(THE GATEWAY PUNDIT) — Why does Obama support terrorists?
What a mess in Syria – Russia says the gas that killed innocent civilians was set off by the rebels who benefit more from it than Assad. If Obama attacks Assad then he will be siding with terrorists again, like in Libya, when Obama bombed Kaddafi forces and sided with the rebels including Al Qaeda, and in Egypt when Obama sided with the terrorist Muslim Brotherhood regime. The fear is that like before World War I, Islamists are hoping to start up another World War.
The Daily Mail reports,
take our poll - story continues below
As the centenary of the 1914-1918 Great War approaches, historian Christopher Clark points out that conflict’s eerie, modern relevance.
‘The assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand began with a cavalcade of automobiles and a squad of suicide bombers: the young men who gathered in Sarajevo with bombs on 28 June 1914 had been told by their handlers to take their own lives after carrying out their mission, and received phials of potassium cyanide to do it with,’ he says in a London Review of Books essay.
‘Behind the outrage at Sarajevo was an avowedly terrorist organisation with a cult of sacrifice, death and revenge: extra- territorial, secretive, scattered in cells across political borders, its links to any sovereign government were oblique.’
Al Qaeda stokes the ire of Muslims angry at what they see as the defilement of their lands by the oil-seeking, infidel West.
Our retaliation for its September 2001 attack on America with hijacked passenger jets, killing more than 3,000, was to invade Afghanistan and Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, costing more than 100,000 Islamic lives on top of our own sad audit of dead and maimed.
But 9/11, as Americans call it, did not trigger the Third World War. On the contrary, for a brief moment — before the retaliation began — Americans enjoyed the sympathy of most of the world.
The West is drawing up a list of targets for Cruise missile strikes aimed at crippling the Assad regime.
How will Syria’s main allies, Russia and Iran, respond? Putin’s spokesmen deplore the poison gas attack, but suggest it might have been the work of the Syrian rebels, which include Al Qaeda elements. They point out that Assad’s military is winning and doesn’t need to resort to using illegal weapons, and suggest that only the rebels stood to gain from the international anger aroused by such an attack.
Now, it’s different. America, urged by its European allies, considers action against the ruling Assad regime in Syria, which stands accused of using poison gas to kill hundreds of its people.