Skip to content

Why is Barack Obama preparing a military response to the Syrian chemical attack when the United States never responded militarily to the Benghazi terrorist attack?

August 26, 2013

 Almost precisely one year ago Barack Obama drew a red line in regards to Syria; if chemical weapons were used in Syria Barack Obama stated his calculus would change and the United Stated would be forced to do something about it.

  Then last week it was reported that chemical weapons were used against the civilians in Syria and today John Kerry made it official. Our government is telling us that it was Syrian President Bashar Assad who used these weapons, but it is quite possible that the rebels got control of these weapons and used them to draw the United States into the conflict on their side.

  While our government is claiming it was Assad who used the chemical weapons this is the same Obama regime who falsely claimed for weeks on end that a youtube video was responsible for the terrorist attack in Benghazi which left Chris Stevens, Glen Doherty, Sean Smith, and Tyrone Woods dead when everyone knew this was not the case, so forgive me if I feel as if the Obama regime has no credibility.

  And speaking of Benghazi.

    At this point we do not know what Barack Obama’s response will be to the Syrian situation but we do know this, it will be more than the response given to the terrorist attack in Benghazi. In that case the United States responded to the violence by condemning a video and apologizing for the disgusting video.

  Why does Barack Obama feel it is the obligation of the United States to interfere militarily in a civil war because chemical weapons were used against the civilians in Syria when he didn’t feel obligated to respond militarily either during–when he might have been able to save American lives–or after the terrorist attack which killed Unites States citizens? 

  Let us look at Barack Obama’s pitiful record in the Middle East to see if we can draw any conclusions: In Egypt Barack Obama supported the ouster of Hosni Mubarak even though it was known that the rebels fighting in Egypt were actually part of a terrorist organization known as the Muslim Brotherhood.

  In Libya Barack Obama supported the ouster of Muammar Gaddafi even though it was known at the time that the rebels were actually al-Qaeda. After Gaddafi met his demise it was these same al-Qaeda operatives who led the attack on the American consulate in Benghazi. That’s right, the rebels Barack Obama supported turned around attacked the United States in Benghazi and yet nobody else seems to be making this connection.

  And this brings us back to Syria. Who are the rebels Barack Obama is about to support? None other than al-Qaeda, does anyone else see a pattern here?

  I am not defending Mubarak, Gaddafi, or Assad, these men were brutal dictators and the world will be a better place without them. But these men were not an immediate threat to Israel, but if al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood come to power they will be.

  The questions which beg to be asked at this point are: Whose side is Barack Obama on, and what is his endgame? The Middle East is on fire and is more destabilized than it has been in years and it is all of Barack Obama’s doing, one has to wonder if this is all going according to his plan.

46 Comments leave one →
  1. August 26, 2013 6:45 pm

    Reblogged this on Cold Dead Hands Days and commented:
    Interesting question to ponder isn’t it?


  2. August 26, 2013 6:49 pm

    Reblogged this on and commented:


  3. August 26, 2013 7:01 pm

    This is a tough nut to crack! Far too many if’s and’s and but’s for my simple taste. But when I look at those kids in Syria who have been gasses I just want those murders to be stopped no matter which side committed these unspeakable acts. I don’t know Obama’s reason for action or inaction in the case of Syria. Like you however, I do smell a cover-up in Benghazi, but this Syrian thing is something else. I do however, like you, fear the the out come of the Syrian Civil War in regards of what that victory by the rebels could mean to the Jewish state. I am wondering what their reaction is to the chemical attacts on civilians just across their borders. We both know that if such attacks should come against Israel from Syria, the Syrian sands would turn to glass. Things are spinning out of control in the Middle East and president Obama must bear part of the responsibility.


    • August 26, 2013 7:10 pm

      I am with you, there is no justification for the use of chemical weapons and it is disgusting and can never be condoned. However I fail to see how this is in the interest of the United States when the attack in Benghazi was not considered something which must be responded to.


  4. Chris permalink
    August 26, 2013 7:07 pm

    Seems like BO is on the payroll of the House of Saud. It is time to start a phoney war to make the phoney scandals go away.


  5. August 26, 2013 7:08 pm

    Interesting post, I can’t see this going well. I’ve made some similar points here:


  6. Petermc3 permalink
    August 26, 2013 7:24 pm

    This despicable excuse for an American and a commander in chief has a sinecure protected by the media, the military and the congress as well as half of the 300 million population in this country. No blame will fall on him for his traitorous misdeeds; in fact if he could rig a run for a third term he would win by an even greater margin than he did in 2012. As anyone with a third grade education should know (today’s equivalent of a high school efucation) is that he is responsible for setting the middle east on fire. It took Germany two world wars to achieve in the Middle East Obama accomplished with one fell swoop of his forked tongue. It appears that he must retain power after 2016 in order to finish his handiwork. After all neither the wicked witch of the east or slip if the tongue Biden has the gravitas (credit Mario Cuomo for slipping that one into our everyday lexicon) to continue and finish what this SOB has started.


    • August 26, 2013 7:35 pm

      You are right, somehow he will avoid all blame in being responsible for almost everything that is going on in the Middle East and the MSM will do everything in their power to portray him as strong on national defense without ever questioning why the Nobel Peace Prize winner is setting the Middle East ablaze with his policies.


  7. August 26, 2013 8:50 pm

    With all that is known about Benghazi at this point I lean strongly toward believing Obama took no action because whatever secret shenanigans he was up to would likely have been exposed. Better to let them men die, then make it all go away. With Syria, it’s a golden opportunity to distract from all the scandals, from the Obamacare disaster and hopefully try to survive the midterms without losing the Senate. And if our soldiers end up being sent to Syria and some get killed, Obama has proven with Benghazi that he will not care.


    • August 27, 2013 6:11 am

      I think you nailed both points; Obama had to let those men die in Benghazi because he was running guns and now Syria gives him a nice little diversion.


  8. August 26, 2013 10:11 pm

    Who is running this show? Obama or the CIA? I have a special guest post tommorow from someone who work for the State Department as a Foreign Service Officer for many years. I think her opinions will pop open a few eyes tomorrow.


  9. Chris permalink
    August 26, 2013 11:20 pm

    Again BO has no plan. He is floundering around because again he doesn’t know how to respond, He made a bold statement that is meaningless. He has been silent and has failed to act as thousands of Christian Arab have been killed in Iraq, Egypt and Syria. Putin and Assad know BO can’t do anything. If he does react the blow back could be disastrous.

    Where are the American masses protesting on the mall in DC demanding BO resign. Silence


    • August 27, 2013 6:13 am

      It makes no sense does it, why is this more offensive than priest beheadings and church burnings? Why is he silent on those issues?


  10. Chris permalink
    August 27, 2013 3:50 am

    Maybe if we had real journalist in this country we might know something of the outside world.


    • August 27, 2013 6:14 am

      Shoebat is the man when it comes to these issues so if he says it was the rebels who used the weapons I would tend to agree with him.


  11. LD Jackson permalink
    August 27, 2013 6:53 am

    At this point in the game, I see no good options for America to take action in Syria. In my opinion, the time for that is long past. With our record in the Middle East since Obama took office, we don’t exactly have a lot of legitimacy left over there.


    • August 27, 2013 7:05 am

      I think it is time for us to get out of there and let these people kill each other instead of killing Americans.


  12. Petermc3 permalink
    August 27, 2013 7:22 am

    Another Obama charade: Now look, you can kill tens of thousands with guns and bombs and IED’s knives scimitars grenades rocks tanks planes drones submarines slingshots bazookas, burn churches decapitate the priests rape and sodomize and kill our ambassadors, that’s ok that’s war but gassing 100 children the future rock throwers of Syria, now that’s where I draw the line.


    • August 27, 2013 7:42 pm

      It makes no sense, does it? Thousands of people have died in the conflict, what is different about this attack other than the method used to kill people? Suddenly now we are supposed to be outraged?


  13. August 27, 2013 11:51 pm

    The Libyan police arrested 6 Egyptians for the Benghazi attack. In the Libyan police report, the prisoners confessed to the attack and said they were given their instructions from Morsi, The Egyptian president at the time. That is the only part of your article I might have a problem with. The Egyptian government says it has proof that would link Obama to this terrorist activity. I find it very strange indeed how he always picks the side that is linked to Al Qeada. Even though he has this to distract the American citizens from his scandals they will not go away. There is a grass root movement called “Overpasses for Obama’s Impeachment” that’s gaining a lot of ground across the country. They have members in all 50 states. This is one way people can speak up for impeachment of the traitor. Another thing I suggest is everyone Contact John Boehner’s office and ask why they haven’t started a investigation into Benghazi yet. As Americans we need to speak up and let our voiices be heard before this tyrant takes away our right to. Good Article.


    • August 27, 2013 11:55 pm

      Forgot the link to the video. Here it is.


    • August 28, 2013 5:54 am

      I do remember something about Morsi being directly involved now that you mention it, there is just so much that it is hard to keep it all straight. As for the Congress; I am beginning to think they knew what was going on and that is why they are unwilling to pursue this. Either that or part of the deal Boehner struck with Obama to exempt federal employees from Obamacare was to let these scandals fade away.


      • August 28, 2013 3:12 pm

        That I would not doubt. I think the Republicans need to get a new Speaker of the House. There is a rep. from Michagan named Justin Amish that would be good if he had more experience. But then again, anyone would be better than Boehner.


      • August 28, 2013 6:34 pm

        If the Republicans hold onto the House their first priority has to be to remove Boehner as Speaker!


  14. k. fisch permalink
    August 28, 2013 8:43 am

    Mr. Dennis, I would like to say that your article brings up great points. But I would like to bring up one more for you, where’s the prove of the chemical attack? It’s all speculation at this point, a couple youtube videos (which, if I remember right, one was debunked as having fake casualities), and hearsay. Before anything happens there, we need proof. I have a terrible feeling that history is just repeating itself.


    • August 28, 2013 6:35 pm

      Thanks for stopping by, no need to be so formal, Steve will do just fine. You are right, we really do not know if chemical weapons were really used, this could all be propaganda.


  15. Matthew permalink
    August 28, 2013 12:31 pm

    It looks to me that I do not agree with America’s Watchtower on many points and key issues, but he has a point about Syria? To broaden the scope from Obama and take a gander during the years 1983-2005 when the Second Sudanese War was ongoing, why did we not use emotionalism to justify military involvement during that war when 2 million people died? Many of the 2 million dead were civilians including small children and babies who were brutally murdered. The most we have done I ever heard was bomb an aspirin factory. So we eliminated their relief from future and ongoing headaches; increasing the suffering? Why Syria? We are not affected or threatened in any way. Obama is being a bully who is throwing his weight around who I believe is helping Al Qaeda and Muslim Brotherhood. Nothing else makes sense. Word of advice, “Never wage war or conduct military action out of emotionalism”.


    • August 28, 2013 6:37 pm

      I agree, for some reason Obama is playing on emotion, why are these live more important than the thousands who died previously in this conflict? There is an ulterior motive here and Obama seems to support the terrorist organizations for some reason.


  16. August 28, 2013 3:00 pm

    When have we gone to war after an embassy attack? There have been quite a few of them the past few decades


    • August 28, 2013 3:01 pm

      And I do not support military action in Syria, not the U.S.’s problem and we should stop being the world’s police force.


    • August 28, 2013 6:39 pm

      The difference with the Benghazi attack is the fact that this was a well planned out act of war which left four Americans, including our ambassador dead, and yet Obama didn’t see fit to do anything about it. Why does he feel justified in attacking Syria for something America has no interests at stake?


  17. Ahmet Abdul Ali permalink
    August 28, 2013 6:19 pm

    My question is this; why is everybody acting like Obama is the only one stepping in the doo-doo? Bush dragged us into the Iraq war over fabricated WMD — how many people died because of that? Bin Laden escaped Tora Bora because Bush denied the needed support to block his escape; because he was staging them for the Iraq invasion. Before that it was Clinton’s many scandals, Reagan’s Iran Contra…. on and on it goes. Doesn’t matter if you’re black or white, dem or republican — our government is rotten to the core and the citizens are in no position to change anything. Who makes the laws? The criminal politicians. So on and on it goes — now that a dem is in office, all the republicans are shocked and enraged. Next term it will be a republican, and all the dems will be outraged and the cycle continues. Running parallel to this cycle is the never ending cycle of Middle East madness. Folks, that will NEVER change. Let’s wean ourselves off the oil so that we can ignore that part of the world. If it weren’t for our oil money, those knuckleheads would still be running around their neighborhoods barefoot and armed with nothing more than slingshots.


    • August 28, 2013 6:41 pm

      The reason why everyone is focusing on this is because it is happening right now while those other events were in the past. It does no good to re-litigate what has been endlessly debated when there is nothing we can do about it.



  2. Are we headed towards WWIII? Part 2 | America's Watchtower
  4. John Boehner and Eric Cantor support taking action in Syria | America's Watchtower

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: