The resolution passed by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee leaves open the possibility that the U.S. might deploy ground troops in Syria. But when you look at who is actually in charge of running the show, the possibility that troops will end up on the ground in the Middle East country is remote at best.
The military action is being run by Secretary of State John Kerry. He’s been Obama’s point man, making the first significant speech on the subject giving America’s response to the use of chemical weapons that were used against Syrian civilians. Obama, of course, is a master at distancing himself from making decisions that could have adverse results on his presidency such as starting World War III. This is the president who blames “Washington” for many of America’s problems as if he, as president and commander in chief, has absolutely nothing to do with what is taking place. As proof positive of Obama not being in charge, if he was truly running the show there would not have been any 60 day limit with a 30 day extension stuff. He would have set a definite date (eg. November 3, at 3 p.m.) when the war, or as he calls it, a shot across the bow, will end.
If an attack takes place in Syria and ends up going south, it won’t be Obama’s fault. In fact, he has an alibi. At the time the initial steps were taking place, the prez was in Sweden denying he ever said the movement or use of chemical weapons would be crossing a red line. It was the world that decided the red line could not be crossed, not him. In fairness to the president, this was not a complete lie as some are claiming. In Obama’s mind, Barack Hussein Obama is the world.
Kerry was a good choice to lead the United States into what might become the Syrian war. The U.S. needs someone who at a minimum looks presidential and if you see Kerry speaking about Syria, he does in fact look like a leader. For optimum results, it is better to watch Kerry speaking with the sound off. He really does look like a leader compared to Barry.
And the fact Obama does not look like a leader has nothing to do with race. Let’s face it; a skinny white guy with big ears would not appear presidential either.
Kerry will never order ground troops to be deployed. Because in his view, the American military are just as bad if not worse than chemical weapons. It therefore would not make any sense to teach his former buddy Bashar a lesson by sending in people who are dumber and worse war criminals than he is.
Kerry, as anyone who as ever listened to him for 15 seconds or longer knows, is a Vietnam veteran. His major contribution to the war was to ensure than any soldier who suffered a tiny boo-boo, whether or not it needed a band aid, would be awarded a Purple Heart.
After returning from Vietnam, Kerry testified before the same committee he appeared before when playing president. He told them of all the atrocities committed by U.S. troops during the war; they cut of ears and heads, applied electric shocks to genitals, raped women and poisoned food.
Kerry’s excuse for saying this is that he was a young man; he was only 27. It doesn’t seem to matter that 27-year-olds are old enough to be executed in the United States for such crimes as murder and treason. Or that 27 is even too old to be placed on mommy and daddy’s ObamaCare.
This was not the only time he’s spoken out against U.S. troops. On Dec. 4, 2005, at the tender age of 62, Kerry went on Face the Nation and accused troops in Iraq of going into homes of Iraqis in the middle of the night and terrorizing kids, children, and women. The fact you don’t know the difference between kids and children simply means you’re not as smart as Kerry is.
The following year, when he was only 63, Kerry told an audience that if they didn’t stay in school and get an education, they would wind up in Iraq.
So how could Kerry possibly conduct a war against Syria by sending in troops that are torturers, terrorists and dumb to boot. It makes no sense to send dumb terrorists into a country where there are no terrorists; only al Qaeda “moderates”. He can’t in all good conscience do it.
John Kerry’s view of the American military pales in comparison to the use of chemical weapons.
