe that 9/11 was a great big 'hollywood type production' where three rundown buildings in NY were simply 'pulled' and the rest is special effects and super imposed animation but that's another topic

 

The ONLY 'Americans' that I have heard from that have been vocally for bombing the ancient city of Damascus and murdering more non Jews, have been dual citizen type, Israeli firsters.

It is they and only they who have, like baying dogs, supported bombings, killings, and a risk of large scale escalation, with unforeseen consequences for all.

Those Americans who are NOT 'Israeli first' dual citizens, all strike me as being ordinary people that are simply tired of all the BS, tired of the lies, tired of the same narrative over and over, tired of the undeserving pride and self congratulatory nature of their entire body politic.

And that's WITH the relentless propaganda and media that they are subjected to, and have been for decades now. They are gradually turning away from that as well, realising that it's not merely that the information they get is not somewhat tainted, but on many occasions, simple lies from top to bottom.

When it comes down to it, no one likes realising that they are being lied to and deceived, over and over and over.
And Americans are no different in that regard. Just imagine what would happen if you could take the corporate and Jewish owned media off air for a year there, and instead have proper investigative journalism, in which the American people were giving an honest and hard hitting dose of truth, about what their Gov's have been doing behind their back?

It would probably be enough to rev them into a state of absolute revolt.

It's no thanks to Jewry that the murder of people in Syria appears to have been averted for now. It is not thanks to them that bombs are not raining down on Damascus, based on allegations with no supporting evidence to even say the Syrian Gov did this.

Had it not been for Putin and their intelligence agencies figuring out the deal here, we could be in the early stages of a large scale war.
Let's not forget that.

But unless those that conspire and plot this way are removed and neutralised entirely, sooner or later they are going to plunge us all into a massive war.

This is why it is VITAL that they are stopped by all means.

This is why it is crucial that more Americans get wise to the game.

 

Although Mr. Obama is not officially an on-the-record, mosque-going Muslim, he is obviously a vicarious Muslim and sympathetic to all Muslim causes. And there is certainly nothing at all wrong with that. To each his own. More power to him.

 

Excellent post!

That sums things up nicely.

See bold: In hindsight, it seems that is exactly what Obama was thinking. As a second term president with more ego than bull(*)(*)(*)(*), he was likely thinking about legacy when he started running his mouth.

His legendary and somewhat frightening political instincts failed him, as before he knew even the beginning of the opposition, he came out with the "red line". It is always clear when a modern day politician has an "oh (*)(*)(*)(*)!" moment, they nuance, as he did with the "international community" escape he tried, which only angered the already pissed off for being spied on international community.

Enter Putin, who clearly has better boots on the ground in Syria than Obama, and better working relationship with his European leaders too it seems as he saw the lack of international support and started throwing up roadblocks at a time when Obama is about to get on a plane and go to Europe and spin the spying on diplomats scandal.

He tried to do that in Stockholm, it got zero coverage, while, as translated by my downstairs neighbor, the Swedish press was running headlines saying "Obama intent on war!"

Oops.

And yes, you are absolutely correct, Obama did NOT foresee his adoring minions not following lock step and lovingly into yet another war, not when even his best supporters are staring to question the massive expansion of the drone bombing program, worrisome statistics coming out of Doctors Without Borders and Amnesty International.

So now they're scrambling to ass cover and make it look like a brilliant, preplanned strategy with Kerry doing what Kerry does best, nuance.

When is a week not a week, Mr. Secretary?

The Obama administration hasn't had a "middle east strategy" since Obama's "1967 borders" debacle where he got his head handed to him by France, Britain, Russia through their puppet, Canada's Stephen Harper at the G-8.

 

Yeah, that was a "just" cause in WW2.

But how, just how, please, is democracy being "proliferated" when the United States is bombing people in foreign lands without the basic tenet of liberal democracy, a tenet that precedes even the US Constition: innocent until proven guilty.

You are killing people whom your intelligence community CLAIMS, without peer reviewed evidence, information held in secret in fact, are terrorists; the same intelligence community that led to "it was just a spontaneous demonstration" in Benghazi, that saw Arab Spring coming and got it so, so, very (*)(*)(*)(*)ing right on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

How is democracy "proliferated" by scooping up people that that same intelligence community SAYS are terrorists and sending them to our "friends" in Syria to be tortured? How does arresting American citizens for whistle blowing "proliferate" democracy?

How does denying a person the right of trial by judge and jury and executing them "proliferate" the neo-American brand of Democracy?\


You don't "proliferate" the concept of civil rights, you "proliferate weapons" which is what's wrong with your entire argument. America isn't "proliferating" democracy. It is proliferating war in a xenophopbic and paranoid panic in the name of democracy, something the American people willingly surrendered when the Patriot Act was passed.

Talk to me about "Democracy" when you can aver without hesitation that there are NO innocents being water boarded at Gitmo. Until then, start reading about such novel ideas as the right to due process, the right of free speech, the right to worship as you please, rights even Russians have and you do not.

So lets leave Democracy out of this, you Americans have been pimping that lady for far, far too long.

 

Naw, I doubt that's the reason.