Bill O'Reilly opened his show on Wednesday by reiterating that he believed Assad did use chemical weapons on civilians including children which makes him a very evil man and if America does nothing then it will embolden our enemies.
O'Reilly: I also think that if the USA does nothing about that, that will embolden our enemies and lead to nastier things down the road.
If Bill had been paying attention to the Syrian civil war then he'd know that the nastier things have been happening in Syria for a while now.
Horrific video footage of a Syrian rebel commander eating the heart or lung of a dead government fighter has aroused furious international controversy, fuelling an already heated debate over western support for the armed uprising against President Bashar al-Assad's regime.
Atrocities have been reported since the start of the Syrian conflict in March 2011, but few images have been as repulsive as this one. Film of prisoners apparently being buried alive turned out to have been faked, but other shocking footage proved genuine.
You can bet many more deaths like this have occurred and will continue on.
O'Reilly: The truth is it would be much easier for the country to not get involved with Syria. In the short run that would be a much safer strategy, but in the long run it would be dangerous. Left unchecked evil flourishes so if we sit out Syria we'll be facing heavy pressure down the road, most likely with weapons of mass destruction delivered by terrorists doing the bidding of Iran and other rogue nations.
See, if Syria is left alone then EVIL will grow and grow and grow until some terrorists attack us with WMDs. Booga booga booga!!! My God, it's like 2003 all over again. He's also fine if Congress votes against taking action, but feels we should go anyway since we've become the world's moral police since WWII.
Karl Rove was up next with his ridiculous chalkboard to map out a logical strategy in Syria. One of the architects of the Iraq fraud perpetrated on the America people has the audacity to think his opinion on Syria is a must-see on Fox. He offered the other Republican talking point that if we only had acted two years ago then there would be no extremists fighting in Syria and all would be going along there swimmingly. People like Rove have attacked Syria as being a hotbed of terrorists and extremists since 9/11. The extremists have always been there and Rove knows this perfectly well. These neocon assholes think that as soon as we kill as many Muslims as possible everything will be great in the Middle East.
If America allows chemical weapons to be used, then Iran will think of us as wimps, or something to that effect. So therefore, we'll lose somehow. I've heard the same basic argument being made on CNN, Fox and MSNBC too. What reality are these people living in? Then Rove makes a claim that is so f*@king stupid and wrong that I almost bit my lip. He cherry-picks data from an NBC poll to hypothesize that Americans would be all for totally taking Assad out if they trusted Obama. Hello? WTF is he drinking? Americans have said repeatedly that they are sick of war regardless of chemical weapons and would not under these conditions ever support our troops going into Syria.
Why do extremists hate America? Maybe because we interfere too much in their affairs. We've been meddling in the Middle East ever since we and other Western nation created the borders after WWI for our own interests. Iran hates us because of our interference overthrowing a democratically elected leader and then the Shah debacle. In recent years, George HW Bush started the first Gulf War and attacked Saddam because he went into Kuwait. George W. Bush attacked Afghanistan and Iraq with 9/11 as the pretext. President Obama stepped in and authorized military action in Libya. We've used countless drone strikes to take out terrorists, suspected terrorists and innocent civilians in many Middle East countries. We went into Pakistan and killed Osama Bin Laden without their approval. It's been revealed that the NSA is collecting data and spying on almost every living thing on the planet.
I don't know how anyone would assume that if America doesn't bomb the sh*t out of Syria, it's a sign of weakness. Are we supposed to bomb a Middle Eastern or African nation at least once every three years so that the rest of the world knows we're still the big man on campus? By having this debate out in the open, Syria and other Middle Eastern regimes know that if anything, America is always capable of striking out. Killing xxx amount of civilians because of collateral damage in pursuit of these "bad guys" will only feed the hatred that is so palpable against America already.
Now pundits and pols, you can lie away because that's what you do when it comes to attacking other countries (looking at you, Donald Rumsfeld) but can you come up with some more original lies? You know, something flashy like if we don't bomb Syria we'll lose our internet access for a minimum of three months. Now that will get Americans behind striking out against Syria.