Obama's False Argument On Syrian Refugees

While in the Philippines, Obama spoke out against those Republicans who would close our borders and block Syrian refugees from coming into this country.  While doing so, he falsely implied that the GOP is "scared of widows and 3-year-old orphans".  No, Mr. Obama, the GOP are instead afraid of the potential fighting age men who might harm Americans in the same fashion as in the Paris massacre.  To that point, I present this picture of Syrian refugees entering Serbia:

I see two women and one child in this picture.  The majority are men who could very well do harm to Americans.   But, we also know from the Paris attack that one of the eight terrorists was a woman.

Are we supposed to believe that all 20,000 refugees, that are coming to the U.S. under Obama's directive, will be properly vetted?  Think about that.  Are we to assume that Bashar al-Assad has provided us with birth records and arrest records for all these people? I don't think so.  What are we going to do? Have them check a box indicating that they aren't a terrorist.

Don't forget.  This is the same Obama Administration whose FBI interviewed the Boston Marathon bombers and Fort Hood shooter and didn't see them as threats.

References:

Obama Chides Anti-Refugee Politicians for Being 'Scared of Widows and 3-Year-Old Orphans': http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/paris-terror-attacks/obama-chides-anti-refugee-crowd-being-scared-widows-3-year-n465301

Source of Image above: Alvand, 18, from Syria takes a selfie with his friends as they walk along a railway track after crossing into Hungary from Serbia last week. (Marko Djurica/Reuters): http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/syrian-refugees-settlement-where-surrey-coquitlam-burnaby-bc-richmond-vancouver-1.3321584

FBI agents interviewed bombing suspect in 2011 - CNN.com: http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/19/us/boston-suspects-no-links/

Fort Hood Shooting: FBI Ignored Evidence Against Nidal Hasan for Political Correctness: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/19/fort-hood-shooting-fbi-nidal-hasan-political-correctness_n_1685653.html

pb

No, Mr. Obama. Putin Doesn't Act Out of Weakness

In a recent press conference, President Obama called Putin's incursion into Syria "an act of weakness".

Unfortunately, that statement is as foolish as it is wrong.  Putin is in Syria because he saw an opening in which the free-Syrian rebels are being bogged down by fighting two wars:  one to overthrow Bashar Assad, and the other, fighting the ISIS insurgency.  This, then, was the perfect opening for Putin to step in and insure that Syria becomes another strong ally in the Middle East.  Also, he knows that Obama is weak as an anti-war foe, and that our President won't step in to take on Russia while Putin's forces decimate the free-Syrians.

This is exactly what he did in the Ukraine.  As soon as there was a Ukrainian revolution in early 2014, Putin took advantage of the chaos by first seizing and annexing Crimea.  Then, by fighting with the pro-Russia, Ukrainian separatists to annex all of the Ukraine once the dust settles.

To not recognize what Putin is up to and thinking he is weak is as ridiculous as calling ISIS a JayVee team.  Also, Obama shouldn't be surprised if the "weak" Putin takes back the Ukraine and creates another puppet-state by securing Assad's future as President in Syria.  Then he will just move on to another conquest whenever the time is right.  Mark my words.

References:

Opinion: Acting out of weakness? Why Obama's dangerously wrong about Putin's intentions in Syria: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/10/06/acting-out-weakness-why-obamas-dangerously-wrong-about-putins-intentions-in-syria.html

With a straight face, Obama asserts Putin is weak and no challenge: http://news.investors.com/politics-andrew-malcolm/101215-772941-60-minutes-interview-obama-putin-is-weak-clinton-mistake.htm

Obama's 'No Strategy' Comment Is Not A Gaffe

Having served in the military, I am quite sure that our Pentagon has multiple strategies developed to deal with the Islamic State terrorists in Iraq and Syria.  But, I am also quite sure that many of those options include varying levels of "boots on the ground".  Of course, having "boots on the ground" is politically anathema to this, our forever anti-war President. Therefore, Obama wasn't lying when he said that we have "no strategy" for dealing with the Islamic State.  In his mind there is no strategy that is yet acceptable.

Reference:

Obama's no 'strategy yet' comment on ISIS in Syria sparks a political uproar: http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/29/politics/obama-isis-strategy/index.html