Why is Barack Obama preparing a military response to the Syrian chemical attack when the United States never responded militarily to the Benghazi terrorist attack?
Almost precisely one year ago Barack Obama drew a red line in regards to Syria; if chemical weapons were used in Syria Barack Obama stated his calculus would change and the United Stated would be forced to do something about it.
Then last week it was reported that chemical weapons were used against the civilians in Syria and today John Kerry made it official. Our government is telling us that it was Syrian President Bashar Assad who used these weapons, but it is quite possible that the rebels got control of these weapons and used them to draw the United States into the conflict on their side.
While our government is claiming it was Assad who used the chemical weapons this is the same Obama regime who falsely claimed for weeks on end that a youtube video was responsible for the terrorist attack in Benghazi which left Chris Stevens, Glen Doherty, Sean Smith, and Tyrone Woods dead when everyone knew this was not the case, so forgive me if I feel as if the Obama regime has no credibility.
And speaking of Benghazi.
At this point we do not know what Barack Obama’s response will be to the Syrian situation but we do know this, it will be more than the response given to the terrorist attack in Benghazi. In that case the United States responded to the violence by condemning a video and apologizing for the disgusting video.
Why does Barack Obama feel it is the obligation of the United States to interfere militarily in a civil war because chemical weapons were used against the civilians in Syria when he didn’t feel obligated to respond militarily either during–when he might have been able to save American lives–or after the terrorist attack which killed Unites States citizens?
Let us look at Barack Obama’s pitiful record in the Middle East to see if we can draw any conclusions: In Egypt Barack Obama supported the ouster of Hosni Mubarak even though it was known that the rebels fighting in Egypt were actually part of a terrorist organization known as the Muslim Brotherhood.
In Libya Barack Obama supported the ouster of Muammar Gaddafi even though it was known at the time that the rebels were actually al-Qaeda. After Gaddafi met his demise it was these same al-Qaeda operatives who led the attack on the American consulate in Benghazi. That’s right, the rebels Barack Obama supported turned around attacked the United States in Benghazi and yet nobody else seems to be making this connection.
And this brings us back to Syria. Who are the rebels Barack Obama is about to support? None other than al-Qaeda, does anyone else see a pattern here?
I am not defending Mubarak, Gaddafi, or Assad, these men were brutal dictators and the world will be a better place without them. But these men were not an immediate threat to Israel, but if al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood come to power they will be.
The questions which beg to be asked at this point are: Whose side is Barack Obama on, and what is his endgame? The Middle East is on fire and is more destabilized than it has been in years and it is all of Barack Obama’s doing, one has to wonder if this is all going according to his plan.
If you enjoyed this post you can read more by Steve Dennis at America’s Watchtower.