I did not like Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and soon to be Syria. But a lot of democrats are only anti war when George W was in charge. They are frauds really. Bush II's administration told us that there were going to be "mushroom clouds" in US cities if US did not take out Saddam. While that was based on lots of lies (yellow cake in Niger, aluminum tubes, etc.) if you are an American who was gullible and took everything at face value, going to war over "mushroom clouds in US cities" seemed legit. On the other hand, going to war for "humanitarian" reasons is complete bullshit. The road to hell is paved with good intentions and I am categorically opposed to humanitarian interventions. Samantha Power can go to hell on this. Humanitarian interventions need to be handed over to UN and if it fails so be it. If you going to be talking about "sending messages" a good example would be when Reagan bombed Libya. It was not done because Qaddafi was a "bad" guy, it was done because Qaddafi developed a nasty habit of blowing up Americans via terrorist attacks. I am not a fan of Reagan but when it comes to using force he was a master. He got the hell out of Lebanon because he did not want to be stuck in some hell hole. He invaded Grenada where 800 American medical students were held hostage and he sent a message to Qaddafi. All masterful. Obama could learn a few things from him when it comes to foreign policy.
. A very good statement regarding Syria and many of our other ventures abroad. Also a great statement regarding liberalism. Perhaps Reagan wasn't besieged by scandals that needed to be off the front page. He was also perceived as one who actually meant it when he made a threat. And last but not least, he loved his country. I would actually like to know the truth regarding Benghazi before we even talk about Syria, wouldn't you?