Syria Superthread [merged]

[GAP]

Yeah, it puts out that fire that's lighting up Obama's a**&^. Getting your irons out of the fire is the focus, not how you do it...... :

 

[Jed]

What are we facing in the WEST?  Is this what we too could be facing in our future?

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=28b_1378767064#rUYREsjryDGMiGVy.01

As E.R.C. points out, these barbaric acts are what is defining the spread of this madness throughout that Region.

Absolute madness, Maloula is very peaceful, very Christian. Why in God's name are we even considering supporting these rebel arseholes?

 

[Edward Campbell]

So Vladimir Putin is, all of a sudden, the voice of "reason" and "moderation" in this mess?

The US has two choices:

    1. Bomb Syria, maybe just a little bomb, as Secretary Kerry suggests, maybe more ~ no matter, it will backfire, this is the Middle East, after all, and President Obama will be branded as a warmonger, but a "strong" warmonger so that's OK; or

    2. Stand down and wait and see ~ no matter, it will backfire, this is the Middle East, after all, and President Obama will be branded as a weak kneed vacillator.

In either event Russia comes off looking "reasonable" and "helpful," and China will smile quietly from the rear row, having invested nothing and risked nothing.

And France has just, according to CBC News, switched sides: the foreign minister says France will present a resolution (in the UN, I suppose) to "take over" Syria's chemical weapons.

Of course, it will all go wrong (this is the Middle East, after all), but, for the moment Putin saves Obama's political life because it appears that he, president Obama, cannot command Congressional or public support.

 

[The Bread Guy]

And France has just, according to CBC News, switched sides: the foreign minister says France will present a resolution (in the UN, I suppose) to "take over" Syria's chemical weapons.

Unusual bedfellows, all ....
"Syria, Iran and Russia working on counter-proposal to U.S. strike"

 

[vonGarvin]

And France has just, according to CBC News, switched sides:

And in other news, the sun will rise in the east this morning, and the Pope is still Catholic.

 

[George Wallace]

......., and the Pope is still Catholic.

For the time being.

 

[Nemo888]

Aren't you supposed to have an objective before you start military action?

At least this sounds like a compelling reason to bomb them. Randomly bombing sh!t when it may very likely be rogue commanders responsible made little sense and had no deterrent value. Threatening same rogue commanders and taking away their toys makes sense. Assad is an nerdy ophthalmologist, his brother was supposed to be the leader of the country but he died in a car crash. I suspect he can't reign in his commanders on his own.

 

[myself.only]

....when it may very likely be rogue commanders responsible made little sense and had no deterrent value. Threatening same rogue commanders and taking away their toys makes sense. Assad is an nerdy ophthalmologist, his brother was supposed to be the leader of the country but he died in a car crash. I suspect he can't reign in his commanders on his own.

IMHO I have problems accepting the rogue commander theory: a dictator clinging to power after years of civil war adopts a laissez-faire attitude about WMDs held by commanders whose Intent can probably be summed up as "stay alive"?
Commanders who could easily get it into their heads to manoeuvre themselves to play king maker like Egypt?
Seems a little trusting, no?
Even if Assad said "do what you must, the less I know the better" he shouldn't be off the hook.
But then again, no one should ever underestimate the power of stupid.
My  :2c:

 

[myself.only]

And France has just, according to CBC News, switched sides....

Well let's be proactive on this.
Please have Ottawa cable them immediately to accept their unconditional surrender.

 

[CougarKing]

According to a CNN report from this morning about US Congress members' war stances, (Sept.10), 166 US House members are against a Syria strike while 26 said they will vote for it. As for the US Senate, 29 Senators were against while 26 were for as of this writing. And 235 undecided as of this morning.

Furthermore, while it is quite strange for Vladimir to be the "voice of reason" that could avert a war, would the alternative of a regional war be any better, in spite of Kerry's supposed "this will be a incredibly small strike" assurances? Tomahawks or not, pinpricks or not, a Syria strike will only enrage not only Syria's Alawites and Iran, but Muslims across the region as well who hate the US regardless of which side Washington takes.

One of the staunch opponents of any Syria strike is Iraq War veteran Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, who used to be a US Army medical operations specialist.

Anyways, we'll see soon enough whether the US Congress votes for the Syria strike. Obama's address on CNN North America will be at 4 PM Pacific Time, 7 Eastern Time.

military.com link

Iraq War Vet in Congress Opposes Syria Strike

Sep 09, 2013

Associated Press| by Donna Cassata
WASHINGTON - One of the two female Iraq war veterans in Congress said Monday she opposes President Barack Obama's push for punitive military strikes against Syria, underscoring the administration's struggle in trying to rally Democrats to back the use of force.

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii bemoaned the carnage in Syria after a chemical weapons attack, which the U.S. says killed hundreds of civilians, including children, last month. However, after participating in public and private sessions on Capitol Hill, she said a U.S. military strike would be a serious mistake.

"As a soldier, I understand that before taking any military action, our nation must have a clear tactical objective, a realistic strategy, the necessary resources to execute that strategy, including the support of the American people, and an exit plan," Gabbard said in a statement. "The proposed military action against Syria fails to meet any of these criteria."

Gabbard, who served near Baghdad for a year and was a medical operations specialist, is a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

Gabbard joins other Democrats from Obama's native state, including Sen. Brian Schatz and Rep. Colleen Hanabusa, in opposing aggressive U.S. military intervention in the Syrian civil war.

Rep. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., lost both legs and partial use of an arm in a rocket-propelled grenade attack in Iraq. She has not made a final decision on whether she would vote for a resolution authorizing force, but the freshman lawmaker from Obama's adopted state has serious reservations about any strike.

"It's military families like mine that are the first to bleed when our nation makes this kind of commitment," Duckworth has said.

The administration is pressing lawmakers to back Obama's request for military action but faces stiff opposition from Democrats and Republicans in the House and Senate. With votes looming in Congress, the White House is stepping up its appeals to lawmakers.

Among other veterans in Congress, Republican Rep. Tom Cotton of Arkansas, who served in Iraq and Afghanistan, has expressed his support for military action against Syria. Cotton is trying to unseat Democratic Sen. Mark Pryor, who announced this past weekend that he would oppose military action.

Military veterans represent a much smaller percentage of Congress from decades past. In the mid-1970s, veterans totaled more than 400 among Congress' 535 members. Today, the number of veterans is slightly more than 100. Most of them served during the Vietnam War.

 

[Edward Campbell]

...
Anyways, we'll see soon enough whether the US Congress votes for the Syria strike ...

military.com link

Or not; the US congress might, I'm guessing that the House of Representative will, want to defer and delay for a long, long time, to deny President Obama any sort of "closure."

 

[57Chevy]

Chemical and Biological Weapons Status at a Glance
Arms Control Association

Syria last year confirmed possession of unconventional weapons, has never given an inventory of its stockpile,
never signed a global treaty banning the storage of chemical weapons,
but is a signatory to a 1925 treaty prohibiting their use.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I suspect Russia definition of "International control" is Russia, followed perhaps by Iran or China

 

[nn1988]

Or not; the US congress might, I'm guessing that the House of Representative will, want to defer and delay for a long, long time, to deny President Obama any sort of "closure."

Grandmaster level of Politics! Although I doubt there is a chance a strike passes Congress now.There is no need to, this is what Obama was putting the strikes on hold. If they actually planned this whole thing that's a stroke of genius.

I suspect Russia definition of "International control" is Russia, followed perhaps by Iran or China

True. I'm wondering how exactly this will be done, no doubt it's a good move. Now to actually turn words into actions. I am equally certain that, no matter how statesman like the Russians are appearing, they are pursuing their own interests (just like the USA and other governments). Hopefully this will not turn into a political game of who's the biggest and strongest world leader.


Also, "the most widely used definition of "weapons of mass destruction" is that of nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons (NBC) although there is no treaty or customary international law that contains an authoritative definition." - Wiki

 

[CougarKing]

Seems Obama's TV speech was delayed from 4 PM Pacific time to 6 PM, which is 5 minutes from now as of this posting. Perhaps this delay was due to some final phone or video conference between US, Russia and Syria?

 

[cupper]

Apparently he just want's to recap what has been in the news for the last few days.

Blah, Blah, Blah.

 

[Nemo888]

He needs a real plan. If the A53 Oker has comms of Syrian officers asking for permission to use chemical weapons they also have geolocatio. I wouldn't mind sending those bastards some air mail.

 

[a_majoor]

Well Putin and Assad totally outmanoeuvred the Administration, and now Russia has strengthened their position and hold on their naval base in Tartus. if Russian troops arrive in strength to "monitor" the chemical weapons stockpile the Syrian Army can free up large quantities of fresh troops and Iran will have strengthened their position in the Middle East in the ongoing Shia/Sunni wars, as well as their claim to regional hegemony.

Mid term, Assad will win unless the Gulf States and Saudi Arabia step up their support for the rebels by an order of magnitude, resulting in even greater levels of repression and most likely allowing Iran to increase its activities in the region (using Syria as a secure forward base and depot for Hezbollah).

Even if the Administration decides to go against the Congress and public opinion and do some strikes anyway, the certainly won't have any real effect on the conflict in Syria and also will fail the Administration's "acid test" of not being mocked. US foreign policy will have to undertake a major reset in 2016, but the damage will last for decades.

 

[CougarKing]

I am finding it very comical that Obama was awarded a Nobel Peace Prize a few years ago  ;D is no institution sacred anymore.

So Vladimir Putin is, all of a sudden, the voice of "reason" and "moderation" in this mess?

K.T. McFarland at Fox News is saying Vladimir Putin deserves the Nobel Peace Prize.  ;D

Sigh...

 

[sean m]

It seems that the argument for those Americans, including the President, who want a strike is that if the West does not act that allowing Assad to use chemical weapons wil set a precedent for usage of chemical weapons in the future, and that American interests around the world could be the recipients of such an attack, does anyone here believe that?