After several months of offering encouragement to Assad, the United States finally decided to step in to try to stop the massacre of Syrian civilians attempting to bring their country from the Middle Ages to the Twenty-first Century. Why did the Administration wait so long?
Reluctance to get involved in Syria, while participating in a less than stellar NATO effort in Lybia, does not only demonstrates ineptness, such actions bring up a serious question: Is the United States still a super-power? Not remaining on moral high-ground, these poor selections by the United States regarding where to exert itself, do indeed suggest that not only did the United States lost its super-power status, it demonstrate that with President Obama at the help, it is not capable of being the world leader. With poor performance on the international arena, couples to inept domestic performance, the United States seemed to have lost the moral-authority it once had
Consistent with the Obama/Clinton inept foreign policy, the United States was sitting on the sidelines while the Syrian people were being brutalized by an incompetent and ruthless dictator. Why did the United States jump into the Lybian conflict at a very early stage, while letting the Syrian revolt go much further, is beyond and rational thinking!
Holding back because there was hope that Assad will reform, might have been an acceptable reason for two, or perhaps three weeks into the revolt, but now, months later and scores of innocent civilians dead, what is the excuse?
How US foreign policy is established is beyond me…helping in Lybia but letting Syria, Yemen, and Somalia go, is a demonstration of ineptness in dealing with the world. It is time for the Obama Administration to develop a rational and coherent foreign policy, and stop its inconsistent and irrational foreign policy!