Exactly. This is crazy. And it is a no win situation for us. If we support the rebels, we are supporting a anti-Western terrorist group. If we don't support them, the (anti-American) Syrian public asks "where is the US when we need their help"? We lose no matter what.

Our best bet would be to sit back and watch.The U.S does'nt really have any tactical,strategic or economic interest in syria.the only think the politicians are concerned about is who to make the foreign aid check out to.

Ido---How complicated is it for you to understand? We support the coalition, just not one of the members in said coalition.

Here's what people don't understand about Syria. THEY ALREADY SUPPORT TERRORISM!!!!! I am shocked at the amount of ignorance on these threads. It is the current and thankfully falling Syrian "government" which has been one of the largest (if not the largest) sponsors of terrorism. Syria's state sponsored terrorism goes to the point where they help fund, supply, and support the efforts of several known terrorist groups. It is well known that Syria has terrorist training camps within its borders. Those were sponsored by this current regime for the specific purpose of terrorist training camps.

Never mind the fact that they commit genocide against their people and have been saving up large amounts of those chemical weapons to use on them and possibly others. (That is terrorism in it's own right.) Syria has been a major supporter of terrorism. A revolution that succeeds against them will drive out a brutal, oppressive regime which supports terrorism. And that current Syrian "government" needs to go. The only thing to be careful about this is who replaces them. But honestly, most things would be quite an improvement.

Now there are rumors and stories that certain radical extremist groups have infiltrated the revolution. In fact, I even believe those rumors because it sounds like something those terrorist dirt-bags would try to do. But that isn't what the majority of the revolution represents. The majority of those people are rebelling because they need to get rid of an oppressive regime which among other things slaughters its own people. We just need to make sure that the radical extremists are weeded out and not allowed to grab any power (or chemical weapons).

We (the USA) also need to make sure the people of Syria can put in place a non-oppressive government which promotes things like religious tolerance and is not run by radical extremist. That's where we screwed up in Egypt. Once the rebellion succeeded, we let such a destabilized country decide things on their own with little to no support. So it was only a matter of time before the people were left to choose only Mubarak's remnants (which they just overthrew) or the Muslim Brotherhood. We all see how that's working out. We can't afford to make the same mistake in Syria. We must be more involved with support (without deciding things for them) and allow them better structure and choices so they might actually succeed in creating a half decent government.

And we have yet another boneheaded foreign policy move from the Obama administration. This will only serve to help speed up the delivery of Syria into the hands of the Islamists. Obama does not have a clue who most of these rebel groups are and does not know what they stand for because most of them either have not said what they stand for besides getting rid of Assad and hide their true intentions. Obama policies have already helped to deliver Libya and Egypt into the hands of the Islamists, now he is upping the ante by adding Syria to that total. By the time Obama is done the only country in the region that will not be in the hands of Islamists will be Israel. Most of the rebels in Syria are being backed by the Muslim Brotherhood. All one needs to do is look at what is happening in Egypt to know what the MB's agenda is. Like Mubarak, Assad is a secularist. Under Assad the people in Syria can worship as they choose. The only people that Assad "persecutes" are the same people that Mubarak "persecuted," this Islamic extremists who want to turn the country into an Islamic republic. Now, thanks to the ineptness of Obama Syria will be the next country to become an Islamic republic where theocracy rules and all minorities are persecuted if not out right killed. Look at what is happening in Egypt and that is what we can expect is Syria in very short order.

Obama To Give 20 F-16 Fighter Jets To Islamic-Run Egypt On Israel’s Election Day

http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/blog/?author=1

Hours after NATO agreed on Tuesday to send Patriot missiles to Turkey because of the crisis in Syria, Russia delivered its first shipment of Iskander missiles to Syria.

The superior Iskander can travel at hypersonic speed of over 1.3 miles per second (Mach 6-7) and has a range of over 280 miles with pinpoint accuracy of destroying targets with its 1,500-pound warhead, a nightmare for any missile defense system.

Russia Arms Syria, Obama Arms Egypt, Any Questions?

ldo===They don't just yet. Maybe after they reach that magic number 50,000 dead, then Obama will make a better decision and possibly give us another name to think about.

I can't believe it. And this whole time I thought Obama was Shiite..

How many times in the passed have we supported a rebellion only to find that the revolution has (again) devoured its children and replaced one repressive regime with one that was as bad if not worse. Do you think that the rebels are pro-US? Do you think that they will not support Hezbollah? I understand that you think that it is our humanitarian responsibility to fight state-sponsored murder in whatever form, but really, the rebels are no friend of the US.

Obama support the Islamic Brotherhood , now see what he got. Protest in Cairo say more than thousand words.

Headline reads:

"Obama says US recognizes Syrian opposition coalition"
Did Obummer find a new optician?

Oh goody! We've blacklisted one bunch of Islamofascist thugs and now are pledging our support and weaponry to another! (Because let's cut the bullsh1t here folks, we ARE supplying the Free Syrian Terrorists arms as we speak!)

You can't make this krap up, folks. Only in Washington. Almost too comical. No reality show or Wringling Brothers Circus can top this!

Why cant our president focus on the issues at hand instead of running away to find a new story for his media...why just why.

didnt NK launch a long ranged missle just a few hours ago? Dont we have a fiscal cliff? Oh and how can he talk foreign policy and such while he is campaining at the state level like a senator?

we helped Egypt and Muslim brotherhood is in charge and the people woke up and hopefully throw them out before its to late.. Thank you USA

then went to Libya and they attacked and killed 4 Americans, trying to help them, but the al-qaeda and jihadists are taken over...Thank you USA

and least we forget Syria, the rebels almost got rid of Assad, but he is about to use chemical weapons and now another al-qaeda element is gaining strength..Thank you USA

and we can't forget obama statement " that al-qaeda is all but dead, just like Bin Laden"

I would not expect any civil war to have an extremist free coalition of rebels(whatever they are called these days), but history has shown recently with Libya and Egypt, that the small extremist groups are extremely well financed, organized and know how to shoot and kill. It has been reported that is the reason the rebels have used them in their fight, and would not have made the inroads they have with the Syrian military had they refused to fight with them.

This country like the others this year will fall to those that are enemies of the US. We can back the so-called good rebels, but we have no control who eventually takes over and so what is the point of making this statement. 40,000 people have so far died in this civil war. I am thinking those that survive will remember who did and didn't come to their aid which is why I predict the anti-American terrorists will get control. They are the ones on the front lines fighting, not us.

they are the ones on the front lines fighting, not us.

As it damn well should be, and had better be. It's THEIR civil war, NOT ours. They're NOT our fooking problem.

Obama did not and does not support the Islamic Brotherhood. He supported and supports free elections. Those free elections resulted in the Islamic Brotherhood. We may not like the results of free elections. In fact, I'm fairly comfortable saying that many on these boards don't like the result of the last US free election, but free elections don't always mean that you get what you want. What you get is what the majority wants. So suck it up, you lost the last election and Egypt lost their last election. Freedom doesn't always mean you get your way.

yes obama does support the MB by his own actions so please do not defend someone who does not represent this country. he encouraged and supported the ouster of mubarak when everyone knew that the MB was vying for power and were the ones who started and financed the revolt. he attacked libya with no congressional approval to remove qaddafi and to replace him with a theocratic leader of islam. obama has supported the muslim push to install caliphates under the "arab spring."

there is no civil war in syria as it does not fit the definition of civil war, there is an insurrection happening and its the islamist who are trying to overthrow a legitimate secular government to replace with a caliphate just as they have in previous countries. the US can not legitimize a rebel group who has no power nor does not represent the majority of the countries population. obama is not our king, he is our public servant.

democracies are not anything resembling freedom. do you think a democracy is a new concept? its been around for thousands of years and has failed every time and countless scholars have said democracies do not work as the people become dependent on the government and eventually leads to oppression.

The following prophetic Quote about democracy is from Sir Alex Fraser Tytler (1742-1813). He was a Scottish jurist and historian and a Professor of History at Edinburgh University in the late 18th century. This quote is from an 1801 lecture series, and it still rings with great truth:
"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters
discover that they can vote themselves largess from the public treasury. From that time on the
majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the results that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a
dictatorship." "The average age of the world's great civilizations has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through this sequence:"
* From bondage to spiritual faith;
* From spiritual faith to great courage;
* From courage to liberty;
* From liberty to abundance;
* From abundance to selfishness;
* From selfishness to complacency;
* From complacency to apathy;
* From apathy to dependency;
* From dependency back again to bondage."
"Perhaps this is why the Founding Fathers did not want a democracy and, therefore, established our representative Republic instead."

Under, no such thing as "free elections" or "free thought" or even "freedom" in the Muslim world.

He duped the intellectuals, students, and women into starting the revolts by making them think they could elect someone who would respect their rights. He donated arms and saber-rattled at the legitimate governments.

No Muslim values democracy. Obama's just following his birthright.

Oaktownboy...."Ido---How complicated is it for you to understand? We support the coalition, just not one of the members in said coalition."

So, hypothetically.....if there are 100 folks in the coalition and only 10 are TERRORISTS, then we shouldn't have a problem. ///sarcasm/

Yep, not that complicated. Just watch out for the 10 bad guys/girls but only 1 of them is enough to kill you.

Oooooooh K.....GOT IT !!

GREAT...yet another 'Obama' mess just waiting to happen.

Who "suggested" the last Egyptian ruler simply 'quit'? OBAMA.....~!!!!! No matter the stock market, home values, taxes, jobs...no matter what ...Obama is simply lame.

Hey Obama !!! you did the same thing with the Lybia opposition which got 4 Americans killed. These oppositions could be the work of terrorist groups helping out. Obama is so stupid in judgement. This country never learns to butt out of other countries problems. Just like Bush with Iraq war which now is a open door for Iran and terrorist groups. Now! Obama with Lybia and Egypt. Now he wants to work on Syria!!! America has done enough damage all around the world. President Obama needs to worry about the problems right hear at home which I am still waiting for him to roll up sleeves and get his hands dirty in Washington.

As the article notes many congressional republicans critisize Obama for not arming the rebels. Half the republicans will bash Obama for acknowledging the rebels and the other half for not arming them. In any case they'll have plenty more to bitch about the next 4 years as clearly whatever happens it'll be Obama's fault. The only thing you idiots will do is drive more rational people into the democratic camp. Keep spewing.

This President is clueless and has now idea of right vs wrong. He has no stability and no thoughts about his actions. He has no ability to govern or lead. What a waste.

great just like we supported the muslim brotherhood ...I dont think this president is clueless I think he supports terrorism

Thank GOD none of you arm-chair politicos are in office...It is quite obvious most of you are mentally impaired..

He can give them all those Garand rifles he wants to destroy. Not our problem, unless there are terrorists to kill. Maybe this is just another country wanting to embrace Islamic brotherhood. That wants it payed for by the West. No closer to victory, brought to our knees financially, and now expected to bow.

Clueless for not supporting O'Bama in this? Those of you who voted for this man yet again were warned: we saw the signs with Egypt, the cover up in Benghazi, we saw his (non) response to the surrounding of Israel by countries who supported or were gearing up their arms until pressurred by congress and everyone else to respond (he still has not withdrawn aid to most of those countries), we saw O'Bama year after year reducing the amount of nuclear arms we possess, yet barely raising a finger to enforce reduction of nuclear arms elsewhere by threatening to withdraw the millions of dollars we give these countries who continue to gear up -Iran in particular .We have heard him say in so many words that he beleives ALL countries should be equal-this man does NOT beleive in America as a world leader..he is a socialist and inmy mind, has some screws loose- and those of you who voted for him: what happens here and abroad is now on YOU..not Bush, not Congress but O'Bama and YOU..

@ Ido

IMHO it would seem, the American government or at least the component that is the Military industrial Complex, is ostensibly supporting the Islamist "terrorist" faction, which could include members of the fictitious Al-CIA-da organization. The agenda to destabilize the middle east continues, so that the Global Elite; NWO, can continue to profit from the war machine, and justify spending billions of dollars to save us from the so called terrorist threat. And so the prophecy continues to unfold and we the sheeple will be fed the usual Bull$h!t from the complicit media and lied to yet again as the Federal Reserve and its corrupt machinery plunders the worlds wealth for its own greedy ends.

But some people are not as dumb as they look:

Anonymous Message: #OpSyria V2.0 - YouTube

I'm fairly comfortable saying that many on these boards don't like the result of the last US free election, but free elections don't always mean that you get what you want. What you get is what the majority wants.

Except that the majority does not get what it wants. The majority of people that actually voted got what they wanted. Obama won by a couple percentage points of total votes....not total eligible voters.

The majority of citizens in this country did not vote for Obama.

Obama and his administration appears to be not knowing what they are doing.

The contradictions in one day speaks much!

Or have some lobbyists jumped in force in one day!

Hope Obama and his administration recall Libyan mess.

yeah,the Taliban got their big start under very similar conditions.They were willing to fight the Russians so we armed them.Now we are fighting the Taliban,An enemy of our own creation.

"The move, which was widely expected, could give new international legitimacy to the rebels fighting to overthrow the regime of Bashir Assad but stops short of authorizing the U.S. to arm the opposition, something Obama has steadfastly refused to do."

Do I really need to explain this? It says that Obama has refused to supply arms to the rebels.

COinFL===Obama refuses to do anything over there. Remember that Russia has a stake in this country and Obama doesn't want to step on their toes. Obama said he would be more flexible after the election. Maybe a new movie on the way? Obama takes on Bashir Assad's troops by himself. The Super President!! The man that killed Bin Laden.

We supplied arms to the rebels in Libya and we are now in search of where all those weapons went to.
Who really is in charge of Libya these days? We never hear who the legitimate government is.

I hate seeing so many civilians killed, but frankly we can never figure out in that region who is the good guy or the bad guy. So now we decided to straddle the fence and back the rebels with exception. Again, keep in mind that those rebels, only civilians I assume, are perfectly fine with those terrorists among them to win their fight. So in the end do the good guys tell the bad guys to skedaddle when the war is over, or do the bad guys turn their fire on those that oppose their will?

hmm so where did the rebels get manpads from? i seem to remember that libya had the worlds largest supply of manpads from russia and there have been cargo ships sailing from the area of lybia to the area of syria and turkey has been helping the rebels for some time now.

we trained the mujaheddin, not the taliban. taliban came after the soviets defeat and after we abandoned afgans. so do you always blame the alcohol for the abusive husband? excuses are everywhere so why use em so frequently?

for people that get mad when a repub does this crap, you sure change your tune when your guy does it.

Theboys- In response to your comment about the weapons issue. Obama and his base is against guns and yet they ship guns to drug cartels like Fast and Furious wich got a Border Patrol Killed anbd Mexican citizens murder. Now this President might give guns to the rebels in Syria , just like in Lybia which our 4 Americans were murdered. I find Obama and his Liberal buddies a huge hypocrite when it comes to guns, weapons.

Is Obama administration much different than that idiotic Bush administration, where Saudis, oil companies, Christian right, Netayahus and their lobbyists used to set directions on foreign policies, actions and jumping into wars?

No role beyond talking. NO more actions like Iraqi wars, Afghan war, Libyan intervention, Somalia and Lebanon!

Also we should keep miles away from Sunni vs Shiites battles. Let us not decide winners with intervention.

Remove sanctions of Iranian oil. Iran can get nukes from Pakis.

Were you planning on doing that, Steve?

One look at your pathetic grammar and seditious comments and other countries will likely lay back, guffaw loudly and comment how fat, ignorant Americans can't even be bothered to vote, yet they're going to rise against their government.

Steve - What do you think the military is going to do to you when you and your yahoo red-neck friends rise up against "are" Government?

You genius liberals suck.

Rob - Well, your insightful and intelligent comment certainly changed my mind. I think I just had a "slap my forehead, what was I thinking?" moment and will now become a crazy right-wing Conservative. I certainly don't want to "suck".

Poll the military, they have no confidence in the current Commander in Chief. If it came down to firing on their own by order of a commander in chief they have no confidence in, you tell us, Kim H. what would they do?

You can also poll them and find that the majority of them will (overwhelmingly) follow a legal order. If a rebellion against our government ever occurred, the military would almost be guaranteed to back the president. Do you know why? Because we have this little thing called "elections" that lets we the people determine who our leader is going to be. If you've got a problem with our current leader, well guess what? He'll be gone in 4 years.

He'll be gone in 4 years.

hopefully without the murdering of millions of Americas via "we supported the opposition, who then killed our own people"

Fact -

But would they consider it a 'legal' order?

It's a valid question since what President, in his right mind, would order our military to attack our own people - especially when some of those people are the family members of our military.

Although, Obama has yet to show that he has any mind at all, let alone a conscience.

lol so all you people do is spout useless pols as example of thought lol freaking clueless. soldiers are not automatons who follow orders without question. as a matter of fact, soldiers have to disobey any order that conflicts with superior orders or is criminal in nature. just as our politicians are suppose to uphold our constitution, so do soldiers.

if the people revolted, the soldiers still need to obey rules and also remember that the military is under civilian control and we are the civilians who control them by our tax monies. the question posed by the OP is a very valid one in the context of this story but it seems you just want to hate.

how long you think soldiers will fight americans when they dont get paid and there is no money for equipment?

Tammmy

It's a very interesting debate to be had, what orders a soldier would follow and which they wouldn't, and I agree with you. I don't see any sitting president ordering soldiers to shoot down innocent civilians. If it came to the point where violence on the part of the military was a necessity to ensure order, you can bet your bottom dollar that they (The military) would (Most likely, unless said President pulled one Hell of a coup off) side with civilians. In the case of open rebellion at this period in time, however... Well whether you like President Obama or not, you cannot be completely apolitical and say things like "Oh he's usurped so much power," or "He's going to order soldiers to shoot civilians (Not quoting you, by the way, just the general tone of some people)" or "He's turning the government into a dictatorship" and the like, because they're simply not true. So at this point in time, if there were to be an armed rebellion against the U.S. government, I can guarantee you it would be a small minority of the population and that the military would not support it. And because the military (And even the majority of the country) would not support it, it would be doomed to fail for my reasons mentioned in my earlier post. Let's face it. Love him or hate him, Obama isn't the secret Nazi some people try to make him out to be. He's going to be gone in four years. Regardless of whether you stand on the political spectrum, isn't it time we stop all this "Oh we didn't get our way, time for armed rebellion" crap and get down to actually doing some work for this country? We can't really afford another four years of partisan bickering.

Roadlesstraveled

In the entire history of our country (1775-today) there have been about 1.2 million dead soldiers. Not to diminish their memory, but I really doubt Obama can pull another million off in four years. Don't be paranoid. Be factual. Under President Obama, there have been around 1800 military casualties. And by no means is that ideal, it is far less than several previous presidents.

blow: ..that POS Pretender-in-Chief will be lucky to make it 4 months...Mark my words, you simpering, bloviating, Libtard a$$hole...

Gee! If you're an example of a fabulous conservative--no wonder Romney lost!

Invent a war as in All President's Men movie!

Many don't understand that our big mess are due to Iraqi wars, Afghan war and now sanctions on Iranian oil!

At home: budget cuts here and there; austerity measure on this and that; unemployment due to laziness and so on!

These people should give us a break from useless wars!

European women need to start having more children.

More than half the people commenting on this forum so far tonight need to leave the computer alone and do their homework so that they might be able to learn something in school tomorrow.

Coinfl, nobody, including you, really knows what is going on in Syria right this minute. We just react to news that most likely is extremely flawed and biased. It is on every other issue and so why not this one too. Therefore nobody's comments can be viewed more right than others except by those that are dealing with too big of an ego.

As Obama said "Not everybody who's participating on the ground in fighting Assad are people who we are comfortable with," and that means no money which also of course is more important to the rebels than arms.

Moron alert!

Why, sure. Explains why he has killed all those Taliban and al Qaeda.

"He" hasn't killed all those Taliban and Al Queda, Einstein. The administration is only continuing the policies and military objectives laid out in the Bush era. Read your history.

Ahhh. Sorry. I thought he was Commander in Chief. My bad.

Bush gave up on catching Osama bin Laden. It was under Obama where that was remade a priority and finally a success. I'm no Democrat, but if you are going to blame Obama for everything you have to give him credit, too. Otherwise you are just a hypocritical, biased, radical right winger.

I didn't know that disagreeing with a point made one a radical right winger. Who is the reactionary here?

Obama is a POS.

Larry,

Don't tell me you actually think Obama is a terrorist supporter like cunical does? You never argued against that crazy notion, and yet people like you also won't give credit to Obama the terrorists taken out under his Presidency. What you said and did not say suggests you are at least not against that ridiculous notion. Unless you would like to say otherwise now? I mean you did kind of support it with what you said. I never specifically said you were a radical right winger, but if you are willing to fault Obama for terrorism related foreign policy then you also have to give him credit or it is only the biased half of an argument.

The facts don't lie, and that we got more high-ranking terrorist under Obama than under Bush. We got a lot of al Quaeda and Taliban under Obama in general. No he doesn't specifically fly over there and kill them. No president does, obviously. All I'm saying is that blame is not separate from giving credit to his achievements. All these biased radicals from the Republican party (note not all Republicans are like this) want to blame Obama for everything and not give him credit for a single thing. Either he has something to do with the terrorists and a bunch of them were taken out under his watch (this is if you give him blame and credit just because he's the President for things he doesn't literally do himself), or it has nothing to do with the presidency and he deserves neither blame (like blame for terrorism which spiked under Bush's watch) or credit.

So if you believe it has nothing to do with the presidency, and you have stated such, then one can't very well think Obama is a terrorist supporter either or they would be giving him hypocritical blame. And a person with a one sided view so extreme would most likely be a radical-right winger. So is that or isn't that you?

The generals and their troops in the military did Osama, not the President...it was way too early in this term to have done that...or even laid the ground work for that to be done.

So if he is praised for this, shouldn't he take responsibility of the condition of the economy today? We still blame Bush for today, so I blame BUSH for OSAMAS death. Good day, I said GOOD DAY

lol wow, you actually think obama killed someone? freaking hilarious lol its stupid. our trained military soldiers kill these people, not the president, he doesnt even give the orders for most of the targets except maybe bin laden but then again i think bush ordered the target, not obama.

obama supported MB in egypt, AQ in libya, AQ in tunisa, Hamas in palestine, the list goes on for obama supporting terrorists. so when his actions say one thing but you say another, whom am i to believe?

recognizing the rebels in syria is supporting terrorists because AQ is in syria and are the ones pushing the insurrection.

Wanna show us proof, Swag?

proof of what, have you been in a cave the past few years? obama supported the ouster of mubarak in place of a terrorist group, same in libya and everywhere else jihadist muslims have taken over. this very story is proof that obama supports terrorists because the rebels fighting against the legitimate syrian government are in fact terrorists. it does not matter if the syrian government is bad, these other guys are worse.

All you silly people. When are you going to realize, the POTUS is merely a figurehead. It really doesn't matter who is in the White House.

The country is being run by Wall Street.

Oh, yeah, cause Wall Street is fundy-Muslim supporting. That's OH SO GOOD for the world economy. Go back to reading Pravda, red sailor.

Rachel-36**** You don't know your a$$ from your elbow.

And you shouldn't be using your "smart"; (ha, that's funny) phone, while you are in class.

Maybe apple should create a "Dumb phone" for little girls like you.

What a clever reply, red. Shows you think I have schooling while I know you do not.

rachel3*****

An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you
know. It's being able to differentiate between what you do know and what you
don't.

"Schooling" isn't a testament to intelligence, it's what you learn while you're there that matters and much more importantly, what you learn after you have left.

Let's talk some more when you've spent 12 years in the military and have some grand kids eh?

Another decrepit old lefty... Were you a Commie in the army? Didn't avail yourself of the tuition plan for vets? THAT'S GREAT THINKING. You might have made a professional out of yourself.

rachel-000000

That’s a very large axe you are grinding Rachel. Were you
sexually abused as a child?

Or is there something deeper and darker. You seem to have
plenty of spare time on your hands for an apparent right wing, feminazi, racist
with the intellect of a fifteen year old. Are you by chance a Republican Intern
or just a spoiled little rich beatch?

That would be understandable since every assumption you have
made thus far has been completely off base.

I’m sure you will feel compelled to cast more aspersions,
jump to some more conclusions and hurl more abuse. Regardless, it will be of no
consequence. The repartee is over; I have better things to do with my time than
continue this pi$$ing contest with someone as immature as you.

Freedom? Do you mean like the "freedom fighters" in Egypt, Libya, and Morocco (i.e. Muslim Brotherhood)? Be careful, or you will get what you want.

Did you drop too much acid in the '70s? Seeking freedom? Maybe a few of them. The rest are seriously part of the death-cult of Islam.

as a free country

Surely you can't be serious!

You can't stop them! Any of them. All of them! It is what they want! They do not care about life on earth. They only care about God and nothing else. Even if you established a secular democratic structure it would decay in no time and anarchy would be the norm.

I read my bible, I study history....everywhere I look suggests that the middle east is full of a madness that has simply lasted through literally the entire history of civilization. One almost wants to dust their hands off turn around and just walk away from it....nobody will ever effect any significant change over there

That's rather defeatist. While I'll admit it is tempting to walk walk from that mess that is the middle east and be done with it, we can't very well do that. There is too much at stake. Yes it is slow going and hard, but eventually it will get better if we keep trying. (Even if we don't live to see it.) If you have the chance to make even the slightest change for the better there, you do it because every slight amount of change for the better adds up over time.

And if you have the opportunity to get rid of one of the worst governments in modern history (and a well known state sponsor to terrorism) without starting a war of our own, and replace it with something better (even if only a little better), you go for that opportunity. You just have to make sure it doesn't change for the worse. We didn't make sure it wouldn't change for the worse in Egypt, and that's partly why it got so ugly there again. We can't afford to make the same mistake in Syria, especially with certain radical extremist trying to infiltrate (which we can't allow either) the revolution.

All good points God.

I only have begun to wonder why we have to make sure of anything over there. Why attempt to effect change from the outside? It is akin to domesticating fire ants or killer bees. And lets go ahead and admit that if the region did not posses strategic resources we wouldn't evn care

A new petition posted on the ‘We The People’ section of the WhiteHouse.gov website demands that the Obama administration cease all funding and support for terrorists and extremist rebels in Syria, as news emerges of 29 different Syrian rebel groups pledging allegiance to the Al-Qaeda affiliated Nusra Front, a group responsible for killing U.S. troops in Iraq and one that is currently the primary fighting force in the NATO-backed bid to topple President Bashar Al-Assad.

That's a damned good question, because I don't believe most Americans are for recognizing, much less arming, Islamist rebels in their quest to take over yet another Mideast nation.

But maybe it means Obama, Netanyahu, Clinton and Wolfowitz.

its been going on seens the day of time!!!!!!

Wh-wh-what?

So you are going to take this administration's assessment that Assad has chemical weapons and is ready to use them? Did you use the same judgement with Bush and Iraq? I bet not.

Where is the proof that they have chemical weapons? The UN? I've heard this story before.

Where is the proof that they have chemical weapons?

The truly sad part is that Saddam was actually using chemical weapons against his own people...and we still have to hear how they never existed....according to many.

Now, with the shoe on the other foot, rumor becomes gospel because it's coming from the messiah's lips.

He is just a fool, huh? You know, it is hard to understand arrogance like yours. The man ran a campaign that beat the Clintons, McCain and Romney. He was an editor of the Harvard Law Review. He was a constitutional scholar. He won a Nobel prize. He has restored our reputation in Europe. He drug us out of financial collapse. He has flaws. He is obviously not "just a fool".

He's just a piece of$hit.

Buffaloed ~

Stating the truth can hardly be termed "arrogance".

Obama won those campaigns by lying egregiously. He was editor of the Harvard Law Review but published nothing; the only thing he did was edit the publication. His appointment to that position was based solely on his race. He won a Nobel prize but did nothing to earn it. He was a constitutional law lecturer but no one knows if he was a "scholar" because he never allowed his grades to be known. Restored our reputation? He's the laughing stock of the world, not just in Europe. As for "he drug[sic] us out of...", don't you mean he dragged us into financial collapse?

They believe the lies and propaganda, they only want to here what they want to believe. If you question any of it, you are a racist, hater, bigot or crazy.

Makes sense. Recognizing other governments is usually the function of the local barber shop...and guys like you that can't write a coherent sentence.

Sorry. Not everyone is a perfect as you I guess. But, you know what my sentences are saying. You just don't agree. So, how about saying that instead of trying to just insult everyone here? But, if you don't understand how about this. DON'T TELL THE WORLD THAT ALL OF AMERICA AGREES. CAUSE I DON'T. DON'T LUMP ME INTO THAT BUNCH. OK? MAKE A STATEMENT THAT THE US GOVERNMENT ONLY SEES THEM AS A NATION. NOT NECESSARILY ALL OF IT'S PEOPLE. Is that coherent enough?

Buffaloed ~

Perhaps you should hold off comment on another poster's "coherent sentence" until you master some grammatical tense skills.

The local barbershop has more sense than does the acting, pretending president.

Nobody said they were allies you ass clown.

You are the ass clown!!! Plain and simple............

Hey, as long as Boehner can block Obama's nonsense...GREAT!!!!!!

What about when Reagan sent arms to Iran?

What did you say about his regognition?

ahhahahahahahhaha

I'll bet you kept your mouth shut and lacked the courage to say anything whatsoever.

Prove me right.

I believe a certain Colonel was responsible for selling arms to Iran, and he burned for it. I actually thought it was a pretty cool idea to raise money for the Contras without the taxpayers having to pay for it.

Chuck-you're right....there are millions of Americans that are very aware of what you just said. We can read between the lines when Obama speaks......nothing but lies.