Don Price
2013-09-15 11:43:29 UTC
That's because Obama is an idiot.
"The US military does not do pinpricks." That was about the only
good line in a speech by President Barack Obama that may not
have won many converts.
He stood behind a podium rather than sitting at the desk in the
Oval Office, and made a speech that was clear but almost
entirely lacking in passion and devoid of new arguments.
Indeed, the first two-thirds seemed cut and pasted from earlier
speeches.
The trouble was that while he made the clinical case for
military action against Syria, we knew there was a "but" coming.
Had he still been calling for a vote in Congress in a few days'
time and had he wanted the American people to pressure their
politicians, he would have had to make a much stronger speech
about the dangers of inaction.
As it was, Syria's acceptance of the Russian plan to give up
their chemical weapons has changed everything.
He didn't express any cynicism about the idea but said it was an
"encouraging sign". He had asked Congress to delay a vote, and
said the US, Britain and France would work through the UN and
talk to China and Russia.
They would wait for the UN inspectors to report. The military
would stand ready to respond if diplomacy failed.
All this leaves more questions than answers.
We don't know how long Mr Obama will give diplomacy or what its
failure would look like.
We don't know if the three Western nations will go ahead with a
resolution backed up with force or go for something more modest.
We have no idea how UN inspectors could do their job in a
country ravaged by civil war.
The President's speech was for a few days a hugely important
date in the diary, but by the time he came to deliver it, events
had rendered it almost an irrelevance.
The next key event is likely to be the meeting between US
Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister
Sergei Lavrov in Geneva on Thursday. The speeches that follow
that meeting might actually tell us something.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-24044008
"The US military does not do pinpricks." That was about the only
good line in a speech by President Barack Obama that may not
have won many converts.
He stood behind a podium rather than sitting at the desk in the
Oval Office, and made a speech that was clear but almost
entirely lacking in passion and devoid of new arguments.
Indeed, the first two-thirds seemed cut and pasted from earlier
speeches.
The trouble was that while he made the clinical case for
military action against Syria, we knew there was a "but" coming.
Had he still been calling for a vote in Congress in a few days'
time and had he wanted the American people to pressure their
politicians, he would have had to make a much stronger speech
about the dangers of inaction.
As it was, Syria's acceptance of the Russian plan to give up
their chemical weapons has changed everything.
He didn't express any cynicism about the idea but said it was an
"encouraging sign". He had asked Congress to delay a vote, and
said the US, Britain and France would work through the UN and
talk to China and Russia.
They would wait for the UN inspectors to report. The military
would stand ready to respond if diplomacy failed.
All this leaves more questions than answers.
We don't know how long Mr Obama will give diplomacy or what its
failure would look like.
We don't know if the three Western nations will go ahead with a
resolution backed up with force or go for something more modest.
We have no idea how UN inspectors could do their job in a
country ravaged by civil war.
The President's speech was for a few days a hugely important
date in the diary, but by the time he came to deliver it, events
had rendered it almost an irrelevance.
The next key event is likely to be the meeting between US
Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister
Sergei Lavrov in Geneva on Thursday. The speeches that follow
that meeting might actually tell us something.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-24044008