Allen West Calls Obama Out on Syria, Benghazi: Obama has a History of Voting ‘Present’

allen-west Since assuming office, President Obama has worked to undermine tough American foreign policy. With one move after another that makes Jimmy Carter look like a hawk, President Obama has instituted a foreign policy based on pillars of apology, cowardice, denials of American exceptionalism and political expediency. Now, as evidence is coming to light that Syria has used chemical weapons, the president is suddenly a hawk? As America creeps closer to military action in Syria, Obama has hedged his bets by punting the ball to Congress for a decision on Syria while still maintaining that he holds the power to act unilaterally. In other words: The president issued a “red line” ultimatum, he got called, and now he wants to put the ball in Congress’ court to relieve him of the responsibility of “owning” the situation in Syria… while still posturing that he could act militarily if he wanted to. That’s not leadership. On Monday, Former Florida Republican Rep. Allen West, a former Lieutenant Colonel and a 22-year veteran of the U.S. Army, commented on Obama’s leadership on the Syria issue on Lauran Ingraham’s show.
“I think what you just saw play out was a president who has a history of voting ‘present,’ and all of a sudden he got out ahead of himself, and he realized that, ‘If I take an action on my own, I’m going to own this,’” West said. “And no one is thinking like the military mindset, what are the branches and sequels of an action? What is the counter-reaction? What is the follow-on, second- and third-order effects we’re going to have to contend with? And I believe that is something President Obama does not want to deal with.” “So therefore he says, ‘Well, you know, I want to do this, but let me go to Congress, and let’s get them to approve it, because if something bad happens down the road then we can always come back and say, ‘I probably would not have done if Congress had not approved it and given me the authority,’” West continued. “But let’s not have such a short-term memory. He went into Libya without congressional approval. He went beyond the 90 days of the war powers resolution, the War Powers Act. And we lost an ambassador. We lost Sean Smith, Ty Woods, Glen Doherty. That was sovereign American territory, that consulate there. We did nothing. We have done nothing. Where is our response to Benghazi? Who has been held accountable for that other than the poor little schmuck that’s still sitting in jail because of a video?”
Nearly a year after our consulate in Benghazi was attacked and four Americans murdered, the Obama Administration continues to shrug off the terrorist attack and stonewalls Congress. But Syria crosses Obama’s “red line” and the Commander-in-Chief springs to life to hasten military action, but hedges his bets by putting the responsibility on Congress. America needs a real leader. If Lieutenant Colonel West is looking for a job, I suggest he apply.

Comments

  1. Obama likes to boast of his alleged successes in foreign policy. Clearly Afghanistan-the most important policy task he faced -is a dismal failure. If the New York Times is to be believed, Obama is using the Kosovo attack air war tactics as the blueprint for attacking Syria. He is using Congress as his shield to blame when his so called attack doesn’t work.

    1. Meanwhile don’t be surprised if the Syrian Govt puts women and children in the target area to generate collateral damage and victims for propaganda purposes

  2. Why wasn’t Allen West reelected and Obama was? There’s the problem folks. Put your focus there. Solve that one and we’ll solve what’s wrong in America…

    1. jack 43 ,,,, more dead democrats voted for Obama then for anyone else there was 105 % voted in one district alone

  3. What? A liberal take responsibility for ANYTHING they’ve done that has gone wrong? Campbell – you’re entertaining to say the least! I’m rolling in my chair right now.

    Seriously, though… Responsibility is anathema to liberalism. Responsibility is anathema to the welfare state. It is anathema to the victimhood mentality. It is anathema to unlimited spending. Responsibility and accountability are what is needed desperately in this country, but which can’t be found in government at this time.

  4. THE GEOGRAPHY, THE PARTICIPANTS AND THE BOTTOM LINE CIRCUMSTANCES, MATCH THE REVELATION PROPHECY OFARMAGEDDON. IRAN, RUSSIA AND OTHERS~VS ~ ISRAEL AND GOD. USA, ABSENT? YES, SAY BIBLICAL SPECIALISTS ON THE ENTIRE SUBJECT, INCLUDING TEXTS INCLUDING ASSOCIATED OLD TESTAMENT PROPHECIES. AN ENORMOUS, BLOODY GROUND WAR IS DECRIBED TAKING PLACE IN A VALLEY, ABOUT SIXTY AIR-MILES E-S-E OF HAIFA, ISRAEL. WHY A GROUND WAR? IRAN CONSIDERS ALL OF ISRAEL THEIR LAND. SO SMALL IS THE COUNTRY, THAT IF THE LAND WAS BLOWN TO DUST WITH HIGHLY DEADY RADIATION, WOULD BE RENDERED INHABITABLE FOR YEARS. THE ABOVE ABREVIATED NOTE IS THE DOMINANT INTERPRETATION AMONG MAINLINE PROTESTANTS BIBLICAL ORIENTED CHRISTIANS. I AM LESS THAN NO AUTHORITY ON BIBLE PROPHECY. MY COLLEAGUES, CLING TO THE ABOVE SCENARIO.

  5. Obama has made the U.S. look ridiculous in the area of foreign policy. Other countries are laughing at us for sure. On another note, I’d vote for Alan West.

  6. What has not been addressed here on the Syrian debate is : “What would be Assad’s reaction to the attack on his county’s sovereign soil?” How would we react if some foreign country were to attack us for shooting some civilians? Also, how do we not know that he may have some shore to ship missiles from either Russia, China, Iran, or North Korea? One missile (at a cost of $1M) could blow a ship (at a cost of $30M to $50M) totally out of the water. Not to mention the lives of the crew lost. Each ship out there could have about 200 sailors on board. So we are talking about five missiles at a total cost of about $5M versus five war ships at a total cost of $150M to $250M add into this the crews totaling about 1000 sailors. Who would come out the big loser in the long run? The fake hawks in DC are not talking about the possible cost to us in lives and ships. They just want to rattle their toy sabers and think they are doing some good.

  7. You people were pissed off because he MIGHT go to war without congressional approval, and now that he is going in that direction your saying he’s passing the buck. And consistently placing partial truths and out right lies AS THE TRUTH you Feed yourselves all the swill you can muster as long as it fits your ideals or adds to the histrionics of the TP followers.

    1. ” you Feed yourselves all the swill you can muster as long as it fits your ideals”

      And the left doesn’t? If you attempt to rebut that it tells the world you failed sandbox.

  8. http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/09/03/obamas-and-kerrys-big-lie

    September 03, 2013

    White House Document “Proving”
    Syria’s Guilt Doesn’t Pass Smell Test

    Obama’s and Kerry’s Big Lie

    by DAVE LINDORFF

    The document released on the White House web site to “prove” to the
    American people that the Syrian government had used poison gas — allegedly the neurotoxin Sarin — to kill hundreds of civilians, is so flawed and lacking in real proof that if it were being used to make a case against a terrorist group it would be too weak to justify an indictment.

    For starters, there is no documentary proof offered. Only assertions about evidence which is never actually shown. No maps. No satellite or aerial spy-plane or drone surveillance photos. No identified witnesses with verifiable expertise. All there is in this document is a narrative with assertions
    like: “The United States Government assesses with high confidence that the Syrian government carried out a chemical weapons attack in the Damascus suburbs on August 21, 2013.”

    There are coy explanations for the lack of any hard evidence, like: “To protect sources and methods, we cannot publicly release all available intelligence – but what follows is an unclassified summary of the U.S. Intelligence
    Community’s analysis.”

    Remember, we’re talking about a debate over whether to have the US launch a war of aggression against a sovereign nationthat poses absolutely no risk either to the US or even to its allies directly abutting Syria. The reality is that this is about launching a war against a country wracked by civil war, not a country that is threatening its neighbors, or US interests and citizens. And make no mistake, a major US bombing campaign against Syria will not be clean and precise. Hundreds, and perhaps thousands, of innocent Syrian
    men, women and children will be killed, whether by errant bombs and rockets, or by accurate ones that hit targets located near residences.

    The first section of the report is devoted to trying to make the case that poison gas, and specifically Sarin, was used in a suburb of Damascus. No actual evidence is presented, though certainly there is evidence available —
    specifically the reports of physicians working in Syria with Doctors Without Borders. Why those doctors are not identified is never explained, but perhaps it is because to do so would make the lack of identifiable sources for the
    rest of the argument all the more blatant. In any event, itis probable that Sarin was used and that a considerable number of people were killed or injured by the chemical, but that is no casus belli, since it is not at all
    clear who is responsible for the release of the deadly chemical–the Syrian government, the rebels, or, as retired Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, former chief of staff to Bush Secretary of State Colin Powell has suggested, Israel.