SIGN UP FOR THE BREITBART EMAIL NEWSLETTER

Obama's Red Line on Syria Proves to Be Idle Threat

Obama's Red Line on Syria Proves to Be Idle Threat

After all the big talk about a red line for Syria concerning chemical weapons–talk which came from Sec. of State Hillary Clinton and President Obama–it appears the U.S. response to Basher al-Assad’s use of chemical weapons is inaction. 

More than that, it’s an announcement of inaction. 

Sec. of Defense Leon Panetta made this clear on Thursday, when he not only alluded to the fact that we’re doing nothing now, but also that we won’t be sending in troops to secure leftover chemical weapons should Assad’s regime fall.

Said Panetta: “We are not working on options that involve boots on the ground.” And while he left the door open for us to get involved in a humanitarian effort, he made in clear that in “a hostile situation” we will not be involved.

With all due respect to Panetta, Obama, and Clinton: The Al Qaeda insurgents in the al-Nursa Front will send in forces to get those weapons if we don’t. Isn’t there something we should do?

Shouldn’t we at least act like we are going to send someone?

P.S. DO YOU WANT MORE ARTICLES
LIKE THIS ONE DELIVERED RIGHT TO YOUR INBOX?
SIGN UP FOR THE DAILY BREITBART NEWSLETTER.


Comment count on this article reflects comments made on Breitbart.com and Facebook. Visit Breitbart's Facebook Page.

SIGN UP FOR THE OFFICIAL
BREITBART EMAIL NEWSLETTER

GET TODAY'S TOP NEWS DELIVERED RIGHT TO YOUR INBOX

I don't want to get today's top news.

x