General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Alan Grayson [View all]Summer Hathaway
(2,770 posts)(and Loonix, to whom I first posed the question) are unable to answer.
Well, it's not so much "unable" as "unwilling" - and here's why:
Anyone with even a modicum of intelligence knows that a country like Syria can never be "untouchable" for all time based on the fact that it was targeted by PNAC. Global politics are an ever-evolving thing, and there can never be an "off limits" nation forever and ever, amen.
What you want to answer, but can't for the obvious reasons, is that if Obama engages Syria, he is following the PNAC agenda - but if any other president does so, whether he is doing so in furtherance of PNAC's goals will be determined based on whether YOU support that president or not.
The promotion of the idea that Obama = W is furthered by insinuating that Obama is "following the PNAC agenda". That is the ONLY reason PNAC is being cited here - and the purpose in doing so is completely transparent.
THAT is why you couldn't answer the simple question - because you couldn't say that ANY president who engages Syria would only be doing so in furtherance of the PNAC agenda (a ridiculous notion on its face), but at the same time, you couldn't admit that it is ONLY Obama who should be seen as doing so.
You painted yourself into that corner - and there was no way out of it. And I've enjoyed watching you twist in the wind trying to deflect attention away from a simple question, because you KNEW you couldn't answer it without exposing your own agenda.