This President

[SB Shock]

In what ways?

When your enemy believe you are weak and no longer fear you - they are embolden. When your allies don't trust you, they are likely look elsewhere for better allies - ones they can trust and ultimately that means less influence.

Case in point - right now Israel is looking at this and are just watching. They have actually wanted to move unilaterally and take out Syria chemical weapons (they have a great fear they are going to fall in the wrong hands) but the U.S. has restrained them to only some minor strikes. Also Obama has promised that Iran won't be allowed to cross the "red line" in getting the bomb. They are watching this to see if they really can rely on the U.S. promises and whether they just need to take unilateral action on their own.

There are also the moderate Gulf States that are opposing the Syria/Iran block who are not to happy at this moment - once they decide they can't depend on the U.S. they are likely to choose their own way which might mean a nuclear arm race in the Middle-East. The U.S. doesn't want this to happen as this will likely destabilize the mid-east and will put stress on economic recover due to higher fuel prices. Then their is the risk of weapons (or nuclear material for a dirty bomb) falling into the wrong hands.

[wsushox1]

When your enemy believe you are weak and no longer fear you - they are embolden. When your allies don't trust you, they are likely look elsewhere for better allies - ones they can trust and ultimately that means less influence.

Case in point - right now Israel is looking at this and are just watching. They have actually wanted to move unilaterally and take out Syria chemical weapons (they have a great fear they are going to fall in the wrong hands) but the U.S. has restrained them to only some minor strikes. Also Obama has promised that Iran won't be allowed to cross the "red line" in getting the bomb. They are watching this to see if they really can rely on the U.S. promises and whether they just need to take unilateral action on their own.

There are also the moderate Gulf States that are opposing the Syria/Iran block who are not to happy at this moment - once they decide they can't depend on the U.S. they are likely to choose their own way which might mean a nuclear arm race in the Middle-East. The U.S. doesn't want this to happen as this will likely destabilize the mid-east and will put stress on economic recover due to higher fuel prices. Then their is the risk of weapons (or nuclear material for a dirty bomb) falling into the wrong hands.

Thank you for spelling it out. My knowledge of foreign affairs is little - outside of what is happening in the real time. People talks about the negative effects of this situation in the region but they never go into detail, at least in the short span I watch.

[Capitol Shock II]

All of these politicians are a bunch of liars who are no longer interested in the best interest of our country but instead what they can do to attain more power and stay in power. The game is completely rigged now. Whatever we decide to do now won't be decided by what's best for the United States. Throw them all out of office and start over with the original Constitution. It will never happen but it's what needs to happen.

[60Shock]

When your enemy believe you are weak and no longer fear you - they are embolden. When your allies don't trust you, they are likely look elsewhere for better allies - ones they can trust and ultimately that means less influence.

Case in point - right now Israel is looking at this and are just watching. They have actually wanted to move unilaterally and take out Syria chemical weapons (they have a great fear they are going to fall in the wrong hands) but the U.S. has restrained them to only some minor strikes. Also Obama has promised that Iran won't be allowed to cross the "red line" in getting the bomb. They are watching this to see if they really can rely on the U.S. promises and whether they just need to take unilateral action on their own.

There are also the moderate Gulf States that are opposing the Syria/Iran block who are not to happy at this moment - once they decide they can't depend on the U.S. they are likely to choose their own way which might mean a nuclear arm race in the Middle-East. The U.S. doesn't want this to happen as this will likely destabilize the mid-east and will put stress on economic recover due to higher fuel prices. Then their is the risk of weapons (or nuclear material for a dirty bomb) falling into the wrong hands.

wsushox1, in addition to SB Shocks comments above our president has:

- doubled the national debt since he took office and we will very likely have to raise it another $2 trilion before this year is over or shortly thereafter.

- browbeat our senior military leaders into nothing but Yes Men and whimps because they are afraid of being fired. Five of which have for one reason or another in the five years he has been in charge. There isn't a hint of a Patton amongst any of the remaining 4 Stars.

- pushed through the infamous Obamacare bill which everone knew was so full of holes it would have to undergo major revisions to be workable
which will only continue to increase the national debt.

- harmed our realationships with Great Britain, Russia, and Israel, to name just a few, due to his lack of leadership and trust. Many British newspapers refer to him as "The Emperor." Headlines in the media and newspapers in Great Britain, Germany, and France during the last meeting held in Europe of the various national leaders, stated, "Obama Bombs OUT! This is what his feeble leadership has lead us to.

- has accomplished little to nothing in securing our Southern borders. There were three counties in Arizona in 2011 when we visited there that we were prohibited by the Arizona Highway Patrol from entering. When I asked why at the road block, the answer was, "Sir, we do not control them." And this is America under Obama. The Governor of Arizona, on national TV, actually screamed at him for help, and little to none was provided.

- And lets never forget Benghazi. The BUCK went right through Hillary and stops with Obama. And neither were around. To this day, none of his henchmen will state what he was doing during the entire time this national tragedy went on. And not one person in the State Department was fired! Nor was the Secretary of State! Nor the Commander-in-Chief!

[Ixiah]

Another nice law out of the Obama administration was the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 which ironically leaves kids constantly complaining of hunger because the portions are too small.

[WuDrWu]

Another nice law out of the Obama administration was the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 which ironically leaves kids constantly complaining of hunger because the portions are too small.

Sure they're hungry, but the President and his wife know better and know what the kids need. This is the arrogance of the left. Do what I say because I'm smarter than you.

[SB Shock]

John McCain sayd

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) warned that a Congressional vote against military action in Syria would be "catastrophic."

Some are not sure whether he was really talking about Syria, or him losing at Poker during senate testimony on Syria

Capture.JPG

[ShockTalk]

John McCain sayd

Some are not sure whether he was really talking about Syria, or him losing at Poker during senate testimony on Syria

[ATTACH=CONFIG]908[/ATTACH]

Geez, I know hearings can be very boring to the rank and file, but if you must get relief, John, please go take an extended potty break and play. Better yet, maybe take a permanent break.

[SubGod22]

I respect McCain for his past and his service in the military and in Congress, but for years I've felt he needs to move along.

How in the hell can we justify getting involved in a Syrian Civil War when both sides are essentially evil? It's a lose/lose situation over there and it makes no sense to support either side. And it's possible that the rest of the region is better off if Syria is focused on Syria and not harassing the rest of the region and Israel.

Yes, there are lots of deaths and many innocent people will die as well. But we've avoided getting involved for years in a number of civil wars in Africa so why are some so eager to do something in Syria? Chemical weapons are horrible, but we ignore genocide elsewhere so I don't get the outrage? And considering this administrations track record of backing horrible people in the area (Egypt/Libya), I really don't trust their judgement on this one either.

[Kung Wu]

How do we know he wasn't playing against Obama and Assad and they were trying to work out a deal over a friendly round of Poka?

Obama led the betting with a boisterous bet, but Assad called and raised that bet with the use of chemical weapons. McCain called the raise because he doesn't know when to get out. Obama showed weakness on the flop and checked it off, but Assad checked it off too - very weak of both of them. McCain threw a token bet in, but his passive aggressive style is so lousy both POTUS and POS called him off. Question now is, did Obama's hand develop on the turn? Because he's in the weak position and his next action will really decide how this hand plays out.

Stay tuned.

[SubGod22]

You sir, are brilliant sometimes. Sometimes.

[1979Shocker]

I respect McCain for his past and his service in the military and in Congress, but for years I've felt he needs to move along.

How in the hell can we justify getting involved in a Syrian Civil War when both sides are essentially evil? It's a lose/lose situation over there and it makes no sense to support either side. And it's possible that the rest of the region is better off if Syria is focused on Syria and not harassing the rest of the region and Israel.

Yes, there are lots of deaths and many innocent people will die as well. But we've avoided getting involved for years in a number of civil wars in Africa so why are some so eager to do something in Syria? Chemical weapons are horrible, but we ignore genocide elsewhere so I don't get the outrage? And considering this administrations track record of backing horrible people in the area (Egypt/Libya), I really don't trust their judgement on this one either.

There are a couple of reasons why the U.S. gets involved in civil wars in the Middle East: Oil and Israel

[SubGod22]

There are a couple of reasons why the U.S. gets involved in civil wars in the Middle East: Oil and Israel

Where does Syria fit into that though? The Assad regime hates Israel. The terrorist rebels hate Israel. Isn't it better for Israel to have those two fighting each other and not them? We're good on oil as long as we have a good relationship with the House of Saud. But there's a whole other issue there.

Syria is simply a lose/lose situation if we get involved and pick sides.

[Kung Wu]

Absolutely disgusting: http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepa...ilies-n1704732

And it all starts from the top.

Disgusting and embarrassing.

[Capitol Shock II]

Outrageous