Should obama have risked nuclear warfare with russia for syria... (side unanswered Q : what leads the highest density to dictators to the middle east? is it cultural, religious, or genetic?)

I don't say the decision was bad to not call the russian bluff... I just really mean that maintaining the hope after air denial was mean...

big mean...

big lee mean...

super vicious...

that's my point of view...

then the decision it self...

I understand...

after all I am quite happy to not have to have taken it... in any way...

but still...

the continuation, that was mean...

specially in the hope sense...

what I mean, is there is no shame in folding.

no weakness "revealed"...

nothing...

just next hand :D

more freightening even for the opponents...

you know this shitless carelessness about one event...

from a real tactical perspective, rather than having launched this failure, better having gone against the domestic and foreign child rapists, and clearly, the baathists in syria... have nothing to do with it at all...

say what ever you want, there is no leads there...

more the contrary... victims...

hmmmm hmmmm....

and I think, that a mighty victory against the crown of england, speaking about total defeat, orange jumper suits and co... would have send a way more bigger message to the world...

and could have been really celebrated as the ultimate victory in the independence WAR ! finally, free, at last !

then a question, what leads the highest density to dictators to the middle east? is it cultural, religious, or genetic?

and a little pull up to the great and astucious and well argumented @arabisouri (which I should retweet and read more... but time, is limited between each sunrise (and set) :D).