Search Box

Thursday, September 5, 2013

How will the world react to Obama's Syria incursion?

In 2007 Obama criticized Bush for making plans to possibly bomb Iran without getting Congressional approval, pointing out that absent an imminent threat to the US, this was unconstitutional. Then, in 2011, Obama himself bombed Libya without getting Congressional approval.

A week ago, Obama said that he would bomb Syria. But then it turned out that he could not get UN Security Council approval, and even our staunchest ally, the United Kingdom, voted against the incursion. So Obama decided that he wanted Congressional approval, since he didn't want to take the political risk of acting unilaterally.

Of course, after seeking such approval, Obama then announced that he did not need it and even if he didn't get it might go ahead and bomb Syria anyway.

Last year, Obama said, "A red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized.” This week, he said, "I didn't set a red line, the world set a red line." (The world has disavowed chemical weapons; but it never set a "red line" and no other world leaders are suggesting bombing Syria.)

The question is, how will Obama be perceived abroad after he gives the order for the Navy to loft a few Tomahawks in Syria's direction? You know, a response strong enough to send a message, but not strong enough to actually change anything (like a regime). Strong enough so as not to be mocked, but not so strong as to anger Russia or Iran. Strong enough to make it look to the American people as if he is good on his word, but not so strong as to do too much damage.

Will Obama be perceived as a strong leader?

Here are some of the reactions I expect:

Vladimir Putin: "Wow, I thought Barack was just a big pussy. Boy, was I ever wrong. When he ordered those Tomahawks in, it sure opened my eyes. He is one tough hombre. You know me, I'm into machismo, but I'm nothing compared to Barack. I wish instead of growing up in Leningrad competing at judo and having a career in the KGB, I'd played JV basketball at Punahou, then gone to Harvard Law School and become a community organizer. Then I'd be a real man, like Barack. I mean, he may be a homosexual, but he's no pansy."

David Cameron: "I'm so ashamed that Parliament voted against supporting Barack's military adventurism. He was right, and we were wrong. They'll be making movies about this in the future. Hey, maybe if Barack is out of office by then, he can star in them as himself. Then maybe he can put those movies on an iPod and give them to Queen Elizabeth as a gift. She so appreciated his previous gift of the iPod with his speeches on it."

UN head Ban Ki-moon: "Barack was smart not to wait for our verdict. There was absolutely no chance that the rebels might have used chemical weapons in order to draw the US into the conflict and shift the tide of the war. I mean, whoever heard of such duplicity, right? And Barack was obviously right that those weapons represented an immediate threat to the United States. Today, the outskirts of Damascus; tomorrow, Bethesda."

Bashar Assad: "Now that Barack has put that airfield out of commission, I see the error of my ways. I'm now going to put down my arms and let the rebels take over. A lot of them are al Qaeda, but Barack is right, we shouldn't fight them."

Ayman al-Zawahiri: "Al Qaeda has been completely won over by Barack's statesmanlike move. We no longer see the US as the Great Satan; we now see them as our savior. In fact, a lot of us are already converting to Christianity. Personally, I can't decide whether to become a Baptist or an Episcopalian. In fact, we admire Barack so much, we've decided to stop promoting jihad and start promoting gay rights."

13 comments:

Baloo said...

Thanks for your recent good words, and now some for you. Sometimes you're so damn funny I can hardly stand it. I've reblogged this one here:
http://ex-army.blogspot.com/2013/09/obamacho.html

Anonymous said...

The good old Nobel Peace Prize winner wants to engage in war when there's really no need. You just couldn't make it up, could you?

John Craig said...

Anon --
Exactly. And the fact that he was nominated for that prize fifteen days after he'd been in office shows what a joke it has become. It should be called the Nobel Political Correctness Prize.

Anonymous said...

I was baffled when the Peace Prize went to Al Gore, nevermind Obama. Whatever work Gore has done for the environment, environmentalism isn't really peace, is it? Surely the definition of 'peace' constitutes doing something good during times of military conflict or political persecution? That prize could have gone to Irena Sendler, who risked her life rescuing people from the Warsaw Ghetto. Alternatively, it could have gone to the many volunteers for Amnesty International or maybe to Nicholas Winton, who organised transport to the UK for Jewish children, as well as families to adopt them, during the Second World War. I'm sure everyone agrees that they would have been worthier candidates. That being said, at least Gore actually did *something*...all Obama did was run for president and win, like all US presidents!

John Craig said...

Anon --
They said at the time that Obama was basically awarded the prize for the accomplishment of NOT being George W. Bush, and I remember hearing the same thing about gore's prize, that he was awarded the prize as a sort of consolation prize for not having won the Presidency back in 2000. So for those two, it was the anti-Bush prize, which tells you something about the selection committee.

If you look at the list of winners over the years, there have been many deserving awardees, along with some just plain silly ones. There have also been a fair number of liberal-to-leftist winners. But there has never been a single conservative one. I guess conservatives like Pat Buchanan aren't capable of advocating peace. It's only drone-happy mad bombers like Obama who deserve the prize, evidently.

Anonymous said...

Agreed - the Nobel selection committee for the Peace Prize does seem to hold obvious liberal bias (I'm not even a conservative, but I still see the bias). I don't think the Nobel selection committees all have liberal bias though - Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman did both win the Economics Prize.

What irks me the most about Gore and Obama getting the Peace Prize is that it cheapens the award for those who really do deserve it.

John Craig said...

Anon --
You're absolutely right. The selection committees for the hard sciences -- and even for the softish science of economics -- are all completely legit. It's just the Peace and Literature Prizes which have been devalued by politics.

Glen Filthie said...

LOL LOL LOL.

Jesus Christ! I haven't laughed that hard in a long time. The thought of Putin being awed by Obama is the stuff of fine comedy John...but there are so many up here in Canada that would seriously expect the same. They wouldn't put it like YOU did, you nasty racist you...

Seriously? I think the world will follow your lead too: if your enemies are hellbent on killing each other, crack a beer, spread out the sammiches and nibblies and enjoy the show! And I would not be surprised if you are right to do so.

My big fear, though, is that Darwin, Murphy and Tom Clancy are hard at work in the middle east. We know those rag heads have WMD's...we sold them to them and they have used them on their own people twice! We also know a small group - stupid and determined enough - WILL use them. For the most part that is an entertaining show of moslem pissants killing each other...but there are some very, very dangerous men in the midst of that and they really, really need to be killed too. They would commit the world to WW3 without a second thought.

To hell with Obama - a few well placed hellfires now may save us a whole pile of bodies later. I hope you guys are right and I am wrong, John.

John Craig said...

Glen --
Thank you.

I didn't say anything racial about Putin's opinion of Obama; I may have attributed some anti-gay sentiments to him, but that's about it.

I agree, let our enemies kill each other. And that was well put -- Darwin, Murphy, and Clancy ARE all at work in the Mideast. I don't know what the future holds, but I see no benefit to us getting involved now.

Glen Filthie said...

Obviously you didn't get the memo from the Oval Office John - anyone that opposes Obama is a dirty, filthy un-American racist.

Who woulda thunk it?

;)

John Craig said...

Glen --
The sad thing is, that memo doesn't just come from the White House, it comes from all the "watchdogs" in the mainstream media as well. They've become, for the most part, propaganda machines for the Left.

Anonymous said...

I hope that we keep out of Syria, dreading what this could cause our country to experience (eg. retaliation in the form of nukes headed our way). When it comes to our president, I have zero confidence in him. He makes me incredibly NERVOUS.

John Craig said...

Anon --
Thank goodness it looks as if this thing will be resolved without bombs, thanks to Putin. I agree with your assessment of our country's President.