posted on May, 29 2013 @ 12:11 PM
Originally posted by MrSpad
For once I agree with something you have state, which is this.
Quick and direct US intervention would have helped topple the regime but, we all know how well that would go over in the US. Have his actions
been what is best for the US? Yes, easly and that is why it has been followed be everbody esle. The US will inrevene just enough to make sure the
next gov is pro western without costing any western lives. As we get closer to the end the more likely you will see some sort action from the west
to show it has supported the rebels all along while at the same time under cutting the radicals chances at taking power
The American public would not have approved a "quick" intervention.
"Have his actions been what is best for the US? Yes.
Be specific. You just specified the US would not have accepted the quick intervention to help topple this regime, which is what the GOVT wants, which
is the agenda Obama is in charge of so what is good for Obama is not necessarily good for the US. He makes more in campaign contributions than the tax
payers pay him.
As for the rest of your statement, the US GOVT and its allies, Israel, UK, France, want these rebels bought, which is what they are currently doing
with the eased embargos on arms and oil, so if Israel and it's allies are successful, they can put into place, again, the people they wish to push
forward their agenda..." to show it has supported the rebels all along while at the same time under cutting the radicals chances at taking power"