Thursday, June 13, 2013

Obama Takes Us To War In Syria, But...Who Is Really Running The White House?

CBS is reporting that the Obama Administration has decided to help Syrian rebels by providing military support.  According to the article, "intelligence agencies" have told Obama that the Assad Regime has crossed the "red line" by using chemical weapons against their own people.
"...'The president has made a decision about providing more support to the opposition that will involve providing direct support to the [Supreme Military Council]. That includes military support,' Deputy National Security Adviser for Strategic Communication Ben Rhodes told reporters..."
You can see the article and video HERE...

The Obama "decision" to help Syrian Rebels, curiously, came, after Bill Clinton excoriated Obama yesterday, as being weak for not supporting anti-Assad rebels in Syria.

Maggie Haberman writes in Politico:
"...Bill Clinton told Sen. John McCain he agrees that President Barack Obama should act more forcefully to support anti-Assad rebels in Syria, saying the American public elects presidents and members of Congress 'to see down the road' and 'to win.'...At another point during a closed-press event Tuesday, Clinton implied that Obama or any president risks looking like “a total fool” if they listen too closely to opinion polls and act too cautiously. He used his own decisions on Kosovo and Bosnia as a point of reference..."
Haberman reports that:
"...The former president also said commanders-in-chief should avoid over-interpreting public opinion polls about whether the United States should get involved in crises overseas...His remarks came during a question-and-answer session with McCain, who has been among Obama’s harshest critics over what he calls a failure to take “decisive” action in Syria. Obama has come under growing pressure to step up American intervention by sending military and other assistance to the rebels..."
According to Haberman:
"...“Some people say, ‘Okay, see what a big mess it is? Stay out!’ I think that’s a big mistake. I agree with you about this,” Clinton told McCain during an event for the McCain Institute for International Leadership in Manhattan Tuesday night. “Sometimes it’s just best to get caught trying, as long as you don’t overcommit — like, as long as you don’t make an improvident commitment.”..."
Haberman said there was no immediate response from the White House, but a White House response has certainly emerged with Obama's decision to help Syrian rebels, which prompts the question:

Who's running the White House?

Did the Clinton "shaming" of Obama prompt Barack Hussein to suddenly declare that Syria had crossed a red line?  The confirmation had come weeks ago that chemical weapons had been used against the Syrian population.  The U.N. confirmed it and then retracted that confirmation and confirmed it again.  Still, there was no action until Clinton fired his well-aimed torpedoes.

They appeared to have hit their mark.

Isn't it grand to finally know who calls the shots at the White House?  It's always nice to have an extra "ace" up your sleeve, doesn't it?

 I wonder.

Does this mean that all Valerie Jarret has to do is text Billy boy, when Barry bud gets all indecisive?

BACK TO:  Red Clix Headliners...

No comments:

Post a Comment