Guardian: Has the following review of the Obama policy in Syria, " These are all unpalatable and perilous military scenarios for a notoriously risk-averse commander-in-chief...But whatever he may wish, Obama will have to do something, and soon. ".
Lets Get Real:
This folks is the left wing Guardian, as noted of late even the liberal New York Times is staring to turn on Obama, they might be LIBERAL, but they can smell political blood in the water, also they are not stupid, the elite press on the whole in the 1930s supported the Chamberlain policy of Appeasement in the UK, a weak leader is not seen as great in history, the NYT and Guardian are seeing the Middle East fall apart, the article has a interesting line on Obama's policy, " Friends and political supporters, not just rightwing critics, are still waiting to see what Obama's threat actually means, if anything at all. ". In other words folks the elite media and foreign policy establishment will dump on the Oval from on high if the Middle East has a major regional war due to the lack of leadership by the Oval, the problem is that the Oval knows that once it starts to take action in Syria the domestic agenda of the Oval is over for the 2nd term, the Oval wants to see Democrats take the House in 2014, if Obama takes action in Syria the liberal base will desert him, thus the Oval is between a rock and Obama's ego, the press on both sides of the Atlantic have covered for the Oval for the past few years, the Oval might think they are in his pocket, that would be a mistake, the press at the end of the day are not going to follow another Chamberlain.
