Zev Porat

Thursday, September 12, 2013

My Response to President Obama’s Tuesday Syria Speech.

by Rev. Joda Collins

President Obama made several claims and comments in his speech that I take exception to. 
1.  "America has worked with allies to…help moderate opposition…."
Response:  Any help that Obama or our allies have provided is aiding the enemy.  The Al-Qaeda and Muslim Brotherhood opposition to Assad is not "moderate."  Any so-called "moderate-terrorists" working with Al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood are not that much different from them.
2.  "…Assad's government gassed to death over a thousand people…."
Response:  We do not know that.
3.  "When dictators commit atrocities, they depend upon the world to look the other way…."
Response:  There is overwhelming evidence that the Syrian terrorists (rebels) used serin gas in May.  Obama knew about it then. (http://www.ppsimmons.blogspot.com/2013/09/the-un-has-had-evidence-that-syrian.html.)  Why is it when the Islamic terrorists use serin gas it brings no response from Obama, but when "he" says Assad used serin gas Obama wants to "teach him a lesson" by starting a war?
4.  Obama tried to make the case that if America does not punish Assad by bombing him, others will be more inclined to use chemical weapons. 
Response:  That may be. However, is it the job of America to bomb every group or government that uses chemical weapons. If so, shouldn't we be bombing the Syrian rebels first.
 5.  "If we (America) fails to act…it could be easier for terrorist organization to obtain these (chemical) weapons. 
Response:  Securing chemicals for warfare will not be made harder if we start a war with Syria.
5.  "If fighting spills beyond Syria these weapons could threaten allies like Turkey, Jordan, and Israel."
Response:  True. The fastest and surest way to guarantee the fighting spills beyond the Syrian boarders is to depose Assad and empower Al-Qaeda in Syria.  This is best done by America bombing Assad.
6.  Failure to stand against the use of chemical weapons would weaken prohibitions against other weapons of mass destruction.
Response:  Obama should secure international support before starting a war that will more aggressively align Russia and Iran against us.  I would be more likely to take Obama seriously if he was willing to bomb the terrorists in Syria for their use of chemical weapons.  
7.  "I possess the authority to order military strikes."
Response:  No, Obama does not possess the authority to start any war he wants any time he wants.  He does not possess the authority to bomb on behalf of Al-Qaeda in the name of America.
8.  "(There is) more war making power in the hands of the President…while sidelining the peoples representatives from the critical decisions about when we user force."
Response:  These comments, alone, are enough to justify removing Obama from office. 
9.  Obama calls for a "little" strike against Assad. 
Response:  Somehow it does not make sense that starting a war with a few bombs is that much less dangerous than starting a war with more than a few bombs.  How many bombs dropped on America would it take for us to go to war with all of our power.
10.   Many of you have asked, won't this put us on a slippery slope to another war?
Response:  Obama never answered the question.  "I will not put American boots on the ground in Syria" is not an answer. He may not do it, but his actions may mandate that Congress does.  That is his "loophole."  I can hear it now.  "I asked Congress to put boots on the ground and they did it, not me."  Neither is, "I will not pursue…" an answer to the question.
11.  "Even a limited strike will send a message to Assad that no other nation can deliver."
Response:  Any nation with bombs that can reach Assad can bomb him and send a message.  However, no one but Obama is crazy enough to do it.
12.  "The Assad regime does not have the ability to seriously threaten our military….Neither Assad or his allies have any interest in escalation that would lead to his demise."
Response:  Assad and his allies have great interest in escalation that would lead to our demise. Obama has personal, religious and political reasons to weaken Assad hoping it would lead to his demise.  Obama wants to use the United States military to do that.
13.  Israel can defend itself with overwhelming force, as well as the unshakeable force of the United States of America.
Response:  Who is he trying to kid?  Israel cannot defend itself with overwhelming force against Iran and Russia.  Added to this, the support of America for Israel has been on an increasingly shaky foundation from the day Obama took office.
14.  Al-Qaeda becomes stronger if we do not bomb Assad.
Response:  Wrong.  Al-Qaeda will become stronger if we do bomb Assad.  Al-Qaeda is the enemy of Assad.  You do not make the enemy stronger by making his opponent weaker.
15.  Obama states that he "agrees" that America should not be the "world police."  Then he follows that comment with, "however."
Response:  In other words, Obama "agrees we should not be the world police, however…."   Double talk.
16.   "I have ordered our military to be in position to respond if diplomacy fails."
Response:  In other words, Obama is positioned to give the order to start war without the approval of Congress.  I hope the Generals are smart enough not to follow his orders. 
17.  "For nearly seven decades the United States has enforced International agreements."
Response:  Wrong. It is not our job to enforce international agreements without international support unless our safety is clearly at risk.  A series of hypotheticals is not the same thing as "clearly at risk."  We are NOT the world police.
18.  "…the cause is so plainly just."
Response:  Why is the cause just when attacking Assad for using chemicals (if he did) and not just when the Syrian terrorists do it?  For Obama, this is not about chemicals. This is about weakening Assad so the Islamic terrorists can take over Syria.
19.  Obama states that starting war with Syria is a "moderate effort and risk."  He states that bombing Assad will make our children safer.
Response:  What guarantee does Obama give that can provide any assurance that starting war with Syria will be just a little effort and a little risk. Starting a war that could end up at WW3 does not sound like the best way to keep our children safe.
This all comes to down to one thing.  Obama wants Assad out and the Islamic terrorist in.  That is why he is silent on the beheadings of Christians and the use of serin gas by the terrorists but quite vocal regarding the accusation that Assad used serin gas. 
Do not let Obama get away with this. 
The greatest current threat to the security of America is not Assad; it is Barack Hussein Obama.
For more articles written by me on the Syrian crisis and a time lime of events with my commentary go to: 

Rev. Joda Collins

No comments:

Post a Comment