More signs of the depravity of Bashar Assad in Syria as his loyalist troops conducted massacres in the pro-rebel towns of Houla and Hama. According to reports, some 108 civilians were killed over the weekend. Less than twenty died from indirect fire of combat, such as artillery and airstrikes. The rest, including as many as 49 children, some infants, were found to have been murdered, execution-style, in their homes when raided by pro-Assad forces. Barack Obama has been far in the background, letting the United Nations and its special envoy, Kofi Annan, deal with Syria. Rupert Colville, a spokesman for the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, confirmed to the BBC that the latest atrocities were performed by the Assad regime.
For over a year, the fighting in Syria has racked-up a death toll of nearly 10,000 victims. Far less bloodshed resulted in intervention in Libya by the US and NATO last year, toppling the regime of Muammar Gadhafi. In that conflict, while the US led in air strikes, Obama let David Cameron and Nicolas Sarkozy take the lead in shaping a policy of response to the violence in Libya.
Many will argue that the United States is already over extended as far as military power goes. Scheduled cuts in defense spending and reductions in the size of our forces would further hamper any future conflict we may need to become involved in. Reports this weekend that Obama himself is apparently picking which terrorists to target with drone strikes, using photos as if they were cards of baseball players, shows a level of White House involvement not seen since the days that Lyndon Johnson would personally pick targets for bombing missions over Vietnam.
Yet, Obama is doing little, if anything, concerning Syria. Some analysts are comparing his lack of action to that of Bill Clinton during the massacres in Rwanda. It is obvious that all efforts up till now in bringing an end to the Assad regime′s crackdown on political opposition has born no fruit. A growing chorus of American and world leaders are asking when will Obama act decisively?
So the killing goes in Syria as the Bashar Assad regime hammers away at rebel towns like Houla and Hama. The latest massacres of civilians show the utter failure of Barack Obama in his foreign policy, as well as his reliance on the United Nations and Envoy Kofi Annan is handling the situation. Reports of the execution-style murders of civilians by pro-Assad troops has been confirmed by UN spokesman Rupert Colville. The question before us now is how much longer will Obama sit on his hands and do nothing?
May 29th, 2012 at 6:32 am
So what would be your desired response?
May 29th, 2012 at 7:19 am
Obama could do the same as Assad if he thought he would get away with it…. YET
May 29th, 2012 at 9:38 am
CharlieGee Says, may be right. Kill the producers.
May 29th, 2012 at 9:53 am
At least we are not the ones who are doing the killing, like we were in Iraq.
Doing nothing? We are kicking all of their diplomats out of the country today. Is that nothing?
May 29th, 2012 at 10:19 am
Yeah, Andrew. Let’s get you on the record now. What should Obama’s response be? Because, if he eventually does whatever thing you want him to do, and then you slam him for it, I’d like to link back to this post.
In fact, let’s do it as a hypothetical: Andrew, whatever your opinion is what actions Obama should or shouldn’t take ont his issue. If he did it, exactly as you prescribe, would you have a post that says “I’m satisfied: Obama does EXACTLY the right thing on the Syria issue!”?
I eagerly await your always-honest response.
May 29th, 2012 at 11:53 pm
Gawd that pic of our faker in chief is worth 1000 words. Would anyone follow him into battle? Apparently not. His own troops suppor Romney 65-35 in the latest polls.
May 30th, 2012 at 3:06 am
What would President Andrew do about Syria?
First, President Andrew would have supported the Green Revolt in Iran back in 2009. As Iran is a major backer of Syria, Assad would have been left in a weaker position than he is now.
Second, President Andrew would have an aggressive domestic oil policy, which would have created a glut of oil on the market by now, causing the price to drop below $75 a barrel, which is where the Russians want it. So they would be in a weaker position to help their pal in Syria.
Third, President Andrew would utilize all available ‘backdoor’ methods when the protests first started to convince Assad that its time to retire to Dubai or some other haven. I would also instruct the CIA to identify and sort out the factions of protest groups, finding one that is best suited to fulfill our regional security needs, such as playing nice with Israel.
Fourth, President Andrew would provide both military aid to any protest group that meets our standard of value as being politically suitable. We would train fighters here in the US or other friendly locations. America should be about spreading liberty throughout the world. While I would not send US troops there, I would certainly materially help any friendly group dedicated to liberty.