Must see interview with Assad

[Musburger1]

IMO well worth the 43 minutes. NBC sent an attack dog and Assad responded admirably.

 

[Horns11]

This reminds me of people trying to make Saddam Hussein look like a benevolent gift of grace to the Iraqi people circa 1985. Sure, he's heavy-handed... against the bad guys!

Assad is a war criminal and a threat to the U.S. based on both policy evidence and NGO recommendations, like the Red Cross and Medecins sans Frontieres.

 

[Musburger1]

US policy and NGO recommendations are one in the same and aren't necessarily factual. But regardless of what kind of actions - illegal or not - that Assad has employed, what I find interesting is that he was willing to step in front of a camera for 45 minutes and confront the grilling from a media attack dog. When was the last time a US President was subjected to such a strong media attack? Can you imagine Hillary Clinton sitting in front of a critical interviewer and responding directly? Compare what Assad did to what Loretta Lynch did in front of the house panel. Whereas Assad was direct and clear, Lynch obfuscated and talked in circles.

 

[Horns11]

I think a dictator such as himself answering questions from the foreign press for an hour doesn't fall under the category of admirable. He knows he controls the cards, so he can answer the questions however he wants. Some of the questions, as loaded as they were, were backed up by evidence from the UN and third parties. He wasn't going to admit to any charges beyond "doing whatever it takes to protect my country."

Maybe it's just that American politicians are better at the spin level. Assad was "direct and clear" in a matter that rejected the premise of each of the tough questions. For example: will the history books show you as a bad guy? "Time will tell a different story." Of course he's going to say that. Another one: how important is foreign policy experience going into a job like yours? (referring to Trump and Clinton). "No one has any experience doing this." Really? I can name several US President who dabbled in policy more than an opthamologist-in-training whose dictator dad sent him off to boarding schools for the first 25 years of his life.

He doesn't honestly believe he's "defending his country" (29 min mark) when the reporter talks about his indiscriminate force. He knows exactly what he's doing to preserve his power. He went as far to blame the innocent civilians for mortaring his army, hence the need to place them under siege.

And the comments about not attacking the press at the 35+ min mark are complete BS. He's lying about not bullying press members because he's done it before and people in his own government have smuggled out information about his knowledge/targeting of press members.

Again, I think facing tough questions is different than being held responsible for his lying answers to those tough questions. This isn't to presuppose that any Americans (Clinton or Obama or otherwise) shouldn't also be held responsible for things they say and do, but Assad is a horrible human being and should have punishment far worse than anyone wants to levy on Obama or Clinton.