Obama Set A Precedent in Libya. Will He Sit Idly By While Atrocities Occur In Syria?

Obama invaded Libya for "humanitarian reasons" (his words). His goal was to stop the Libyan government from killing its own people. The same type of atrocities are now occurring in Syria (see the link below).

According to the story, over 880 anti-government protesters have been killed by the Syrian government since March of this year. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton denounced (Syrian President) Bashar al-Assad's pledges of reform as fraudulent and said the regime has experienced a "total collapse" of political and moral legitimacy.

I'm curious to see how many of you think Obama should invade Syria for "humanitarian reasons".



Clinton denounces Syria’s Assad over murdered boy - Yahoo! News

View attachment 191
13-year-old Syrian boy Hamza Ali al-Khateeb allegedly tortured and murdered by Syrian security forces.

 

The politics and policies differ from country to country, as you must be aware of. Syria is definitely an issue, not just for America but for NATO too, but every country is unique and every situation must be considered carefully. In Libya, there was little time to act and NATO agreed to stop Gaddafi immediately. As dire as the situation in Syria is (approximately 880 killed), it's not as dire as the situation was in Libya (the threat of total extermination of the insurgents). Sudan was far worse, there has been decades of war and millions have died, yet America managed to keep out of the conflict.

 

Have to point this out, you can not differentiate between NATO and America as America is one of the founding members of NATO and the largest contributor In effect when you say NATO you mean America and her European allies the difference between Syria and Libya is the UN sanctioned action against Libya, President Obama did not one morning wake up and decide to attack the country He along with other NATO members decided to enforce a UN resolution To date no such resolution has been passed against Syria

 

You say U.N. ...I say NATO... lol. I wasn't trying to imply that NATO made the decision by itself. Yes, it was the U.N. that passed the resolution allowing America (and NATO) to enforce it.

But I can differentiate the two (America & NATO) pretty easily. I do agree America has a lot of say in NATO matters, as well as the U.N.'s, but I can still differentiate 'em lol

So sue me!

 

Libya presented a unique opportunity that does not exist in Syria. The Libyan army had pushed the rebel forces back to the city of Benghazi and Gaddafi had vowed to kill the insurgents. It was clear that a massacre was about to take place in the city of Benghazi. The geography of the situation is what allowed us to attack Libya and prevent the genocide.

In Syria, there are protestors intermingled with the government forces. There is no way to intervene without incurring mass casualties on both sides. Not to mention, that a US invasion of Syria is likely to draw us into a war with Iran which we are not prepared to fight.

And if Obama really was a war monger, wouldn't he have already attacked Syria? Do you like contradicting yourself or are you really that dumb?

 

Whatever you want to believe is fine with me.. I'm simply asking a question. If you feel that it's necessary to attack me, well, go right ahead. People are being killed in Syria (just the same as in Libya) and I don't see any difference. Shouldn't Obama invade Syria for "humanitarian reasons"? Just askin'...

 

No, he shouldn't, and he will not. It's in the U.N.'s hands, they are making the decisions about what can be done.

 

So, if the UN decides that Syria needs to be invaded, it's OK for Obama to do so? That's pathetic.

 

That's not quite what I said lol

But, if the U.N. should decide that Syria needs to be invaded, I'm assuming you would not want America involved in the invasion.

 

I already explained the difference. When did I attack you, I didn't even call you a clown.

 

See how it works? United Nations. United.

 

Yeah. You would never do such a thing. Youre above all that.

 

I don't mind if people attack me, that's just the way it is in a forum like this. You're actually such a political dunce though, you really need to find a new forum to spout your idiocy. Try another forum that doesn't require your brain cells to engage. Such as the Play-Doh forum.

 

Please stop. Every time you call someone else an idiot, I fall out of my chair laughing. It is starting to hurt.

Why don't you explain what you would do about Syria if you were President instead of living every moment of your life as if it were Monday morning.

 

Now, why in the world would you have me do that? That's exactly what you do. Don't be a hypocrite as well as a jerk.

 

Are you saying you want me to go first? Don't be a baby as well as a clown.

 

Your posts are pointless.

 

You are pointless!

 

Coming from the King Clown himself.

 

I so love the "I know you are what am I" defense. Very original.