Obama says U.S. military strikes could not have stopped Syria misery

[ProSense]

Obama says U.S. military strikes could not have stopped Syria misery

(Reuters) - The United States could not have stopped the humanitarian crisis in Syria with military strikes, President Barack Obama said...asked in an interview with CBS Evening News anchor Scott Pelley whether he regretted not applying U.S. force in Syria, where the three-year civil war has killed more than 140,000 people and displaced millions.

"It is, I think, a false notion that somehow we were in a position to, through a few selective strikes, prevent the kind of hardship that we've seen in Syria," Obama said.

<...>

Obama said the United States would have a hard time committing to putting troops on the ground in Syria, a commitment he said could have lasted "perhaps another decade."

American troops have been involved in a decade of war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"And it's not clear whether the outcome in fact would have turned out significantly better," Obama said.

- more -

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/28/us-syria-crisis-obama-idUSBREA2R21O20140328

[cali]

1. He is absolutely right.

[Scootaloo]

2. Do you remember people telling you how wrong we were to think so at the time?

we had to send Iran a message!
we just wanted brown children to die!
We love chemical weapons!
Why don't you just vote for Assad?!

[cali]

3. Uh, no. Because I did nothing remotely like that.

[Scootaloo]

4. No?

I'm pretty sure you were against military strikes against Syria, weren't you?

Point I'm making was that there were a hell of a lot of DU'ers who were very much for such an assault on Syria... And who were very insistent that those of us who were NOT for such attacks were just the worst, most despicable people.

[cali]

8. yes. I was adamently against any U.S. military intervention of any kind

and now I get what you were saying.

[KittyWampus]

6. What? Almost every DU'er posting was against intervention in Syria. Stating otherwise

is revisionist, at best.

[Scootaloo]

9. Save for a core of very loud, very conservative bomb-frotters, yes

[ProSense]

7. The strikes

"Do you remember people telling you how wrong we were to think so at the time?"

...on Syria's chemical arsenal, which even the administration stated was less preferable to Assad cooperation in terms of disarmament, is separate from what President Obama is addressing in the OP.

The use of military force in terms of ground troops and involvement in the war was never on the table. The President said so at the time. The focus was disarming Assad.

[lumpy]

13. Of course. Obama, as most of us, would rather use diplomatic dialogue rather than military

solutions. I think he has demonstrated that against all odds.

[ProSense]

14. Yes, and

"I think he has demonstrated that against all odds."

...some of the taunting is coming from Congress.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

19. Just remember that with dictators, you sometimes need to also point a gun at their head

Because otherwise they won't change their position.

President Obama wanted widespread chemical "WMDs" out of the equation. Not more never ending peacekeeping, bleeding us dry. With a combination of diplomacy and threats, that's exactly what he got. At zero cost.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[Vattel]

20. His keystone cop way of getting there was impressive.

He claimed authority to launch an attack that candidate Obama said the president didn't have. But then he went to Congress for authorization anyways. He argued forcefully for the importance of a military strike, only to be turned down by Congress. Then Kerry makes a rhetorical point that the Russians take at face value. And suddenly diplomacy worked!

[ProSense]

21. The "keystone cop way"

was a product of media speculation and a lot of people helping them to push it.

I mean, the description of events as such creates the impression that Obama's acheivements are based on luck.

[AnalystInParadise]

22. Hahahahahaha

I never get tired of your algorithmic nonsense posts Prosensebot

[ProSense]

24. Kick

for embarrassment.

[think]

5. Good to hear the president saying this. /nt

[ProSense]

10. Kick! n/t

[AngryAmish]

11. Well yes and no

He is actually correct, the American people have no stomach for war right now and the Alawites will fight to the last man...because if they lose there will be no Alawites left.

But to paraphrase noted philosopher Larry Holmes, if you want to get technical the US military could win the war.

But the president is right in all but my pedantic, stupid example.

[ProSense]

12. "get technical"

always comes with a caveat.

[jakeXT]

15. What about pressure on Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey fuelling the conflict ? /nt

[Cha]

16. Thanks PS

[Skip Intro]

17. But, Obama pushed for US strikes on Syria last year.

That did happen, right?

[ProSense]

18. The strikes

"But, Obama pushed for US strikes on Syria last year."

...on Syria's chemical arsenal, which even the administration stated was less preferable to Assad cooperation in terms of disarmament, are separate from what President Obama is addressing in the OP.

The use of military force in terms of ground troops and involvement in the war was never on the table. The President said so at the time. The focus was on disarming Assad.

[neverforget]

25. These aren't the droids you're looking for