On Syria, Obama lacks credibility after Benghazi

September 6, 2013 

Finally something that people from the left and the right can agree on: No military strike against Syria! Let's just hope our representatives know.

U.S. threats to use military force against Syria would be violating international law if it acted without the approval of the UN security council. Obama's threats were made in the absence of any definite proof of the Syrian government having used chemical weapons.

The Syrian government was winning the war. Why would they risk using chemical weapons knowing it would bring attacks against them from outside?

It seems it would only behoove the losing rebels to use chemical weapons and blame it on the Syrian government in hopes of outside intervention to strike at their enemy. There is no definite proof which side used the gas.

Using deductive reasoning, we should assume that the rebels in desperation did indeed deploy chemical weapons in order to receive outside help for their side, which will just prolong the war, causing more death and destruction.

Our allies have even elected not to act due to the lack of evidence. After the Benghazi incident and the lies and deception that came from the Obama administration to cover it up, the world has no trust in him.

Pete Martin


Bradenton Herald is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

Commenting FAQs | Terms of Service