Get PJ Media on your Apple

Obama: Intervention in Blitz, Kosovo, Rwanda Was Also Unpopular

Promises to address American people on Syria Tuesday; won't say whether he'll go around Congress if he doesn't get authorization.

by
Bridget Johnson

Bio

September 6, 2013 - 8:50 am
Page 1 of 2  Next ->   View as Single Page

President Obama remained fuzzy on whether he’ll strike at Bashar al-Assad without approval from Congress, telling reporters at the G-20 summit in St. Petersburg that he won’t engage in “parlor games” before the whipping and final vote is done.

Insisting he’s not “itching for a military action,” the president also compared the current situation Americans face to the intervention questions posed by the blitzkrieg on Britain and the Rwandan genocide, noting that getting involved today “probably wouldn’t poll very well.”

Obama’s statement at the press conference focused on economic issues, yet “even as we focused on our shared prosperity — and although the primary task of the G-20 is to focus on our joint efforts to boost the global economy — we did also discuss a grave threat to our shared security: and that’s the Syrian regime’s use of chemical weapons.”

He announced that he would directly make a case to the American people from the White House on Tuesday.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-Nev.) office hasn’t yet released the floor schedule for Monday. The Foreign Relations Committee sent an amended version of Obama’s use of force authorization to the full Senate in a 10-7-1 vote this week. It’s unknown yet if the bill has the 60 votes needed to overcome any procedural block.

Obama gave Russian President Vladimir Putin, an Assad ally, “credit” for holding a dinner with member nations last night where “a full airing of views on the issue” was heard.

“Obviously, this is disputed by President Putin, but if you polled the leaders last night, I’m confident that you’d get a majority who said it is most likely, we are pretty confident, that the Assad regime used it,” he said. “Where there is a division has to do with the United Nations. You know, there are number a of countries that just as a matter of principle believe that if military action is to be taken, it needs to go through the U.N. Security Council.”

He stressed “I was elected to end wars, not start them.”

“I’ve spent the last four and a half years doing everything I can to reduce our reliance on military power as a means of meeting our international obligations and protecting the American people,” the president continued. “…This is not convenient. This is not something that I think a lot of folks around the world, you know, find an appetizing set of choices.”

“You know, if people who, you know, decry international inaction in Rwanda and, you know, say how terrible it is that there are these human rights violations that take place around the world, then why aren’t we doing something about it? And they always look to the United States. Why isn’t the United States doing something about this? The most powerful nation on Earth. Why are you allowing these terrible things to happen?”

In 2009, President Clinton apologized to survivors in Kigali for doing nothing in 1994 to stop the slaughter of 800,000 people in the Rwandan genocide.

Obama theorized that after the UN inspectors’ report is complete, “it may be more difficult for Mr. Putin to maintain his current position about the evidence.”

“You know, and what I’ve tried to explain is, look, we may not solve the whole problem, but this particular problem of using chemical weapons on children, this one we might have an impact on and that’s worth acting on.… And that is something that can only come about I think if, as different as our perspectives may be, myself, Mr. Putin, and others, are willing to set aside those differences and put some pressure on the parties on the ground.”

Asked about growing opposition in Congress, Obama acknowledged he “knew this was going to be a heavy lift.” He disputed some members’ assertions that they’re coming out of administration briefings more skeptical of military action.

“I think that when they go through the classified briefings, they feel pretty confident that, in fact, chemical weapons were used and that the Assad regime used them,” he said. “Where you will see resistance is people being worried about a slippery slope and how effective a limited action might be.”

“…Now, is it possible that Assad doubles down in the face of our action and uses chemical weapons more widely? I suppose anything’s possible, but it wouldn’t be wise.”

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
In Kosovo President Clinton and Co Presidenet Clinton decided to attack Christians in Kosovo in order to support the radical Islamist with whom Hilary has such tight ties. At the time the Clintons and their media allies went on and on about the hundred thousand graves that were located in Kosovo; up to this time there has never been a shred of evidence about these graves. When dictators start wars they can always whip up stories of alleged atrocities; in fact when Hitler invaded Poland his propaganda ministry filled German movies with film of Poles invading German villages and raping German women.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
It is certainly news to us here in the UK that the USA intervened during The Blitz!
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (26)
All Comments   (26)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
Not a new observation, but day by day the Syria conflict looks more and more like a modern variant of the Spanish Civil War of the last century. As for our ability to conduct a risk free aerial attack on Syria, I wouldn't bet the farm on that with Russia aiding Syria.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
We weren't saving head chopping al-Qaeda then.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
Another reason the comparisons don't hold up: time. The conflicts Obama mentioned were new - to us, anyway. We had not been in conflict with any of the opponents at all. So what we could do to them, what they could do to us, and what the results might be were all matters of speculation. We wouldn't know for sure until we took action.

Syria is totally different. We've been involved in the Middle East since the foundation of Israel. That's what? Sixty-five years? We've had that long to experience the unique problems endemic to that area, to figure out the characters and mindsets of the various factions, and - most importantly - to try our hand at The Middle East Peace Process.The results of our "engagement" with this region have, as far as I know, ALWAYS been the same: war, death, misery, anger, hostility, frustration, and no progress whatsoever.

WWII, Kosovo, and Rwanda (had we gone there) were crapshoots at best. Roll the dice, take your chances. In the Middle East, we know the odds are all on the house - we can't win. How do we know? Experience.

So what's the deal? We're addicted to "intervention" like a gambler is addicted to his games. We like how "helping" other countries makes us feel, how it props up the image we have of ourselves as the good guys, the "light unto the nations." Liberals like "doing the right thing" under an American flag. Conservatives like demonstrations of American "exceptionalism." Whatever. These mental aberrations have nothing to do with the actual results of our activities abroad - which, of late, have all ended badly.

As a gambler needs, at some point, to take a hard look at himself and ask "Why am I doing this to myself and my family?," we need to look at our country and ask "Why are we the only country dropping bombs on other countries?"

Right now, I'm wishing there were a "Superpowers Anonymous" to help us beat the nation-building addiction. I'm afraid the habit will be the death of us.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
My favorite comment I've read this week: "obama is less believable than Walter White's gas pump malfunction story." -buzzfeed commenter
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
Everything he says just sounds like mush to me, expressed in a 10-year-old's vocabulary ("a whole bunch of chemical weapons").

Intellectually, this grifter is a disgrace.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
The same leftist hacks that are supporting Obama now are the same leftist hacks that berated Bush over WMDs in Iraq.

I believe that the Russians helped ship them to Syria. If Russia supplied some of the equipment and technology then they had a reason to do so.

So if it wasn't a good reason to go into Iraq then it is not good to go into Syria.

Just because I though it was a good ideal to go into Iraq does not mean it is a good ideal to go into Syria. Not with leftists deciding on the ROE and otherwise hamstring soldiers. On top of that they will say "it is your 's to do and die not to reason why" Which is a backhanded slap of a way to say you will bear the brunt of our leftist incompetence and we will lead from behind.

There is no good side to be on. Even if we put boots on the ground the left will turn a blind eye to the plight of the minorities in Syria until just before they are completely eradicated. They will then do a few "concerned" news stories. So why go in? To back up Obama's mouth? No way!
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
Rwanda? What intervention in Rwanda?
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
I think I might support an attack if the intention were either to a) completely destroy Assad's chemical weapons capability or b) completely destroy Assad and his entire regime. Doing both would be better.

Have I missed something? Has Obama stated clearly what it is he wants to blow up and how blowing it up will make the situation better? Or does he just want some explosions to prove America "responded?"

And does anyone seriously believe that Assad and the Russians have just been sitting around waiting for O and Congress to make up their minds? I kind of doubt it. The longer we wait, the better prepared Syria will be when we finally "respond." It may be dangerously late for us already. And you know no matter what happens, Americans are going to die. I don't care how many Syrians get gassed - they're not worth the life on one American pilot or soldier.

This, like Benghazi, is looking more and more like an impending American cluster f**k. Unless Obama pulls some kind of miracle plan out of his hat, I'm not supporting military intervention in Syria.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
If we do go in we need to destroy Assad's military and the muslim "moderate" rebel army and secure the country for the benefit of Middle Eastern Christians.

Anything less is a waste of time and resources. Look at how well Iraq worked out for us. We tried to bring those people democracy, and the first thing they did was elect a bunch of islamist nutballs that immediately set out to kill and/or drive out any Christians still living in Iraq.

Islam and Democracy are incompatible. As soon as we accept that fact, our middle east policy will be much clearer.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
Forget it not being compatible with the Middle East, Democracy itself simply is not compatible, period. The French Revolution and the horrors and mess that occurred there taught me that. Even the Founding Fathers fully realized this.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
Agreed. Basically, Assad is Saddam, Jr. as far as we're concerned. And we could do the same thing to him as we did to Saddam. And the results would be the same as or worse than what happened in Iraq. Lots of dead Americans, "allies" who are ambivalent at best about our "liberating" them, and Muslim fanatics waiting in the background to jump into the first power vacuum they can find.

We should have learned something from our "allies" in Afghanistan and our "allies" in Iraq. Specifically, they are not our allies.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
Yeah. Heck, the closest we got to genuine allies was when we aided the Mujahedeen in driving off the Soviets, and look what happened: A terrorist spree from al Quaeda, its descendents due to Osama bin Laden, from the 1993 bombing all the way to September 11, 2001. Then again, assuming that cut footage from Path to 9/11 is correct, at least some of the Mujahedeen were against Laden and were willing to aid us in killing him had Clinton not backed out at the last minute.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
Well, if we're going to bomb Assad, let's bomb him for something he actually did, not for something where the evidence is suspect or fabricated. (He's being framed.)

We're about to start WWIII over blatant lies and fantasies, instead of over facts, truth and reality.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
c) Look for and document if any and how many of Assad's chemical weapons capability came from Saddam Hussein in 2003.

Otherwise let the left twist in the wind.


By clearing out Assad how do you stop Al Qaeda or the Muslim Brotherhood from coming to power.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
Good question. I'm not sure how it can be answered without putting boots on the ground. I don't trust the UN to find out. As for Assad vs. the MB, I guess there's no good choice.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
Yeah, there isn't. The United Nations also shouldn't be trustworthy, now or back when it was created, as it was created specifically to ferment communism across the world.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
Shout it loud, so the historic illiteracy of this embarrassment of a president doesn't pass for the truth: The blitz ended in May, 1941. We started shooting on December 7, 1941. Pearl Harbor. Maybe he's heard of it. And we bombed Serbia because the president lied about getting a BJ. And in the process established a failed muslim state that persecutes Christians. Come to think of it, maybe that one is relevant. But not what I'd consider a plus.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
Bill sided with the goat blood thirsty Muslims - Obama like Jimmy Carter chooses the Losers
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
In Kosovo President Clinton and Co Presidenet Clinton decided to attack Christians in Kosovo in order to support the radical Islamist with whom Hilary has such tight ties. At the time the Clintons and their media allies went on and on about the hundred thousand graves that were located in Kosovo; up to this time there has never been a shred of evidence about these graves. When dictators start wars they can always whip up stories of alleged atrocities; in fact when Hitler invaded Poland his propaganda ministry filled German movies with film of Poles invading German villages and raping German women.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
And I am sure Ed Shultz or Ed Ship Head will with Rosie begin producing the same in the USA- Father O'Leary with a bomb strapped to his belly running into a Mosque in Detroit & a republican at that is what caused Detroit to be in the condition it is in- oh and he was anti UNION as well
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
1 2 Next View All