So now, the Marxist-in-Chief is considering getting us involved militarily in Syria, assuming we're not already involved. As someone who was/is totally against us getting involved in Iraq, Afghanistan, Lybia, and God-only-knows where else, i say, why? Why should we be involved in what appears to me to be an armed insurrection/revolution in Syria? Is it because Assad is killing the armed revolutionaries? So what! Or, maybe it's because Mullah Obummer wants to open yet another country to his brothers in the Mooselamb Brotherhood? He's already given them Egypt, Iraq, and Lybia.
Back when president GWNitwit thought it would be nice to attack a country that did absolutely nothing to us, i said, "hey Mr. Nitwit, you're attacking the wrong country! Our real enemy is Iran, not Iraq! In fact, you could use Saddam and his big military as the spear-point to attack the country that we really should be worried about." The Iraqi's would've loved the opportunity to fight their hated enemies. Of course, once they get their nuke, they become untouchables. That's assuming the Israeli's are dumb enough to listen to Obummer. As for Afghanistan, for all we've accomplished there, we could've done the same thing and paid them back for 9/11 with air power alone. We have the means. Unfortunately, my memo to the WH apparently didn't arrive.
I've said it before and i'll say it again. If our brave and dedicated warriors are to be used to protect our country from a genuine threat, they should be guarding our southern border, (this time armed) because IMO, the threats coming from Mexico are far greater to our national security than any coming from the Middle East...