4 ms·

Because we need more Libyas and Syrias...

• pavlov 10y ago
  The Libyan intervention was probably a mistake (though it's important to note it was a NATO operation with full support from European partners, unlike the invasion of Iraq). But what should he have done about Syria?
  • postcarnival 10y ago
    stayed in iraq longer, stop supporting the saudis, stop selling arms to saudi/rebel/others
    • threeseed 10y ago
      Might want to brush up on your world affairs. Iraq is a sovereign country. They asked the US to leave and quite rightly they did. And all of this happened under GWB's watch.
    • pavlov 10y ago
      A permanent occupation of Iraq in a situation where you've intentionally broken relations with Iraq's large and powerful neighbor Saudi Arabia sounds like a recipe for much larger trouble than even current Syria!
  • meric 10y ago
    Stop defending Aleppo.
    • pavlov 10y ago
      Obama should stop defending Aleppo? How? Asking the rebels to surrender?
      • meric 10y ago
        http://edition.cnn.com/2016/06/20/politics/us-advisers-wounded-syria/ http://edition.cnn.com/2016/06/20/politics/us-advisers-wound... Stop giving terrorists (Al-Nusra) advisors.
        • ceejayoz 10y ago
          Is there any reputable evidence that the US is supporting Al Nusra?
          • meric 10y ago
            Yes. And who do you think these U.S. advisors were helping, really? The Syrian army? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-hughes/us-support-for-al-qaeda-l_b_10089410.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-hughes/us-support-for-... http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/america-siding-with-terrorists-like-al-nusra-its-not-a-conspiracy-theory-10319370.html http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/america-siding-w... http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-usa-equipment-idUSKCN0RP2HO20150926 http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-usa-equipme... http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/715977/al-nusra-us-arming-jihadists-syria http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/715977/al-nusra-us-armin...
            • ceejayoz 10y ago
              > And who do you think these U.S. advisors were helping, really? The Syrian army? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_Democratic_Forces https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_Democratic_Forces Your four links show zero cases of the US supporting Al Nusra. One's talking about how in the chaos the lines between groups get blurred, one's random op-ed spitballing from a newspaper owned by a Russian oligarch, one's talking about a rebel group negotiating for safe passage (six pickup trucks and some ammo - having to include that really helps make my point), and the last is claiming that the US supporting UAE/Saudis means the US is supporting Al Nusra.
  • _delirium 10y ago
    > it's important to note it was a NATO operation with full support from European partners, unlike the invasion of Iraq Not wrong in the general thrust, but I think "full support from European partners" is overstating it a bit. By raw numbers, it had support of about half of the European NATO members. It's true that the half supporting were generally more important/core members than the half abstaining or opposing though; the only really core NATO member who conspicuously abstained was Germany. Others abstaining were mostly new or more peripheral members, but still a significant number: Portugal, Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Croatia, Slovenia, Albania, Hungary.
• threeseed 10y ago
  Libya was going to happen with or without US support. And let's be clear the involvement of the US was limited to refuelling, air support i.e minimal. But remember Gaddafi was imminently going to wipe out significant numbers of opposition supporters. So it was always going to be a lose-lose situation.
• ceejayoz 10y ago
  Obama's probably significantly less likely to create as many Libyas and Syrias than Clinton or Trump.