Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

David__77

(24,514 posts)

14. But that's not the objective.

Reply to brooklynite (Reply #13)

Sat Aug 31, 2013, 12:12 AM

Aug 2013

That would require securing those weapons. This is a "shot across the bow" strategy, in the president's own words. What if weapons were used again, and again? We get more slaps on the wrist, which is indeed what he's implying?

Libya is very different from Syria. The UN and NATO were involved in Libya. This is Obama making a decision, with no UN or NATO support. And one that will not protect anyone from anything. The civil war will grind on, and likely escalate.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

27 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

We'll lose the WH in 2016 if our nominee doesn't run AGAINST Obama's wars. [View all] Ken Burch Aug 2013 OP

I'm afraid that you're right... CaliforniaPeggy Aug 2013 #1

I almost wonder if Obama wants to make SURE we lose in '14 and '16 Ken Burch Aug 2013 #2

I really doubt that. CaliforniaPeggy Aug 2013 #4

He may not be calling the shots. HooptieWagon Aug 2013 #6

Has it passed? LukeFL Aug 2013 #8

Obama is still busy listing... HooptieWagon Aug 2013 #16

His party is not happy with anything he LukeFL Aug 2013 #7

His 'party' is pretty well satisfied Summer Hathaway Aug 2013 #19

His party isn't in a conspiracy against him. Ken Burch Sep 2013 #23

I don't think so, Ken. AverageJoe90 Aug 2013 #3

Bull- I don't think millions of progressives LukeFL Aug 2013 #5

They won't vote for War, TPP, or NSA spying either. HooptieWagon Aug 2013 #10

No, but there's the real possibility that they won't vote. Ken Burch Sep 2013 #24

Just lik we lost in 2012... brooklynite Aug 2013 #9

Libya at least had a defined goal. morningfog Aug 2013 #12

Stop a dictatorial Government from using chemical weapons on civilians... brooklynite Aug 2013 #13

But that's not the objective. David__77 Aug 2013 #14

Stop is ill defined. There are chem weapons morningfog Aug 2013 #21

I think we will be fine in the end. I don't support the Syria action but I think we will get through hrmjustin Aug 2013 #11

We definitely need some new stars in the party. David__77 Aug 2013 #15

Exactly. Elizabeth Warren. Dennis Kucinich. Taverner Aug 2013 #17

Which wars are those, Ken? Control-Z Aug 2013 #18

Totally agree, which wars? Please tell us! eom DonViejo Aug 2013 #20

Off the top of my head zipplewrath Sep 2013 #25

In addition to the wars listed below Ken Burch Sep 2013 #26

Don't worry, in the lab they are formulating a candidate as we speak. Safetykitten Aug 2013 #22

The last one really fooled a great many of us. How are they going to top that? AnotherMcIntosh Sep 2013 #27