Shootin' the Breeze

and random targets

Archive for the tag “Syria”

A Modest Proposal for World Peace Via the Weiners

I would not bet on a victory for Anthony Weiner in the New York City mayoral election.  However, I have an idea for alternate employment for him and his wife, Huma Abedin.

Mr. Weiner is Jewish.  His wife is Muslim.  His sexting has put more strain on their marriage than merely their religious difference.  Since they are still together, apparently they are both extraordinarily skilled at conflict resolution as well as being experts on Facebook networking.

Huma Abedin works for Hillary Clinton.  Some of you will recall that Ms. Clinton was, until recently, Secretary of State, a job which made her the boss of all American ambassadors to foreign embassies around the world, including Benghazi, Libya.

Huma grew up in Saudi Arabia, where her mother still lives.  She must have knowledge and insights about the troubled Mid-East.

Anthony has, well, “people skills” and is very out-going, to a fault perhaps.

What a team!  I suggest that they be sent to Syria as co-ambassadors.  They can make friends with Assad and bring him around to the American Way.  Maybe they could get him involved with Facebook friends as a way to get his mind off killing rebels AND maybe they could get the rebels in Syria to make friends with Assad through Facebook rather than direct military action.

Who better?

Problem solved.

You’re welcome!

Why the British aren’t coming

I agree. President Obama painted himself into a corner. Now his pride is on the line. Why is this red line promise so important? Hasn’t he broken plenty of other promises?

nebraskaenergyobserver

obamaIn the last century the British have been first up to deal with the threat of evil: we were trying to stop the Kaiser a full three years before the Great Republic got involved, and we (along with the French) were the only ones ever to declare war on Nazi Germany without being attacked by it or one of its allies; we have been extremely grateful for American help, which has always been invaluable, and during the Cold War Years, and after, have stood with the USA when many others failed. So why, on this occasion, have we declined to get involved in taking action against Syria?

In part it is because we have, none of us done so over the last two years, despite thousands of deaths and millions being made refugees. We have not done so for a variety of reasons: the UN can’t, because Russia and China…

View original post 387 more words

Help Me Understand Syria (and President Obama)

A year ago, when the U.S. embassy in Benghazi, Libya was attacked and our ambassador killed, our military was not brought in to protect Americans at the embassy.  That failure to protect Americans is still being investigated.

America did not punish Libya for not protecting American diplomatic guests in that country.

The apparent use of chemical weapons in Syria by the Syrian government against its own citizens is horrible, yet, unlike the Benghazi situation, does not, as far as I know, involve American citizens.

England, our ally, is not backing President Obama’s desire to intervene in Syria.

Russia is very opposed to U.S. involvement.

Is this not something for the United Nations?

Until I am persuaded otherwise, I do not see why the United States of America should attack Syria.  I see that as lighting a powder keg.

If one of President Obama’s daughters was being threatened and he did nothing, and then, sadly, she was killed, and he still did nothing, then if a child was being abused by his own father in another country, should our President then be committed to saving the foreign child from that child’s family or just do a better job protecting his own family?

May God grant wisdom to our leaders.

Post Navigation