Quote:
Originally Posted by Undertoad
...you're angry at the Obama administration and Clinton's State Department for re-engaging with Syria in 2009, creating a closer relationship between the US and these people:
At this point the State Department has figured it out, but when you read this, you realize they seem totally certain they will change Syria by isolating it. Two years ago they were totally certain they could change Syria by engaging with it. Ah, well. you make mistakes, you learn. |
I am disappointed and angry (but not surprised) by some of Obama's national security policies.
I certainly approve of his first actions in office of ending the policy of enhanced interrogation and rendition to countries that torture.
But I'm not angry for reengaging with Syria, while at the same time, keeping it on the terrorist supporter list and extending Bush sanctions.
And not for the engagement with NATO in Libya, which I still believe will be successful in driving Ghaddafi out of the country at little $ cost to the US and no US military losses.
We have little influence with Syria, but it was worth a shot. I dont see a good outcome there regardless of the US strategy.