Are you sure you want to delete this post?
Sorry; read in another "thread" (Foley murder) Jared's comments; that is very clear and well said. What you are implying is nonsense; I certainly do not see Obama engaging Syria without congress approvals these countries must decide their own futures and hopefully get rid of religeous fanatics themselves.
Here is Jared's mail: Quote
sbfriedman Wrote: What should be done? What would you do, if you were Obama?
In short--nothing can be done that isn't lead by the Syrian and Iraqi people. They need to figure this out themselves, with as minimal help by the American military as possible. I'm okay with targeted airstrikes that have a detailed goal in mind, but I am not okay with us getting dragged back into a civil war and picking sides in it.
With that said, we have to think long and hard before we bomb yet another country. Mr. Foley was not killed in Iraq, he was killed in Syria. If we are going to attack yet another Middle Eastern country that is involved in a civil war then I feel that the President needs to go back to Congress and ask them for the go ahead. I am tired of the Congress abrogating its Constitutional duties by refusing to vote to use force. If Congress wants to send our troops back into a combat zone, even if it is only by air and sea, then they should vote on it.
It is terribly sad to see a journalist killed while covering a war, but that in and of itself is not a reason to alter our national policies. President Obama has been winding down the conflicts that our previous President got us into and we should not alter that course because some bad people are kidnapping and killing journalists. Iraq and Syria are quagmires that are impossible for for America to fix alone. The only way Iraq and Syria will get out of their current hell is by figuring it out themselves. America can't force peace on a warring people fighting a religious civil war. Unquote