Two-faced Hypocritcal GOP: Never Happy Unless They Have Total Control

Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov

(September 14, 2013 in Geneva)

Yes, this new brand of GOP is both two-faced and hypocritical basically ever since Mr. Obama took office on January 20, 2009. A whole lot of facts and background supports my view and is a matter of public record, both officially and in print and other media. What follows is prime example of that. Enjoy.

The U.S.-Russian Deal on Syria (from the Atlantic) – the photo above, here in part:

Back in 2013 (remember): A deal with Russia on chemical weapons may be a “win for President Obama” but only in the narrowest sense. He managed to avoid a war he desperately did not want. But with the near-obsessive focus on chemical weapons use, the core issues have been pushed to the side. These were always more or less the same – a regime bent on killing and terrorizing its own people and a brutal civil war spilling over into the rest of the region, fanning sectarian strife and destabilizing Syria's neighbors.

For his part, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is effectively being rewarded for the use of chemical weapons, rather than punished as originally planned. He has managed to remove the threat of U.S. military action while giving very little up in return. Obscured in the debate of the past few weeks is that chemical weapons were never central to the Syrian regime's military strategy. It doesn't need to use chemical weapons. In other words, even if the regime does comply with inspections (which could drag on for months if not years), it will have little import for the broader civil war, which Assad remains intent on winning.

If anything, Assad now finds himself in a stronger position. He can get away with nearly anything as long as he sticks to using good old conventional weapons, which, unlike the chemical kind, are responsible for the vast majority of the more than 100,000 deaths so far in the civil war. Let's say Assad intensifies the bombardment of villages and cities using aircraft and artillery. What if there are more summary executions, more indiscriminate slaughter? What we have already seen is terrible, of course, but it is not the worst Assad can do with conventional weapons.

Assad and his Russian backers played on Obama's most evident weakness, exploiting his desire to find a way, any way, out of military action. There was a threat of military force, but it was a weak and not entirely credible one, and this has only been further confirmed by the events of the last few weeks. Assad is still in power, prosecuting his war. Before this “deal, Assad had to at least worry about the possibility of military intervention and modulate his daily kill rate accordingly.”  

Thus that agreement effectively strengthens the Syrian strongman by removing the threat of American military involvement.

At this point, a quick review of this Gallup poll about U.S. intervening in Syria is in order. (Apparently it is one the GOP forgets or fails to remember that poll):

The GOP cannot and will not ever be satisfied with anything Mr. Obama says or does or proposes or even thinks about. Syria is their latest load of crap:

1.  They rabidly now complain for our “lack of support for the Rebels” which means we have to pick a side and hope they win; if they do not, what then, eh, Mr. and Mrs. GOP Don’t Know Shit.

2.  They nastily say Kerry went to the Russians with a “weak” hand ... BS. It was Kerry’s offhand remark that he thought no one would take seriously about WMD in Syria that the Russians and UN picked up and ran with it... that is a good thing.

3.  They harp that Mr. Obama remains weak and has caused us to lose our world credibility ... crap: no such thing. Doing anything and everything to avoid war: how can that be bad?

Here’s the deal: it is results that count, not the method of techniques used to get positive or at least good results ... not more GOP nasty words; not more GOP rotten politics; and certainly not more GOP “expert” advice about how to get into another war rather than working hard to avoid one.

The threat of U.S. military force worked without the actual force – that is a good thing in this case and the GOP needs to grow up and support their country and not Putin’s or Russia’s or Assad’s or the damn Rebels – they have a Civil War – let them fight to the finish. If WMD are used again from this point on, then the military force card is still on the table and everyone knows it, except the GOP apparently.

Also, recall this article (same time frame back in September 2013): 

The CIA has begun delivering weapons to rebels in Syria, ending months of delay in lethal aid that had been promised by the Obama administration. The shipments began streaming into the country over the past two weeks as well as separate deliveries by the State Department that include vehicles and other gear as well as light weapons, munitions, new types of non-lethal gear, combat vehicles, sophisticated communications equipment, and advanced combat medical kits. These weapons and gear will boost the profile and prowess of rebel fighters in a conflict that started about 21 / 2 years ago and more importantly it shows the U.S. has chosen to pick a side: the Rebels against Assad. That story from WaPo here. 

B/L: The GOP’s motto: “Keep blaming Obama no matter the issue or the hype and outcome.”

All the while the GOP ducks the historical past while Bush-Cheney was in power. There retort: what about that era – what did we do wrong or harmful, right Mr. and Mrs. Gee. Old Poops. Thus, they preach responsibility while ducking their own.

So, vote GOP in 2016 and help keep up the silly-ass games we play.

Related to this topic:

1.  Chris Christie blames this president for Syrian refugee deaths

2.  From Dark Dick Cheney

3.  JEB Bush Blames Mr. Obama for Iraq's problems

4.  GOP blames Mr. Obama for leaving Iraq too soon