a kickstarter campaign I can get behind!

[KG]

because obama!

[Shemp Howard]

1. A powerful message there.

That was political satire as it should be done, funny but with a powerful message.

But I really wish that the phrase "because Obama" had been replaced by the phrase "because the President says so." Because as we all know, the impulse to rush to war is shared by Democratic and Republican presidents alike.

As a side note, at first I thought this was going to be an Obama hit piece. But Lindsey Graham and the Koch brothers were also mentioned. So I'm guessing this was a nonpartisan effort, focusing on Obama because, well, he's the one who wanted to bomb Syria.

Two thumbs up from me.

[RufusTFirefly]

2. Yes! I'm emptying my piggy bank!

Because Obama!

[Plucketeer]

3. Wow! My OWN senator!

HONEY! Where's that jar of coins at???

[Hulk]

4. I'm not buying it...

I've never seen a President so reluctant to go to war as this President, yet the satire makes it out as though it's his desire to start a war. He's gotten us ALL THE WAY OUT of Iraq, bringing us out of Afghanistan, HASN'T STARTED A WAR in Egypt, Ukraine, Libya, Syria and ALL of Africa...to date. Yup....he uses drones to take out the key players in this "war on terror crap", but what would you have him do? I know, that opens another whole can of worms to many, but I happen to support it as the lesser of two evils, by far!

The way I look at it, in this day and age, after W & Darth, 8 years of Bill, and 8 years of Ronnie and George I; this is the closest to Jimmy Carter we have come, and he gets no credit for that. Instead, he gets rotten tomatoes tossed his way because of the drone program. Awful as it may be, we aren't losing hundreds of US military on someone else's soil. Blow up a family of innocents, and it creates hundreds more terrorists for tomorrow; but cut the program and you end up with a strong terrorist structure that can fester into a World War III in the Middle East and elsewhere in a heart beat.

Sometimes you can't have your cake and eat it too. This may just be one of those times. And lastly, it isn't just the little guy who sleeps in the White House that is making all the decisions on his own. He is SURROUNDED by military and political advisers. I think we should just be thankful we aren't in six or seven new wars in Asia and the Middle East today.

Go ahead and attack. I'll just say, I never said it was perfect. War is messy, and keeping out of a full fledged war can also be messy.

[RufusTFirefly]

5. He didn't get us out of Iraq. He wanted to stay.

But the Iraqi government wouldn't change the Status of Forces agreement. This left U.S. forces and contractors subject to Iraqi law.

• It subjected U.S. contractors working for U.S. forces to Iraqi criminal law
  
• It prevented us from holding prisoners for more than 24 hours without criminal charges
  
• It required a warrant for searches of homes and buildings that were not related to combat
  
• It stipulated that if U.S. forces committed "major premeditated felonies" while off-duty and off-base they would have been subject to certain procedures that weren't yet specified.
  

Rather than leaving Americans forces and contractors subject to Iraqi law (some of it unspecified), we left.

[Hulk]

6. Can't win on either side of that argument

I realize that. The neocons criticize him for "not working hard enough" to twist Maliki's arm to allow us to stay as walking targets; and he says he got us out. Maybe the truth is somewhere in between. I tend to believe he was quite content to get the hell out and follow through on his promise to bring the troops home. Anyone's guess as to whether or not he could have actually changed the situation there. I won't concede the argument, but I won't argue it either. I'm just glad we did get out. It's been a shit hole ever since we left, as it was when we had an occupying force there for the past 10 years.

I tend to give him the benefit of the doubt. Again, there are lots of incidents that can be brought up to argue whether or not President Obama is a pacifist or a President that at least doesn't want to bring this country into more wars we can't afford on any measure: threatening to go into Syria, bombing of Libyan forces to overthrow Gaddafy, drone strikes all over Africa and the Middle East, and air support to fight back ISIS in Iraq. We have kept our noses out of Ukraine; but again I have to state for the record, this President has military advisers that are chewing at the bit to toss in their new weapon hardware to test on ALL of these potential battle zones. He isn't a dictator, or he isn't "the decider" on all of this. I honestly think he makes careful judgments on when to use force, and so far, he's done pretty well, in MY opinion.

[RufusTFirefly]

7. Fair points. I disagree on some counts, but I appreciate your thoughtful reply

What I'm leery of is the tendency to pass judgment based on the person or the party instead of on the policy.

We definitely see this on the Right, where the President can't seem to do anything right in their eyes. But we also see this among some Democratic/Obama partisans, who sometimes forgive or overlook questionable policy decisions because the person who made them is "our guy."

I think if Dubya were still President (a frightening thought) the responses would be quite different. Frankly, I find that more than a little problematic.

[KurtNYC]

8. "reluctant" ? Obama didn't go to Congress or the UN. Didn't build a coalition.

That makes this action seem unilateral which is likely to depress Democratic turnout 50 days from now because the GOP gets to have their war AND blame it on Obama. He could have at least put them on record for or against it.

As for Libya, which is a good example of what may happen in Syria, the US created a no-fly zone and bombed government forces so that Islamist rebels in Toyota trucks could force Gaddafi from power. That war ended when Gaddafi was captured and killed in October of 2011, and then....

Since the defeat of loyalist forces, Libya has been torn among numerous, rival, armed militias affiliated to regions, cities and tribes, while the central government has been weak and unable to bring its authority over the country. Competing militias have lined up against each other in a political struggle between Islamist politicians and their opponents...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libya#Post-Gaddafi_era

Likely both the destruction of governments in Libya and now Syria are not the decision of Obama but rather the people General Wes Clark refers to here:

[grahamhgreen]

9. He's been trying to involve us in every excuse for a war til now. He finally got one. Who Pays?

answer please.... where does the money come from????

He's also destroying the Dem party for years to come.

We will get killed in NOV.

[A Simple Game]

11. Did you read this after you wrote it?

but cut the program and you end up with a strong terrorist structure that can fester into a World War III in the Middle East and elsewhere in a heart beat.

Have you heard of ISIS or as President Obama says ISIL? Do you know that it is being sold as the worst thing to happen since... well, since the last worse thing to happen?

[BrainMann1]

10. I'm not feeling it right now

Satire and all. ISIS is a real and is not going away. We need to do what we must like it or not. We are at war with ISIS.

[valerief]

12. +1