Obama takes a victory lap!!!!!!

poet1b
This is a major victory for Obama, and Putin. They get to claim credit for making a difference, without ever having to put boots on the ground.

But wait for it, soon the anti-Obama crowd with be claiming about how Obama should have invaded Syria, and calling him a wimp.

Obama's lustfull attempt at more war failed.
Obama gets punked by Putin.
Obama is given credit for a "major victory"??

I am sorry but...
The only victory was Putin's. He basically castrated Obama.
And, I am gratefull that Putin stepped in before Obama dragged us off into another needless war.

Obama Victory? Nope.
Embarrasing Fail? Yep.

luciddream
reply to post by Amagnon

 

No matter what Kerry and Obama do from this point, they are criminals - filthy war criminals - they should be hanged.

Yeah agree, but first, when is bush hanging?

Oh right.

If we start hanging these guys then Bush and the Clintons can be moved to the front of the queue.

poet1b
This is a major victory for Obama, and Putin. They get to claim credit for making a difference, without ever having to put boots on the ground.

But wait for it, soon the anti-Obama crowd with be claiming about how Obama should have invaded Syria, and calling him a wimp.

Our original post — 'U.S. Threats' Did Not Influence His Decision, Assad Says:

Though the U.S. and its allies say the threat of military force has led Syrian President Bashar Assad to endorse a Russian plan for ceding control of his chemical weapons, the Syrian leader says "U.S. threats did not influence the decision."

Russia's RT.com newssite says Assad has told another Russian news channel that "Syria is handing over its chemical weapons under international supervision because of Russia," not any pressure brought by the Obama administration's talk of missile strikes.

Source:
Link

All Obama has done is saber rattle and threaten more war crimes, Putin has given him and his administration a GOLDEN opportunity to save face and maybe just MAYBE gain back some approval ratings. But more likely than not Obama, Kerry and co will end up attacking anyway proving just how big warmongers they all are, having the opportunity for peace and pissing it away.

reply to post by xuenchen


I guess it depends on how you define conservative. The way the the Obama haters post, it seems they think Putin is the best thing since sliced bread.

Good to see you recognize the free market communism connection.

If we don't wake up everyone else to the reality, we are all going to be standing in a very long line
hoping to get some tp, with our Fed res script in hand.

My take on Syria is pretty much the same as yours.

Nice summary

Iraq is too unstable (by design) and more than 2/3 are Shiite (big issue with the Saudi and Qatar Monarchies)

Qatar and the Saudis are interested in a direct gas pipeline to Syria (shorter total distance).

From there, a small distance would tie into the proposed Turkey pipelines to Austria (if that ever happens).

Russia is successfully stalling all of the above.

Qatar and the Saudis might be interested in tying into the existing Arab Pipeline that now runs from Egypt, through Jordan and into Syria.

Part of the Arab Pipeline is shutdown (going to Israel [aww]), and the line going to Jordan/Syria is slow because Egypt can't deliver the volume (all by design because the Saudis back one side in Egypt, and Qatar backs the other side -- (even though they are partners ! -- sounds familiar !!).

As long as there is war in Syria, Russia maintains its monopoly on the natural gas supply to Europe.

The only reason Russia wouldn't be happy to see the U.S invade Syria, and make the situation even worse, is because Russia is afraid that the U.S. will quickly do to Syria what they did to Iraq, except even faster.

Does anyone seriously doubt that the war mongering republicans in congress would not vote to attack Syria, if that is what their corporate masters tell them to do?

The gullible public would change their stripes in an instant, if the corporate masters tell the right wing radio talk shows to re-program their zombie audience.

It is more than likely that the ICBs are teed off that Obama floated a diplomatic solution to the Russians, and got Putin to take the bait.

reply to post by poet1b

Obama floated a diplomatic solution to the Russians, and got Putin to take the bait.

So let me get this straight.

Chemical weapons were used in Syria.
Obama has a red line.
Obama threatens to bomb Syria.
People everywhere say no and want proof.
Obama doesn't have a red line anymore, it was the worlds red line...not his...really.
Syria admits to having chemical weapons, not to using them.
They talk with Russia and agree that the only way for the US to not hit them is to give up control of them.
Now Obama is the hero because he openly supports the rebels containing many terrorists (blamed for 9/11) and not only did he not bomb a country potentially killing many innocents, he also did not come up with this idea.

Am I understanding your viewpoint?

reply to post by superman2012


Sort of,
I don't think Obama supports the rebels.

It looks like Putin supports both sides of this war, it favors Russia.

And this is, after all, an ancient Muslim conflict.

Maybe Obama stumble upon this solution, or it could be a masterful stroke.

Victory??? Are you serious? Obama looks like a weak, frail and dim-witted child right now whining and trying to make up lies to save his credibility. You know...his normal plan. He also made the US look like a joke and Putin looks like a hero. Truth be told...Putin probably IS a hero in some ways.

Obama's best move right now is to shut up and go hide in a corner of the White House for a few years while we fix everything he has broken. Then...after he is out of office he can blame everyone for not following his "brilliant" plan. You know...the plan that destroys the constitution, the economy, international relations, the strength of the US and the credibility of our people while allowing terrorists, fanatics and leeches to suck the blood out of our way of life.

Victory?

poet1b
reply to post by superman2012

 

Sort of,
I don't think Obama supports the rebels.

It looks like Putin supports both sides of this war, it favors Russia.

And this is, after all, an ancient Muslim conflict.

Maybe Obama stumble upon this solution, or it could be a masterful stroke.

Did you mean to say, "doesn't support the rebels anymore"?
You do remember that they supported the rebels and even allowed the public to donate to the FSA right?

poet1b
reply to post by sonnny1

 

Then you should applaud this move by Obama, to be willing to stop the call for invasion and give diplomacy a chance.

Cause your earlier post sure sounded pro-war.

Your perception of world events is skewed by some combination of ignorance and delusion.

Obama threatens military intervention in a foreign civil war (with utter disregard for the outcome) and you call him a peacemaker?

I will grant you that he probably did not think anyone would dare cross his "red line," but once the chemicals were deployed he was dead set on proving that he isn't afraid to use "my(his) military."
If Putin had not seen the opportunity to take control and appear peaceable, we would have fired cruise missiles by now.

poet1b
reply to post by superman2012

 

Sort of,
I don't think Obama supports the rebels.

It looks like Putin supports both sides of this war, it favors Russia.

And this is, after all, an ancient Muslim conflict.

Maybe Obama stumble upon this solution, or it could be a masterful stroke.

Made it to the end of the thread and found this, which further reveals your need for geopolitical enlightenment. Not to say you are entirely un/misinformed; it is a complicated subject.

Through his actions, Obama does seem to support the rebels. The pattern behind his actions suggests that he is more interested in bringing down their opponent: the Assad regime. This civil war has raged for two years now with at least 100,000 killed so far, and Obama did nothing until this arbitrary "red line" of chemical weapons use was crossed. Conveniently, a case can be made that only a government authority could perpetrate such an act. The poor rebels must, therefore, have been the victims.

So despite the fact that Putin is the one who is stonewalling in the face of Obama's military escalation, you think he "supports both sides?" That does not compute. My guess is you are saying that in order to maintain your belief that Obama is a good guy in this.

Nor is Putin really being a good guy. All of these fools calling him a hero for resolving the situation are playing right into his hand. In one move, he was able to undermine US military and political authority, improve international opinion of Russia, and further obscure his own past as a ruthless KGB elite. Let's not forget that Russia has been repelling militant Muslim groups from its borders for centuries, and Assad has kept these groups from attaining power in Syria. Oh, and Tartus is the only friendly port that the Russians have in the Mediterranean.

Bottom line--it's not about aiding the downtrodden rebels, or protecting a legitimate government, or finding a peaceful solution to a civil war in halfway around the world. Politicians use these notions to tug at your heartstrings while asking for your vote.

It is about power.

reply to post by poet1b


Obama takes a victory lap?

Obama threatens to bomb the Assad Regime...

Putin wets his pants at the thought of his "boy" being smacked around like a small, frightened child,

Bends over backward in a panic, Will do anything to hold onto power in the region,

demands Assad gives up his weapons pronto...

Victory lap for Obama.

Pretty hard not to come up with that conclusion, that is if you're not a supporter of murderous dictators like Assad and haters of freedom (Like Putin and his fans here on ATS).

canucks555
Obama threatens to bomb the Assad Regime...

Putin wets his pants at the thought of his "boy" being smacked around like a small, frightened child,

Bends over backward in a panic, Will do anything to hold onto power in the region,

demands Assad gives up his weapons pronto...

Victory lap for Obama.

Pretty hard not to come up with that conclusion, that is if you're not a supporter of murderous dictators like Assad and haters of freedom (Like Putin and his fans here on ATS).

edit on 13-9-2013 by canucks555 because: (no reason given)

The US, UK Gulf Arab goal is to get rid of the regime (because it further their interest). The Russian, Iranian, Chinese goal is to keep the regime in power (because it furthers their interest).

The chemical weapons issue is the necessary excuse that the western side needs to get its populations to agree to go killing. Its also something the russians don't care about and are happy to force Assad to give away.

Neither power block really gives a # about the people dying. If they did they would have forced a negotiation rather then pouring weapons and support in on the side of their choice (as all sides have been doing).

Its currently a stalemate, entirely devoid of morality or good intentions on both sides.

justwokeup

canucks555
Obama threatens to bomb the Assad Regime...

Putin wets his pants at the thought of his "boy" being smacked around like a small, frightened child,

Bends over backward in a panic, Will do anything to hold onto power in the region,

demands Assad gives up his weapons pronto...

Victory lap for Obama.

Pretty hard not to come up with that conclusion, that is if you're not a supporter of murderous dictators like Assad and haters of freedom (Like Putin and his fans here on ATS).

edit on 13-9-2013 by canucks555 because: (no reason given)

The US, UK Gulf Arab goal is to get rid of the regime (because it further their interest). The Russian, Iranian, Chinese goal is to keep the regime in power (because it furthers their interest).

The chemical weapons issue is the necessary excuse that the western side needs to get its populations to agree to go killing. Its also something the russians don't care about and are happy to force Assad to give away.

Neither power block really gives a # about the people dying. If they did they would have forced a negotiation rather then pouring weapons and support in on the side of their choice (as all sides have been doing).

Its currently a stalemate, entirely devoid of morality or good intentions on both sides.

Exactly.

Pretty much sums it up perfectly.

Both sides share responsibility for the over 100,000 already dead.
But only one side wanted to kill more people in the name of freedom, and help Al Qaeda regain the upper hand, and also risk a world war.
The other side chose to try and end the bloodshed instead of add to it.
If choosing to try and stop the killing is bad, then call me bad too. Maybe there can be an end to the war by diplomatic means.

reply to post by sonnny1


I was thinking of the irony of it all. Our Nobel Peace Prize winning President was pushing for war until an ex KGB agent stepped in with a peaceful solution. Hmmm.

borracho
reply to post by sonnny1

 

I was thinking of the irony of it all. Our Nobel Peace Prize winning President was pushing for war until an ex KGB agent stepped in with a peaceful solution. Hmmm.

Can't have a quality circus without some sort of weird twist, now could we?

"Obama got slapped", that should be the title of this thread.

ArtooDetoo
"Obama got slapped", that should be the title of this thread.

And to make it worse, he got publicly spanked while the spotlight of most of the world was on HIM.

Yeah I bet thats embarrassing.

I think it truly is a great victory for independent media and forums like ATS.

For the small part we all played so far, we are the winners right now. At least while it lasts.

reply to post by poet1b


No offense to the OP, but Putin knows how to play this game much better than Obama.

Best thing to do, is mind our own business. America is NOT the policeman of the world. The middle east is a cesspool of war and nothing good can come from getting involved.

I can't believe ppl STILL believe the left/right rethug/democrap coke/pepsi nonsense.

I mean seriously. Why not just post from WND or natural news or something if you're gonna go there.

Call me naive I guess, I just thought we were (mostly) past this kind of thinking by now.