President Obama and Sec. Kerry invited the Russians to bomb Syria. And now they want them to stop killing too many women and children with their bombs.
No doubt, the Russians are killing more women and children than the United States are killing in Syria.
Obama invited the Russians to bomb Syria when Obama wanted some sort of military response to the Paris terror attacks and did not want any more American soldiers deployed with "boots on the ground."
So, for political reasons, Obama invited the greatest killing machine of the century to show that he is doing something, knowing that the Russians would kill without compunction.
And with Obama’s blessing, the Russian military could kill without worries of any annoying interference.
Now John Kerry says that the Russian bombing of Syrian cities, the type of carpet-bombing that Ted Cruz gets excited over, is too much and “has to stop.”
Obama and Kerry do not really want the Russians to stop their bombing. They know that just whining about it won’t stop the Russians. This is Vladimir Putin, the man who invaded the Ukraine in the face of NATO, as the Obama Administration essentially watched and crossed their fingers.
We know what Putin is, and we know that if the world wants to stop Putin from doing anything, the way is simple and obvious: stop buying Russian oil and gas.
A worldwide boycott organized by the EU and the United States would cripple the Russian economy and force Putin to concentrate on his home front. He might even lose popularity at home.
Also, the United States could establish a no-fly zone in Syria. Hillary Clinton mentioned it earlier in the campaign, but I believe she may be dropping that idea, for political reasons.
Bottom line: it’s not clear what the United States wants, and even the President himself may not know.
Perhaps secretly, and the evidence supports this, the United States invited the Russians into Syria in order to help the Assad regime ultimately defeat the rebels, including the rebels that Obama himself funded and trained.
Why? Because after the Russians decimate the population of Aleppo and take that starved city from the U.S.-backed rebels, the Russians will then — and only then — take on ISIS and the U.S.-backed Kurds. And when Assad finally prevails, two political victories will be achieved — the defeat of ISIS in Syria and the end of a war that has killed unknown hundreds of thousands.
Is Obama this smart? He seems completely confused. Maybe he is crazy like a fox. Unfortunately, his madness has cost the lives of hundreds of thousands of Syrians. He could have simply supported Assad in the beginning and the war would have ended in months. Because the war was prolonged, the rebels hoping for stronger American support, Assad happy to let Al Qaeda join the American-backed rebels …. because of this, ISIS has spread and millions are undernourished and lacking clean water.
Or will Obama turn his back on the Russians just as he turned his back on the Free Syrian Army when he invited the Russians? And so, will the war rage on for a decade or two longer? Ironically, I am certain Obama originally wanted to save lives in the present or the future, in Syria.
Obama, Clinton, Sanders, and bloodthirsty Republicans, if you want to save lives, please save lives through nonviolent means first — abolish hunger worldwide, eradicate malaria, provide clean water for all. After you have saved all the lives you can through the most efficient nonviolent means, then you consider picking up your guns.
Or then and only then you wink and nod at a genius imperialist mass murderer named Putin.