The Irony of Syria — and the Hypocrisy of the Left
It is funny how things change. The same people who screeched like banshees about Iraq and said George W. Bush lied about WMDs are now condemning Bashar al Assad for allegedly using what we are supposed to believe was Sarin gas on a neighborhood. These are most likely Saddam’s WMDs and yet, in his hands, they were stuffed animals or baby medicine. In Assad’s hands they are genocidal tools.
We have credible sources saying it was Syrian rebels (al Quaida) who were the perpetrators of the gas attack. You know the guys supposedly on our side.
The UN wants a full investigation and the House of Commons debated and said no to any intervention in Syria. But our President, who was a staunch anti-War voice in Washington when it came to Iraq, now wants to take it to Syria. How is that for irony?
Considering that there is ample evidence of Saddam giving aid and comfort to al Quaida, we were in the right to invade and take him down. Richard Miniters book, Losing Bin Laden: How Bill Clinton’s Failures Unleashed Global Terror, details in full the intelligence that is out there about how Saddam aided Bin Laden, from visits by Iraqi generals to Afghanistan to a little talked about training facility in Iraq that strangely enough featured the body of a passenger jet to train hijackers.
But with Syria, all of us are trying to figure out how Assad’s regime has hurt our national interests and security. We can’t find one and none have been listed in the whiny war chants by, of all people, John “I threw my fake medals over the White House fence because I opposed Vietnam” Kerry. And he was in Vietnam, for one trimester.
And then there’s the herd of sheep who are Obama’s supporters? When asked why they support his stupid move in Syria they say, “Well, he’s having a hard time and it is really tough for him. Everyone’s against him.” No mention of the fact that George W Bush was called every name in the book by them for doing something that needed to be done. Ah, but it is different: Syria is Obama’s baby and they won’t stand idly by while their fearless leader makes a complete joke of himself and makes the entire country look silly.
Poor Barack, no one understands the pressure he’s dealing with. Syria is so awful. Oh, and Obama said he was doing this to protect Israel. Since when does this man and his sheep-like supporters care about Israel? Not one of these leftists who demanded an accounting for Iraq when they knew what the reasons were is asking the same from Obama. Hypocrisy of the Obama true believers is a monument to self-inflicted ignorance. They just don’t want to ask the tough questions of him because they know that it would end up making them question themselves, which for a leftist would be bad. The left proves the old cliché’ “ignorance is bliss” is true.
Then here’s this: why is it more tragic to die in a chemical weapons attack than it is by bullet, car bomb or high explosive either fired by a missile or artillery? Is there a level of death for the left? We get stories like the following: http://www.theblaze.com/blog/2013/06/25/catholic-priest-murdered-by-our-syrian-rebel-allies/ and our intrepid golf player in chief says not one word. But when chemicals are used he turns into a screaming war monger.
Hey, I thought us right-wingers were the screaming war mongers. Oh wait, 3000 Americans being butchered on 9-11-01 aren’t worth seeking justice for but when our so called allies get into chemical weapons we have a major crisis on our hands, and we blame Assad. Does anyone on the left remember the Gulf of Tonkin? Just asking. And as to level of death for the left I would assume people who support abortion in general have grade levels for death.
The fact is Obama won’t get support for Syria from congress. The feelings are pretty much against intervention. The Pentagon has said so here: http://www.independent.co.uk/news /world/americas/pentagon-warns-against-syria-intervention-which-could-cost-us-1bn-a-month-8728429.html. When the Generals say it is not the right war and it’s not going to work, one would think a President would listen. They are the experts. However when the President is a narcissistic, spoiled baby and thinks he knows far more than men who have studied war strategy for over 30 years, and have the wounds to prove they’ve seen combat, well, their good advice is ignored. Some people believe John Kerry once joked only stupid people went into the military — so what would the Joint Chiefs know? And wasn’t John Kerry also at one time in the military? Hmmm, weird.
There’s a time to go for the jugular on the world stage and a time to leave things well enough alone. Syria needs to be left alone. There’s no plausible reason for us to be involved in Syria. A lot of shady questions are arising, like: is this whole thing connected to Benghazi? These are very viable questions because they are about the only theories that make sense. Think about it: Obama couldn’t have cared less if people were killed by bullets, bombs or missile strikes, but the moment chem weapons are used he loses his mind. And why get involved in this if there wasn’t something underlying he dares not talk about? And these are just some of the things that occurred to me over this latest fiasco started by Obama.
He not only proved the cynics like me right about “democracy” not fitting well in the Mid-East, he proved himself right. That was himself seven years ago, though. Funny how things change.
Image: Author: Cumulus Clouds; Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license
