Sunday, March 27, 2011


Syria's Assad deploys army; Clinton says no US intervention
"Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Sunday the United States deplored the bloodshed in Syria but a Libya-style intervention should not be expected."

Sloppy reporting. There's no answer as to why the US and NATO are choosing not to intervene in Syria when peaceful protesters are being put down with live fire. Why in Libya, but not Syria?

 More explanation here...

Clinton: No military action in Syria for now - Face The Nation - CBS News
"When asked about recent brutalities committed by the Syrian regime against civilians, Clinton suggested that 'there's a difference between calling out aircraft and indiscriminately strafing and bombing your own cities, than police actions which frankly have exceeded the use of force that any of us would want to see.'"

Protesters are being killed in both instances. I certainly don't expect America to right all the wrongs in the world, but Hillary's reasons for military intervention in Libya, but not in Syria, Iran, Bahrain, Yemen, or Jihadi hot spot Saudi Arabia are contradictory and inconsistent.

No comments: