About Steve Chapman, writer of record of this article at Reason Magazine:
Hillary’s Appetite for War
The author says “The president himself is partly to blame” for getting Democrat Party members and followers and the public “inured” to war. Hey guys, he is to blame for jumping in with both feet. President Truman hung out a sign on his desk: “The buck stops here”. The expression, for you younger guys, means he’s the boss and takes the blame for his underlings.
Obama loves to blame the “top one percent” for everything their companies do, why soft-pedal this thing with him. What, he listens to his Secretary of State and former rival for top dog, and his coterie of adviser women, and he has no blame for anything?
And then this “Reason” author says something that in this real world sounds irrational:
“Obama has also refused to be panicked into reckless military action against Syria”.
Americans were tired of war, and even when they tried the false flag operation of getting the Syrian “rebels” to use chemical weapons against civilians while blaming it on Syria, in one marvelous demonstration of the importance of an independent free-for-all Internet, it took one lonely unsung European reporter to blow the whistle on them.
(By the way, the U. S. has stockpiles of those weapons, and used a banned chemical warfare weapon against its own civilians at Waco, Texas. That “tear gas” was a chemical used in Vietnam to kill the Vietcong in their tunnels.)
In other words, Obama either approved the operation or post-facto nodded at it.
OBAMA IS ALL IN AGAINST ASSAD AND HELPING SYRIAN REBELS AND ISIS INCLUDED
Everybody who isn’t head-stuck in the sand knows by now that D.C. is pouring aid into Saudi Arabia as back-channel help for the “rebels” in Syria. Almost everybody should know by now –if you’re paying attention– that Saudi Arabia is pouring rivers of financing and arms to ISIS. On occasion the war hawks talk about using the Middle East allies more, but they don’t say too much.
Now we find out that Obama has deliberately ordered the troops to let ISIS sell their oil.
Somebody reading this is rolling their eyes because they believe government media (PBS, NPR, CNN, FNC,FBN, CNBC, CBS, ABC, NYT, Washington Post, etc). He just announced in a big news story that they dropped leaflets warning oil truck drivers to get out of the way, for around 100 of them waiting at the ISIS oil docks.
The Pentagon has been watching they said, over a THOUSAND of these trucks filling up and they have not bombed them.
Obama is waging a PRETEND war against ISIS. Obama is all in for helping al Qaeda and ISIS overthrow Assad in Syria. Obama saw nothing wrong with Hillary Clinton’s helping al Qaeda get rid of Gaddafi.
Gaddafi had become one of the best allies against al Qaeda in the Middle East. He turned over their bad guys and he gave up his nuclear program. That’s why he was confused about the West attacking him so hard.
What about the propaganda against him that claimed he was attacking civilians? My question is, why did the media go along with that propaganda without mentioning that the Libyan “rebels” were doing much worse? Where is the story that exposes the lie that said all the blacks defending Gaddafi were “mercenaries”, when in fact they were the people who were treated well in Gaddafi’s Libya and that knew the Yankee-supported NATO-armed “rebels” were fatally dangerous to them?
Why did nobody ask why the Obama-Clinton regime was supporting rebels that committed much worse atrocities against civilians? If getting rid of monsters is the goal, why aren’t they attacking the worst of them?
“Massacre of Blacks in Libya By NATO-backed Rebels Continues as World Watches”:
Who in their right mind believes this? Oh, yeah, maybe the same ones that believed the troops would find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
And quoting a Washington Post propagandist that said Obama shows “an appreciation not just of the limits of U.S. power, but also of the limited need to exercise it.”
We can all see that he pushes U.S. power where he wants it, and that is, AGAINST the United States and its future. Contrary to the “peaceful guy” government propaganda, he is actively supporting operations that will be the country’s ruin, and he knows it. How can he not, unless his IQ is a lot less that his hiding of college records suggests.
You cannot blame Hillary Clinton for Obama’s continued war against Syria, his pretense bombing of ISIS while supporting Saudi Arabia’s support for ISIS in Syria. You can blame Obama for refusing to cooperate with Russia against ISIS, but not as a “weakness” or “peaceful” man. The truth is rather obvious: they don’t want it known that their support for “moderate Syrians” is a bogus smokescreen disinformation cover. Russia asked the U.S. to tell them where to avoid bombing, then asked them where to bomb.
How strange, two months or so after Obama’s own propaganda campaign for bombing Assad’s forces had hit a blowback wall, ISIS bursts onto the news cycle with captured American tanks and captured Iraqi oil wells, complete with a change in American opinion.