Hi kevin

good too see you back

close "to home". is that because your President (in your view) is not an American.

And I think if your going to attack Ho Chi Minh for slaughtering Vietnamese farmers you might want to take a look at the USAF as well.


>I think so. The situation is letting the use of chemical weapons go unchallenged and he did talk about the possibility of other countries deciding it's okay to use them.
>
>I think we are all in agreement that the use of CWs against innocent people is very bad. Though many (myself included) do not find them to be qualitatively different than government-sponsored genocide by more conventional weapons. Barack Obama's near-obsession with Syria, and his indifference to other situations where far greater numbers of innocent people (the Jinjaweed militia in the Sudan, the mass killings in Africa) have been killed, is rather suspicious. Clearly, Barack Obama is happy to remain silent when the issues hit too close "to home".
>
>But then again, what can you expect from a president who, a few weeks ago, tried to put a "soft spin" on Ho Chi Minh by mentioning that Minh supposedly was inspired by the words of Thomas Jefferson. Somehow I think if Thomas Jefferson knew about Minh slaughtering countless Vietnamese farmers. Then again, I rather doubt Obama knows history much better than Sarah Palin.
>
>This speech last night was a train-wreck. It's too bad he has surrounded himself with 'yes-men' who aren't able to tell him that one of the many reasons people are so polarized against him is because of his continued finger-pointing at the prior administration. It's ironic that he blasted Bush last night for too much power at the executive level for going to war, when the resolutions against the two wars under Bush were approved by Congress - yet Obama has repeatedly bypassed Congress on everything from Libya to the Dream Act to the AHCA. There is just no end to his hypocrisy.
>
>He has no objective in Syria. None. He digs himself a hole with each passing week, and is continually "shown up" by Putin. He can't even build a consensus with a moderately conservative British government that he has repeatedly snubbed the last 5 years.
>
>And if Obama actually got his way to start with - had there been a military action - he is the absolute last person to be in a position to state that we wouldn't put boots on the ground. When he says, "Let me be clear...there will not be XYZ"....well, from the # of times he's made claims like that in the past, we know what the outcome will be. The minute we discover a greater stockpile of CWs, "someone" has to go in there to secure them. Who, pray tell, would do that?