End game in Syria

Not his stated goal, no. Whether on purpose or not, though, he’s getting a lot closer to staying out then Putin. So wise by design though he’s saying something else, or wise on accident. Either way, wiser than Putin.

500 million is pretty much nothing, so I’m thankful that we’ve wasted so little compared to past adventures in the region. Not as wise as I’d like, but a lot wiser than Putin.

I understand that Putin’s actions are unwise, and Obama’s are wiser, if not as wise as I’d like. Stay out – I wish we’d stay out even more so, but what we’re doing is far wiser than what Putin’s doing.

Thanks, Obama. :slight_smile:

Is this not a direct quote from President Obama, where he states that “The time has come for President Assad to step aside”?

Yep, politics can be pretty silly. Thankfully, Obama is not wasting more than a paltry amount of money, and no American lives, to achieve this, so I think it’s much more about optics and politics.

You’re not answering the question.
The quote I provided, was it a statement from President Obama that President Assad must step aside?

Like how the future of Afghanistan was secured once Russian troops rolled in to save the revolution?

Shiiiiiiiiiiiiit, even you can’t really believe that.

Wow,wow, wow, hold on there, young bucko…
Once again, before we launch into completely different discussion, let’s first ascertain whether the removal of President Assad was a stated goal of President Obama. **iiandyiiii **claims that it was not.
Do you concur with iiandyiiii?

When did I claim it was not? Do you usually invent the arguments of those you oppose, or is this an anomaly?

I’m sure it was, I just don’t think that really matters. I judge him much more by what he does than what he says – and what he’s done is waste a paltry amount, spend no American lives, and mostly stay out of Syria. That’s far wiser than Putin, no matter what he’s actually said.

You have no problem changing the topic whenever someone criticizes Russia. I don’t need to talk about whatever way you want to deflect what a brute and disaster Putin is.

The fact is that Putin is a lot like George Bush: he likes to throw his military around a lot and show he’s a tough guy by scoring seven goals against a team that’s not allowed to touch him/clearing brush from his ranch/whatever, but in the end his senseless policies result in a lot of senseless deaths with no justification.

Is there a difference between Obama saying “Assad must go” and “the U.S must be the ones to make Assad go?”

I’ve been saying for years now that he should go but don’t necessarily feel it’s the responsibility of the United States.

Yes there is a difference, you can perfectly want him to go yet not want the U.S to get involved.

Is Iran part of ANY trading bloc with Russia at all? I know Russia is not calling for Iran’s inclusion into the EEU, which is for former Soviet Republics. And how come Iran is not yet a member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which is led by Russia and China, and includes Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan?

India and Pakistan have been approved for membership and will join.

http://in.reuters.com/article/2015/07/11/china-russia-india-pak-sco-idINKCN0PK20520150711

Yet NOTIran? Why is Russia not pushing for it? I also disagree that religion prevents nations for becoming allies, the Central Asian states are Muslim and close to Russia, and Pakistan which also Muslim has joined the Russia-China led SCO. So I don’t think this is what prevents Russia and Iran from becoming allies.

Obama wanted Assad to go, but there was no viable successor.

Obama yielded to political pressure to get involved knowing that it was fruitless.

Now Russia will support Assad and the US will back out. Isis in Syria is now Russia’s problem. The Syrian population is so depleted that Russia will have to send in ground troops. It will be an expensive operation for Putin. Probably not another Afghanistan, but close.

Obama is wise to keep us out of Syria. The only end game is occupation by 200K or maybe 500K American troops. And, it would be another invasion without any reason. If Russia is willing, let them fight the battle.

Crane

He does judo and wrestles crocodiles with his dick.

In historical terms, what is more humiliating: JFK and the Bay of Pigs or Obama and Syria?
Both events are strongly paralleling each other: we have 2 US Presidents supporting “rebel” groups in order to achieve US strategic goals, and overthrow the government of the 2 respective countries, followed by subsequent abandonment by the US of the said rebel groups and their destruction by the US enemies, and the very public and personal humiliation for both Presidents.
It does appear that in the latter case there’s a curious denial of reality (“Well, it was never Obama’s stated intention to remove Assad, except that he stated exactly that”), but putting aside this peculiarity, which event was more humiliating?

The Bay of Pigs by a country mile.

Which is more morally outrageous: Putin murdering political opponents, or Putin denying that Russian soldiers are dying in a war that they were ordered to go fight?

And to add to that: ISIS is sporting lotsa shiny new American weapons…all paid for by the US taxpayer. This is the “Bay of Pigs” times 100!
the sad thing is: American citizens will be murdered all over the world-thanks to Obama’s kind donations of cash and weapons to them.

Putin has rational goals. Bush had Gog and Magog.

Ukraine ? Of course he puts secret troops into the field, everyone does that. I don’t know what’s sillier, the thought that he wouldn’t or the mock outrage that he does.