No, the failure is not having a policy and thereby creating a vacuum. Something the Russians thought it rude to ignore.
Is it your view that anything less than a no holds barred interventionist ‘world must do as we say’ policy is = no policy?
No room for change of policy when new information comes to light?
No, the failure was in backing the rebels, willfully ignoring the fact that half of these guys are affiliated with al-Qaida, and the whole lot of them can only be called “moderate” by comparing them to ISIS. Assad is a pretty bad guy, but he’s a pretty bad guy who doesn’t hate us (or didn’t, until about a year ago), and when the other choice is guys who are still pretty bad, and do hate us (but are smart enough to take the guns we’re handing out for free), then the reality of international relations is that you choose the guy you can live with.
It’s easy to Monday morning quarterback. If he sat on his hands, I suspect the same people would be shouting about the fact that in failing to come to the aid of the Syrian rebels, Obama missed the opportunity to weaken both Russia’s and Iran’s influence in the region.
Yes, but, had the rebels killed more Syrians than all others combined, the rebel faction would be in control of things in Syria now.