The New York Times: Has a Editorial attack on former President Bill Clinton and Senator McCain when it comes to Syria, the article states the following, " Mr. Obama has also come under increasing attack from a small number of American politicians, including President Bill Clinton who this week said Mr. Obama risks looking “lame” for not doing more to help the rebels. It was a cheap shot leveled at an event hosted by Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona, a leading advocate of aggressive action in Syria. ".
Lets Get Real:
Thus the NYT is no fan of Bill Clinton, the uber liberal NYT in its heart of hearts after Iraq does not want the US to take ANY military action, but even the pure liberal NYT gets the fact that President Obama boxed himself in with his red line comment over Syria, unlike Libya the Oval can not lead from behind when it comes to Syria, if the US is going ALL IN, the Oval has to the public face of this action, it can not be down to UK PM Cameron and President Hollande of France, the disaster that is the Syrian Civil War is having regional results that could lead to the pro Western Government of Jordan to fall, for Lebanon to return to Civil War and we have seen Turkey having its own internal problems, the over million refugees of Syria has spread over the region, they are causing internal problems, if Assad WINS, the refugees might never go home, thus more pressure for Oval to deal with the Assad problem. The Oval might have to risk losing the uber liberal NYT, that could make him a great President, so what will it be Mr President, greatness or coffee with the NYT.
No comments:
Post a Comment