June 18, 2013

Obama: U.S. Has 'Legitimate Need' To Be Involved In Syria

"Now, in terms of what my goals are. The goals are a stable non-sectarian representative Syrian government that is addressing the needs of its people through political processes and peaceful processes. We’re not taking sides in a religious war between Shia and Sunni. Really what we’re trying to do is take sides against extremists of all sorts and in favor of people who are in favor of moderation, tolerance, representative government and over the long term stability and prosperity for the people of Syria." - President Barack Obama, from his interview with PBS host Charlie Rose on June 17, 2013.
Noble aims, evil means.

But, it's hard to demonize Assad because the facts support his case. Contrary to what Obama said in his interview with Charlie Rose, the U.S. is provoking a Sunni-Shiite conflict by arming xenophobic, racist, Saudi-backed Jihadist terrorists in Syria. They have committed massacres against Shiites and Christians, and kidnapped Kurds.

Washington has been arming the so-called Syrian "rebels" since the very beginning, so the debate about whether to arm them or not is pointless. The train has already left the station.

Does America have a mission in Syria besides breaking it up in pieces to benefit Israel? And even if America's aims are noble, how can Obama promise that they will be achieved in Syria when all of his promises have not come to fruition? Empty promise after empty promise is what Obama offers to both the American people and to the world.

Merciless mercenaries and Jihadist terrorists will replace Assad if there is a U.S.-led war against Syria to remove him. Hell will spring up, not a representative democracy.

And, despite Obama's grand promises, he does not have the power to reeducate the brainwashed Jihadist terrorists who are fighting in Syria. He can't tell these fanatics to put their guns down and accept the new democratic government. Only a few Muslim Brotherhood clerics have the power to do that, and they want the fighting to continue regardless if Assad stays or goes.

So, unless Obama decides to don a turban and preach a new universal religion in Syria and the Muslim world to stop the unrest, bloodshed, and chaos, and bring all the sides together, he should stop promising future "stability and prosperity" to justify an aggressive war against Syria. There won't be any stability and prosperity in a post-Assad Syria for a long time to come.

Besides, Syria was already stable and prosperous before the U.S. decided to launch a war against it. So if creating "stability and prosperity" are the real aims, then Washington already has their man in Syria and his name is Assad. And he is backed by over 50 percent of the Syrian people.

Obama: U.S. Has 'Legitimate Need' To Be Involved In Syria. Source: tpmtv.