Thursday, August 29, 2013

Political Benefits For Obama From A Syria Strike

Official photographic portrait of US President...
Official photographic portrait of US President Barack Obama (born 4 August 1961; assumed office 20 January 2009) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
(1) Greatness

You liberate people, you enter the greatness department as president.

(2) Avoid Being A Lame Duck

An Obama who pushed out Assad will be a stronger Obama in domestic politics. He will still be able to do things all the way to 2016. In short, a strike on Syria makes immigration reform more possible, for example.

(3) Help The Economy

World War II got America out of the Great Depression. Bringing democracy to Syria, Iran and Russia will bring the unemployment rate in America down to around 5%.

(4) Clarity Of Purpose

I was Barack Obama's first full time volunteer in New York City. I am talking early 2007. To me the case for a military strike on Syria is as clear as the case for Obama was back then.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Iran, Russia: Election Holding Non Democracies

Why Iran Is Nervous

Iran (Persia) with Black, Caspian and Arabian ...
Iran (Persia) with Black, Caspian and Arabian seas around (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Think of Iran as a chair. You take Assad out of the picture and now the chair has only three legs. Is the chair nervous at the prospect?

Assad is worth taking out with or without chemical weapons. The chair ending up with three legs is a good thing for what the Iranian regime did in 2009 to its own people.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Israel Can Defend Itself

English: Map showing the maximum territorial e...
English: Map showing the maximum territorial extent of countries under the direct influence of the Soviet Union — between the Cuban Revolution/21st Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the 22nd Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union/Sino-Soviet split. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
For Iran to say if the US attacks Syria, Iran will attack Israel is kind of like suggesting a few things. One is that Iran and the US are equivalent powers, like the Soviet Union and the US back in the days. I have a hard time believing Iran is the new Soviet Union. It is a little itty, bitty state.

During the Cold War it would have been like the Soviet Union saying to the US, if you attack Cuba, we will attack your ally Turkey. That was proportionate talk somewhat. This talk by Iran is outlandish. Oh really? You are going to attack Israel?

I don't mean to take sides, but objectively speaking, in terms of sheer military capability, Israel could take Syria and Iran at once. Or Israel would not have been talking - like it has for years - in terms of going solo into Iran to take out its nuclear sites.

This is kind of like if Poland threatened a trade war with the United States. China threatening a trade war would be plausible. But Poland?

The president should not worry about Israel and do right by the people of Syria.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Syria, Iran: Major Military Action Needed

English: SOCHI. With President of Syria Bashar...
English: SOCHI. With President of Syria Bashar al-Assad. Русский: СОЧИ, БОЧАРОВ РУЧЕЙ. С Президентом Сирии Башаром Асадом. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
For the president to ever have talked in terms of the "red line" itself was a mistake. That was like saying Assad could do everything upto using chemical weapons - like kill over 100,000 people, which he has - and there would be no consequences. That talk encouraged Assad. And the killings have gone on. And we have had Rwanda in slow motion on our hands.

John Maynard Keynes said, in the long run we are all dead. I am saying, in the long run every single country is a democracy. If you don't buy that, then my line of thinking will not make sense to you. Not only is every country a democracy in the long run, America as the oldest democracy plays an active, pivotal role to getting the world to that point. There is an obligation.

Iran's talk on Syria is a good thing. Russia's talk on Syria is a good thing. Iran pretty much did in 2009 what Syria is doing today. That country was utmost brutal to its own people. That is not a legitimate regime in Iran that you see.

An Israel that is capable of proactively attacking Iran is not an Israel America needs to worry about.

Both Iran and Russia are non democracies that do hold elections. Regime change in Syria, Iran and Russia has to be on the cards. For Russia it will be an after effect.

For now the call to be made is just enough aerial strikes to take down Assad's air capacities so as to tilt the balance of power in the rebels' favor. Assad gone is a weakened Iranian regime. It's time too will come.

Active regime changes in Syria and Iran might just be the thing the still sluggish US economy needs. After all, it was not the New Deal but World War II that finally got America out of the Great Depression. Muscular moves in the Middle East to birth democracies is what is good for the American economy. The stimulus of 2009 did not do the trick.

It is time for Barack Obama to show some leadership. History is on his side. We remember Abraham Lincoln for liberating people. Liberations are the best things a president can do to achieve greatness. Too bad wars are needed. But a just war - like the American Civil War - is all too justified. There is a clear case to be made. There is no abdicating responsibility.

Conduct a billion dollars worth of air strikes to weaken Assad. Let Iran throw a few missiles at Israel. Then rinse and repeat for Iran. Regime change in two countries for the price of one. Call Russias' bluff.
Enhanced by Zemanta