Saw this recently, but
was so tired of people arguing, I didn't post it. So now I will, amongst friends...
http://freakoutnation.blogspot.com/2013/09/president-obamas-brilliant-strategy-no.html
President Obama’s Brilliant Strategy No One Seems To Recognize
Article Mirror
September 8, 2013
By Wayne Bomgaars
As the media interprets recent events as Obama’s march to war, America and the world falls for it hook, line and sinker. Say what you want about Obama but he is a very smart man. He would never ask permission he did not need from Congress to launch a strike on Syria unless he knew beyond a doubt he could get it. That is if his real intentions were to actually carry out military operations. But why on earth does it appear he wants this war?
After agonizing over this question over and over I began to realize there is only one logical explanation. He does not. Only a month ago the GOP was accusing Obama of being weak for not acting when the “red line” was crossed. There was pressure for him not only from the US but from the world as well. The reputation of the great American defender was on the line. Still it was obvious at the time Obama did not want to rush into another quagmire, bogging down the rest of his tenure as our nation’s leader. But the evidence kept rolling in. He had to do something not only for his reputation as a world leader but for the United States as well.
Cue the British Parliament to provide Obama with the perfect out. Just days after Britain’s governing body eliminated any joint action with the US to participate in a coalition to strike the Assad regime, Obama made a surprising and decisive move. Against the advice of all his advisors, he put any US participation in the hands of our do-nothing Congress with no chance they would give him the approval he needed. Not because it isn’t the right thing to do but because Obama was asking for it. The outcome is a given if you just take a step back and look at the situation rationally. And there is no way Obama is going to launch this attack once Congress says no. It would be political suicide. Bush may have gotten away with it but America is not going to let it happen again. The fallout would signal the end of any and all effectiveness the Obama administration for the remaining years of his presidency. And history would place him with the likes of war criminals like George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. Let me repeat this. Obama is not that stupid!
So why then does our president appear to be beating the drums of war? The simple answer is he is now regarded as a hawkish leader before the US and the world. And he does so without having to fire a shot. He appears wholeheartedly in favor of a strike and is playing the part well. The hawk stands upon his perch without lifting a talon as Congress now takes any and all responsibility for lack of action on the part of the US. And during this entire debacle, he even manages to make republicans come out as anti-war; something even no one thought possible only a month ago.
If this sounds like an improbable scenario I ask that you to ponder for a moment the potential outcome:
No war
Obama and America look strong and world leaders should not doubt Obama’s willingness to take action
Congress was made to do their job
Congress will take the responsibility of inaction
Republicans have to pretend they are anti-war
Americans comes out against any further wars thereby providing the beginning of the end to our perpetual war
Puts pressure on the UN to take other action
Suddenly the UN is eager to accept other harsh non-military actions against Syria
And there is even the added bonus that the GOP weakening the push to shut down the government over the debt ceiling will not proceed with the intense battle anticipated. Next week Congress returns for only nine days. Nine days to act on the Syrian War, the debt ceiling, immigration, the Voting Rights Acts and many other important issues.
more...
= new reply since forum marked as read
Say you support President Obama in GD and you become a cult leader, who knew!
Outrageous, brilliant and effective. It has to do with not being an egotist. I've been in negotiations and one takes the role of the bad guy to unite those who would fight and get nothing good done.
It's a lesson being taught, to get people to realize what is really important. It does not hurt the 'bad guy' if he's not doing it for himself, which PBO has not been doing. It causes people to reveal themselves to themselves and others.
And the work gets done. Those who are 'stuck in the schoolyard' and trying to win and make someone else lose, never get what is happening. But all win and come out happy in the end.
As Lao Tze says:
Those who know do not tell; those who tell do not know.
Simplicity, patience, compassion. These three are your greatest treasures.
Wise men don't need to prove their point. Men who need to prove their point aren't wise.
If you overesteem great men, people become powerless.
And this in particular:
A leader is best when people barely know that he exists, not so good when people obey and acclaim him, worst when they despise him. Fail to honor people, They fail to honor you. But of a good leader, who talks little, when his work is done, his aims fulfilled, they will all say, "We did this ourselves."
I've seen a lot of abuse heaped on Obama. He would offer those who were against him, what they seemed to want as a peace offering, so they could not complain later in a just manner.
Then his 'own' side turned on him viciously, inciting so much hatred that the 'other' side heard them.
Then both sides joined to oppose that which he did not want to begin with, made him the bad guy. And the bad thing did not happen because people of both sides found common ground.
And both sides claimed victory, over him and the evil idea. Then they said,
"We did this ourselves."
Yes, they did it themselves from both sides, seeing what it was. He laid it out for them to choose. He didn't, like the wise man, need to prove his point or win their praise.
The goal is to make life better for all, not a victory for only half of the people. This is what justice, compassion and equality require for peace.
I thought a forceful show toward Assad would cause him to give in to his allies. Russia has done a great job ridding itself of its WMD as a member state of the CWC and Iran lost 100,000 people with 300,000 hurt by CW. Both of these are modern states, like them or not, and their people are paying attention.
Assad should be able to fsurvive without using any more CW or face regime change. Maybe he will flee to live amongst his major allies, this has happened before. Many knew his methods were horrendous without using CW, but they let him get a pass until Obama put his foot down.
No one, except lunatics such as Romney and McCain, wanted a war there with the use of nuclear weapons to fulfill Doomsday fantasies. It is worth the fight to stop this happeninng with the work of diplomacy.
Since ending the use of WMD is the intent of all of this, is it not?
You are so right.
They talk about his legacy. They snark that he has blown it. The legacy that he is leaving behind is not for him but the people. Our legacy. And damn he is going to leave us a beautiful one.
Thus far, anyway. You do realize that by hitting the Rec button you've sent it to the Greatest page, so this may not necessarily last. OTOH, you all have no doubt given some aid and comfort to some of the suffering masses out there.
And, I love you for it. <--BOG