Obama's U Turn on attack's on Syria
So Obama has put his attack on Syria on hold until after Congress has voted, what do people think? Is this a good idea or should he have gone ahead with his original plan? Or should he listen to the rest of the World and not get involved?
1
point
Maybe he's copying what David Cameron did at putting it to the legislative body to make the final decision. It then removes any implications on him if the war goes terribly.
As I said in another debate, Obama's main concern now is probably his legacy and this war could make it or break it. Britain has just pulled out after Parliament voted against military action which had removed America's closest ally from the conflict, which could have reduced the legitimacy of the justification for war and made the American public very reluctant to go to war. Additionally according to a recent poll only 9% of US citizens believe they should attack Syria. 1
point
1
point
1
point
Until he gets enough fire power to wipe them all out in a single blow without harming any surrounding areas. Maybe make a Syria shaped dome that would be properly placed over Syria, that would have bombs attached on every square inch of the...and...idk if you know where I am going with this, but I really think that we should not attack Syria. They probably were never going to do it in the first place. Probably was just announcing an attack for the publicity. |