McCain and Graham on Syria: Obama’s “red line” has been crossed, so it’s time to take action

posted at 7:21 pm on March 19, 2013 by Allahpundit

And so the effort by the Senate’s super-hawks to mainstream Rand Paul’s isolationism by contrast continues apace.

“We are extremely disturbed by reports that chemical weapons have been used today in Syria. President Obama has said that the use of weapons of mass destruction by Bashar Assad is a ‘red line’ for him that ‘will have consequences.’ If today’s reports are substantiated, the President’s red line has been crossed, and we would urge him to take immediate action to impose the consequences he has promised. That should include the provision of arms to vetted Syrian opposition groups, targeted strikes against Assad’s aircraft and SCUD missile batteries on the ground, and the establishment of safe zones inside Syria to protect civilians and opposition groups. If today’s reports are substantiated, the tragic irony will be that these are the exact same actions that could have prevented the use of weapons of mass destruction in Syria.”

Leave it to McCain and Graham to choose the 10th anniversary of the invasion of Iraq to call for deeper intervention into a Baathist-run country over dubious claims involving WMD. Quick question: Leaving aside the fact that no one has yet substantiated that chemical weapons were in fact used — on the contrary, there’s reason for doubt — does it matter at all that each side is accusing the other of having used the weapons? It’s likelier that Assad is the culprit if this even happened but it’s possible that it came from the rebels themselves. In fact, the whole argument for intervening in Syria is that Assad’s chemical weapons might fall into the wrong hands eventually and be used against innocents. Well, in the near term the hands they’re most likely to fall into are … the rebels’, and there are enough jihadis among them to leave it an open question about who’s really behind yesterday’s massacre. Yet here are McCain and Graham insisting that Assad’s crossed the “red line” and therefore it’s time to start arming the same opposition that stands accused of the attack. There are monsters on both sides in Syria, which is why even many hawks are reluctant to intervene. But Maverick has a habit of viewing groups like this through rose-colored glasses, so go figure that he’d grasp at a reason to push the U.S. in a bit further.

None of that’s surprising. This is a little surprising, though. Calls for a no-fly zone over Syria from … Carl Levin?

Levin chaired a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee Tuesday morning during which he asked Adm. James Stavridis, the Supreme Allied Commander, Europe, if NATO was discussing attacking Assad’s air defenses. Stavridis acknowledged the idea was under discussion but said there was no unified NATO position on the issue…

“I believe there should be the next ratcheting up of military effort and that would include going after some of Syria’s air defenses,” Levin said [after the hearing].

Regarding the establishment of a no-fly zone inside Syria, Levin said that would help both protect innocent civilians and speed the end of the conflict.

“You could protect that kind of a zone with these Patriot missiles, leaving the missiles in Turkey but having the zone inside the Syrian border,” he said. “It is a way without putting boots on the ground and in a way that would be fairly cautious, that would put additional pressure on Assad and also create a zone where Syrian people who are looking for protection and safety could come without crossing the border and becoming refugees.”

That makes me wonder if the chemical-attack story is more credible than we think. Maybe Levin — and McCain, and Graham — have heard from U.S. intelligence that it looks legit and this is his way of getting out in front of the debate that’s coming this week about what Obama should do. Just as I’m writing this, in fact, CNN’s running a chyron claiming that there’s a “high probability” chemical arms were used yesterday in Syria and citing the chairs of the House and Senate Intel Committees as their sources. Graham has already suggested putting American boots on the ground (of course) to secure the weapons, which, in fairness, would probably be an option considered by O. There have been rumors for ages about U.S. Special Ops training to enter Pakistan and grab their nukes if necessary. Hard to believe there aren’t similar teams tasked with grabbing Assad’s chemical weapons, although of course the Pentagon will deny it.

Exit question: What if Assad hasn’t in fact (yet) used WMD and O declares anyway that it’s time for the U.S. to act? What’s Assad’s incentive at that point to keep holding back?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Here we go.
No. Rinos. No.
Just role play with each other and call it a war.

CherryBombsBigBrownBeaver on March 19, 2013 at 7:24 PM

Friggin stay out of Syria. Geez. If anything makes Ron Paul’s call to end pointless interventionism, it’s McCain et al’s seeming unending craziness. “Wacko birds” back at McCain.

anotherJoe on March 19, 2013 at 7:25 PM

Shut up McGraham!

lester on March 19, 2013 at 7:25 PM

Why should we risk blood and treasure for people that if given a chance would slit our throats?

let them kill themselves. they seem to want to why step in the middle of it. Sryia is a mess but they aren’t Iran who attakced us nor are they lybia who blew up 300 americans over scotland. We have no dog in this fight. Just stay home and let our enemies kill each other.

unseen on March 19, 2013 at 7:26 PM

This seems more timed to put pressure on Barry as he lands in Tel Aviv.

budfox on March 19, 2013 at 7:26 PM

Action against who? No confirmation on who used the chemical weapons, Assad or the rebels.

Tasha on March 19, 2013 at 7:28 PM

Honestly, does the stupidity of these two idiots have no boundaries?

They yet fully confirmed accounts coming our of Syria have Assad’s soldiers as comprising most of the victims. So it sounds like Obama’s allies drew first chemical blood here.

What type of “intervention” do Mr and Mrs McCain have in store for us anyway? Who are the “good-guys”- the Islamist radicals? How did they get access to those weapons? Gee, someones not minding the store as they stated they would.

At best we should warn anyone using chemical weapons the we will wipe them out.

Marcus Traianus on March 19, 2013 at 7:28 PM

assholes are gonna get us into another shooter

lm10001 on March 19, 2013 at 7:28 PM

I think these two fruits just like to play soldier.
Don’t even need the blue pill when the bombs are dropping.

CherryBombsBigBrownBeaver on March 19, 2013 at 7:29 PM

I like that it puts Barry in the spotlight for being a weak kneed weasel.

I don’t like that we might be putting boots on the ground for the Syrians.

portlandon on March 19, 2013 at 7:29 PM

Exit question: What if Assad hasn’t in fact (yet) used WMD and O declares anyway that it’s time for the U.S. to act? What’s Assad’s incentive at that point to keep holding back?

Fear of a strongly worded letter from the UN?

rbj on March 19, 2013 at 7:30 PM

The problem with Syria is the people we should be willing to protect, aren’t the ones fighting.

The Christian population is terrified of each side and has no one to turn towards. So the side with Assad because he’s had Christians in his cabinet and Alawaites are also a minority. But it’s not a winning decision because of Hezbollah.

That’s all I’m waiting for; Hezbollah versus Al Qaeda. Jihadimania running wild.

budfox on March 19, 2013 at 7:30 PM

Who the heck cares what these jerks have to say…they are dead to me.

Jackalope on March 19, 2013 at 7:31 PM

And McCain ran for president once and you all voted for him.

Le sigh.

newtopia on March 19, 2013 at 7:32 PM

Hey Mac, didn’t see you speak out on Harry Reid’s nonsense about the mortar explosion that killed the seven Marines. I guess you and sissy hold your venom for fellow dems.

arnold ziffel on March 19, 2013 at 7:32 PM

To hell with Syria. Good luck to both sides of the conflict. Go to your respective corners and come out swinging.

Panther on March 19, 2013 at 7:32 PM

You can’t be serious. Why don’t we just invade the entire region and colonize it. The package deal would probably be cheaper in blood and treasure than these half-assed ROE-choked “interventions.”

rrpjr on March 19, 2013 at 7:32 PM

Stay out of the crapper. McGraham – STFU.

Let them kill each other.

There are no good options.

antisocial on March 19, 2013 at 7:33 PM

So, we might go into a country to secure WMD stocks that intelligence says are there because they’ve been used by that country before. Nice. Hope we find them, I don’t want Obama to go through what Bush had to deal with if they’re not found. Just kidding! Like that would ever happen…

joejm65 on March 19, 2013 at 7:34 PM

Don’t kill for Oil. Don’t invade.

antisocial on March 19, 2013 at 7:35 PM

What’s going on with John McCain? He only attacks Conservatives and Republicans, did Bashar Assad claim to be a Conservative or Republican so McCain now feels free to attack?

According to McCain, pouring water over a terrorist’s face and scaring them is horrible illegal torture, but now McCain wants to start a war?

John, go home to Arizona and rake the rocks in your yard and your head.

RJL on March 19, 2013 at 7:36 PM

Apparently McShamnesty isn’t aware of Obowma’s ‘Rules of Engagement’ that forbid our Armed Forces the ability to kill the bad guys and win wars…

… Why in he%% would we send a single soldier to Syria to die for nothing?

Seven Percent Solution on March 19, 2013 at 7:36 PM

I know. We are going to be tempted to do it. To send our bombs and troops in. Well, do neither. We don’t have to poke our nose everywhere it doesn’t belong. Just let whatever it is take care of itself. It’s not our business. It’s not our job.

anotherJoe on March 19, 2013 at 7:36 PM

Sounds more like they are calling out the Commander In Chief for more of his empty bluster. At least with Bush when he said he would do something he did it.

BohicaTwentyTwo on March 19, 2013 at 7:36 PM

I can’t formulate an opinion until bill kristol chimes in. If krauthammer concures,, then we have concensus.

wolly4321 on March 19, 2013 at 7:36 PM

Hey, wait!!! Since when is Syria an immediate threat to the U.S.? Wasn’t that an argument used against the Iraq invasion? Even if Saddam had WMD, he wasn’t an immediate threat to the U.S., so why bother? Remember? Neocon, Cheney, war crimes? My, how times have changed!! /s

joejm65 on March 19, 2013 at 7:37 PM

And McCain ran for president once and you all voted for him.

Le sigh.

newtopia on March 19, 2013 at 7:32 PM

Not quite. Voted for Sarah Palin, but you voted for Obama twice I’m sure.
F&cking idiot.

CherryBombsBigBrownBeaver on March 19, 2013 at 7:37 PM

Rubio to join McCain and Graham in the hot-tub (again) in … 321

Pork-Chop on March 19, 2013 at 7:37 PM

What’s Assad’s incentive at that point to keep holding back?

Not wanting to end up like Slobodan Milosevic and Charles Taylor. It’s still conceivable at this point that he can go live comfortably in exile somewhere. If he uses chemical weapons he ends up dead or on trial in The Hague.

Mark1971 on March 19, 2013 at 7:39 PM

Not quite. Voted for Sarah Palin…

Sarah has never run for President. You voted for the guy singing Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran all the way to election day….but now, suddenly, you have clarity.

I’m confused, does this mean you guys are now happy O won?

LOL.

newtopia on March 19, 2013 at 7:40 PM

By the way, McCain should remember he’s the reason we have a President Obama.

I suppose a little humility and the realization that America resoundingly rejected him might go a long way towards stopping these ridiculous statements from leaving his lips.

Graham? Well I am starting to think he’s the ventriloquists dummy.

Marcus Traianus on March 19, 2013 at 7:41 PM

Obummer has an out. He only mentioned the redline if it was the Assad regime. It has been reported that the rebels unleashed the chemicals.. The very people Kerry is funneling support to. This is a huge mess.

jake49 on March 19, 2013 at 7:42 PM

BOTH sides of the Syrian coin are evil. Let ‘em destroy each other.

annoyinglittletwerp on March 19, 2013 at 7:43 PM

Not quite. Voted for Sarah Palin…

Sarah has never run for President. You voted for the guy singing Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran all the way to election day….but now, suddenly, you have clarity.

I’m confused, does this mean you guys are now happy O won?

LOL.

newtopia on March 19, 2013 at 7:40 PM

No, but you are happy O won and that says it all.

CherryBombsBigBrownBeaver on March 19, 2013 at 7:43 PM

Whacko Birds.

2Tru2Tru on March 19, 2013 at 7:43 PM

This is a huge mess.

jake49 on March 19, 2013 at 7:42 PM

That was the logical outworking of newtopia’s worldview.

tom daschle concerned on March 19, 2013 at 7:44 PM

No, but you are happy O won and that says it all.

Not quite champ. I didn’t vote in 2008 or the last election and so I don’t have to explain how I was for McCain before I was against him.

newtopia on March 19, 2013 at 7:44 PM

Would you rather fund a disaster ot just let it take it’s natural course?

aryeung on March 19, 2013 at 7:44 PM

McCain and Graham on Syria: Obama’s “red line” has been crossed, so it’s time to take action

Great idea Senators………YOU FIRST.

Load your Senatorial Grandness on the first plane to land in Hellholus MiddleEastus.

Ask Senator Diane FeinMeinKampfStein if you can take a gun.

PappyD61 on March 19, 2013 at 7:44 PM

I can’t formulate an opinion until bill kristol chimes in. If krauthammer concures,, then we have concensus.

wolly4321 on March 19, 2013 at 7:36 PM

I too await Supreme Commander Kristol’s opinion and that of Marshal Krauthammer’s. I’m sure Colonel Jennifer Rubin will also offer up pearls of wisdom — she is so knowledgeable about, uh, everything.

Punchenko on March 19, 2013 at 7:45 PM

No, but you are happy O won and that says it all.

Not quite champ. I didn’t vote in 2008 or the last election and so I don’t have to explain how I was for McCain before I was against him.

newtopia on March 19, 2013 at 7:44 PM

Sure, whatever. I was against Obama both times.
But, even worse than voting for Obama, not voting at all. Chump.

CherryBombsBigBrownBeaver on March 19, 2013 at 7:46 PM

And McCain ran for president once and you all voted for him.

newtopia on March 19, 2013 at 7:32 PM

You are somewhat correct but most of us voted AGAINST Obama not for McCain.We would have voted for a dog catcher if one was on the ticket.

docflash on March 19, 2013 at 7:46 PM

STOP Military adventurism. Where’s the PAC to send these dinosaurs to a home for the hopelessly out of touch?

Come and take it on March 19, 2013 at 7:47 PM

And McCain ran for president once and you all voted for him.

Le sigh.

newtopia on March 19, 2013 at 7:32 PM

Le WRONG.

We voted for the only hope we had, Palin.

PappyD61 on March 19, 2013 at 7:47 PM

Are “safe zones inside Syria” gun-free zones?

BKeyser on March 19, 2013 at 7:48 PM

BS. They will NOT stand up to obaka.

ladyingray on March 19, 2013 at 7:49 PM

These two are like the Bartles and Jaymes of the Senate. Hey guys, grab a Geritol, chillax on the porch and STFU.

Travis Bickle on March 19, 2013 at 7:49 PM

A mere matter of marching…….marching to stupidity. Marching to the sound of laughing trombones, marching to assure your filthy Saudi friends.

BL@KBIRD on March 19, 2013 at 7:49 PM

The only good reason I see for intervention is the possibility this fight spreads and further destabilizes Lebanon and Iraq.

Mark1971 on March 19, 2013 at 7:50 PM

These two are like the Bartles and Jaymes of the Senate. Hey guys, grab a Geritol, chillax on the porch and STFU.

Travis Bickle on March 19, 2013 at 7:49 PM

More like Laverne and Shirley.

CherryBombsBigBrownBeaver on March 19, 2013 at 7:54 PM

Please McClame-you and your loverboy go and fight.What? You only want to send our soldiers over there to get blown up by people that hate us.Oh,I see.

redware on March 19, 2013 at 7:56 PM

tactical nukes.
use them.

dmacleo on March 19, 2013 at 7:56 PM

Hagel sends hugs & kisses Johnny mac. Hell get back to you soon. Perhaps at the hearing 9 months from now.

wolly4321 on March 19, 2013 at 7:56 PM

As long as McAmnesty boys are the first boots on the ground. Fvck Syria.

katy the mean old lady on March 19, 2013 at 7:59 PM

And McCain ran for president once and you all voted for him.

Le sigh.

newtopia on March 19, 2013 at 7:32 PM

Yes, and I still have bruises from beating my head on concrete. Against my better judgement. But thanks for reminding me. BANG….

CW20 on March 19, 2013 at 8:03 PM

And McCain ran for president once and you all voted for him.

Le sigh.

newtopia on March 19, 2013 at 7:32 PM

…voted for the running mate newphobia

KOOLAID2 on March 19, 2013 at 8:03 PM

Mark1971

The only good reason I see for intervention is the possibility this fight spreads and further destabilizes Lebanon and Iraq.

Why us? There’s a perfectly good NATO ally with a first-rate military who shares a border with Syria. Literally, next door to them. Why should we send our military (and our tax dollars) to the other side of the world instead of letting Turkey handle it?

As far as Iraq goes – if we weren’t so quick to bail out our fair-weather allies they may hesitate before chanting, “Yankee go home” and telling us to GTFO like the Philippines and Iraq did! Heaven forbid they take responsibility for the defense of their own country and let their citizens pay the price in blood and treasure for their own security.

Come and take it on March 19, 2013 at 8:04 PM

The last thing I would ask our boys to do is don CBR gear in the desert. If johnny wants to fly a solo mission with lyndsey as wingman however. What’s one more time being shot down?

wolly4321 on March 19, 2013 at 8:05 PM

Ummmmmmmmm we’re in a cash crunch aint we?

*puts on Lord of War hat*

Sell the goodies to BOTH sides!!

Katfish on March 19, 2013 at 8:06 PM

PappyD61 on March 19, 2013 at 7:47 PM

I voted for McCain/Palin.

annoyinglittletwerp on March 19, 2013 at 8:07 PM

The last thing I would ask our boys to do is don CBR gear in the desert. If johnny wants to fly a solo mission with lyndsey as wingman however. What’s one more time being shot down?

wolly4321 on March 19, 2013 at 8:05 PM

I’ll actually PAY FOR IT.

Where do I donate money?

riddick on March 19, 2013 at 8:14 PM

Slow down Maverick..We don’t need another war front especially with Obie as the CIC..:(

Dire Straits on March 19, 2013 at 8:17 PM

Katfish on March 19, 2013 at 8:06 PM

+ 10..Nice movie reference..:)

Dire Straits on March 19, 2013 at 8:18 PM

LED by Marco Rubio, the young John McCain.

PappyD61 on March 19, 2013 at 6:42 PM

yep. marco should just go away.

crash72 on March 19, 2013 at 8:18 PM

McCain and Graham need to retire. They have had far too many “No Country for Old Men” moments this year. More war is not what Americans are calling for now.

ModerateMan on March 19, 2013 at 8:22 PM

And so the effort by the Senate’s super-hawks to mainstream Rand Paul’s isolationism by contrast continues apace.

McCain and his butt boy Graham are not super-hawks, they are super-turkeys who won’t be satisfied unless American troops are losing life and limb in all 57 Muslim states fighting for no good Muslims against other no good Muslims and forever. And they think that anything less than that is “isolationism”. They are both demented.

VorDaj on March 19, 2013 at 8:23 PM

According to McCain, pouring water over a terrorist’s face and scaring them is horrible illegal torture, but now McCain wants to start a war?

John, go home to Arizona and rake the rocks in your yard and your head.

RJL on March 19, 2013 at 7:36 PM

According to liberals’/RINO’s thinking (contradiction in terms, I know), pouring water over a towel placed over someone’s face is cruel. KILLING them is not.

Learn the difference.

I am all for the killing part, per liberals’ insistence, when it comes to islam. One nuke at a time, my choice. World back to normal in, oh, about 2-3 bombings? Ask Japan if they feel like war lately.

BTW, this is exactly what should have been done in both Iraq and Afghan, no American lives lost and world back to normal in a few split seconds. Carry a big stick and all that…

riddick on March 19, 2013 at 8:23 PM

The only good reason I see for intervention is the possibility this fight spreads and further destabilizes Lebanon and Iraq.

Mark1971 on March 19, 2013 at 7:50 PM

The only good reason for intervention is too protect American interests. That’s it. Have the neo-con hawks conceded this basic principle of American military SOP?

beselfish on March 19, 2013 at 8:26 PM

riddick on March 19, 2013 at 8:23 PM

This!!!

beselfish on March 19, 2013 at 8:28 PM

Let them thin their own herd of turds, ala Chicago…

hillsoftx on March 19, 2013 at 8:30 PM

Rubio to join McCain and Graham in the hot-tub (again) in … 3 … 2 … 1 …

Pork-Chop on March 19, 2013 at 7:37 PM

Rubio does seem bent on joining McCain and Graham with sticking our necks between waring infidel hating muslims every chance we get, as well as joining them with amnesty, or as Marco Orwell calls it “earnesty”.

VorDaj on March 19, 2013 at 8:31 PM

And McCain ran for president once and you all voted for him.

Le sigh.

newtopia on March 19, 2013 at 7:32 PM

I voted for Sarah Palin in the hopes McCain wouldn’t last out the term.

bw222 on March 19, 2013 at 8:33 PM

LED by Marco Rubio, the young John McCain.

PappyD61 on March 19, 2013 at 6:42 PM

When I look at Marco Rubio, now all I see is the face of John McCain looking back at me and I can almost hear, “My friends, my friends …” coming from his mendacious mouth. It has become very clear that Rubio is The Man Who Never Was. He’s just a conman with a no longer very convincing con, so teenage girls you can get over your crush on him and now would be a good time.

VorDaj on March 19, 2013 at 8:34 PM

If McCann and his puppet want to get American males (not sure about Graham qualifies)involved in a battle between Muslims, let’s give them AK-47s and parachute their a$$e$ into the middle of Syria.

bw222 on March 19, 2013 at 8:38 PM

If you supported Bush and his socialism + nation building, you must be ecstatic. There’s no reason to complain right?

The GOP will betray you

True_King on March 19, 2013 at 8:39 PM

McCain and Graham on Syria: Obama’s “red line” has been crossed, so it’s time to take action

Let’s see: The Mo Doctrine

1) The United States should only get involved in conflicts abroad where there is a direct and imminent threat to the nation and its security.

Syria is neither.

2) The United States should stay out of civil wars.

Yep.

3) If war is declared upon us, CRUSH, and I mean C-R-U-S-H, the enemy.

War hasn’t been declared upon us.

4) Fight to win or stay home.

We don’t fight to “win” under Obama.

5) The United States has an abysmal record of siding with despots and propping up tinpot dictators. Know your enemy, your “ally,” recognise self-determination, and MYOB. (No installing new governments then “finding out who or what is in it”)

In Syria, we don’t have an “ally”…unless one considers al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood to be allies of the United States.

6) Unless the United States is under attack or imminent threat of attack, the President must get Congressional approval for all actions involving military operations abroad pursuant to Art. I, Sec. 8, Clause 11 and the War Powers Resolution Act.

Not applicable, but McCain and Graham would vote to give Obama power for a war in which the US wasn’t under attack nor under threat of an imminent attack.

7) When people want to kill each other, let them.

Yep.

OK, I ran Syria through my “Mo Doctrine” and came up with a BIG, FAT ZERO as to why we should be going into Syria now.

But, as a consolation prize for Senator “Get Off Of My Lawn!” and Senator Scarlett:

Pic of the Day: Obama, The Weak Ass

Resist We Much on March 19, 2013 at 8:40 PM

If we can keep McCain and Graham busy with this quixotic effort and keep them away from illegal immigration, isn’t that a win for the good guys?

BuckeyeSam on March 19, 2013 at 9:05 PM

I’m sorry, but I need to know the definition of “chemical weapons”.

Since car bombs/ pack bombs have morphed into WMDs in the US,, I want to be sure we’re not talking about Clorox bleach bottles with a grenades taped to them.

Ben Hur on March 19, 2013 at 9:09 PM

If we could carefully meter out the guns and ammunition so that the last Syrian Assad loyalist and the last Syrian rebel shoot each other and drop dead, I’d say go for it.

We aren’t that good at this though, so the leftover weapons end up being used against the Great Satan.

slickwillie2001 on March 19, 2013 at 9:23 PM

Give McCain and Graham a rifle, helmet, and a pair of boots and sent them on their way. The more of these Muslims that kill one another, the less there will be for us to kill when the time comes. And that time will come.

savage24 on March 19, 2013 at 9:41 PM

Who gives a shit about Syria or Syrians???
Let them all kill each other – less work for us to do 10-20 years down the road.
Send McLame over in an old F4 Phantom…..

redguy on March 19, 2013 at 9:49 PM

Seriously,, he’s my senator and he scares the shiite out of me. He’s long gone in tbe cerebral department.

wolly4321 on March 19, 2013 at 9:59 PM

No no and NO!!!!

SgtSVJones on March 19, 2013 at 10:37 PM

Are McCain and Graham joined at the hip somehow? Or are they sharing their remaining brain cells?

Why the hell would we “intervene”, anyway? It’s none of our business if two groups of savages – both of whom hate America – spend their time killing each other. And, it doesn’t matter what they use to do the job.
As long as they’re killing each other, they aren’t bothering us; and every one that one side or the other kills now is one less we’ll have to fight in the future.
Just back off and let them go at it. Don’t take sides. Don’t provide assistance – military, arms, or humanitarian. No no-fly zone. NOTHING! (Perhaps humanitarian aid to refugees who make it across one border or another)

Keep the aid money (and our troops) here. We’ve better things to do with it anyway.

Solaratov on March 19, 2013 at 11:11 PM

McCain and Graham on Syria: Obama’s “red line” has been crossed, so it’s time to take action

Man, what’s with these two? Are they going to be secretly wed and have Obummer as their best man?

Dr. ZhivBlago on March 19, 2013 at 11:44 PM

The problem of course is the known Syrian stash of chemical weapons. If these end up in the wrong hands, they could become the worst terrorist disaster ever, worse even than 9/11.

But talk of troops is ridiculous. It makes no sense at all, we only need eyes on the ground to ensure we hit the targets, they don’t even have to be our eyes.

McCain and Graham have a sense of ironic humor in calling on Obama to honor his “red line.” Obama has never kept his word about anything. They used to say that Clinton lied but believed his lies, at least while he was saying them. Obama never has the slightest intention of keeping his word, he is only interested in the short term politics because his supporters have very limited attention spans.

Adjoran on March 20, 2013 at 12:54 AM

Sure, in an ideal world, Turkey would’ve mopped things up by now. But at the end of the day, we have the power and thus we have the moral responsibility to make things right. How can you lot call yourselves conservatives, “pro-life”, and not see a moral imperative to help stem the flow of blood? It’s hypocritical. The only people who should be against going in are anti-war Democrats and isolationist/non-interventionist libertarians. The GOP’s conservative base should be completely behind putting boots on the ground in Syria.

This is, of course, besides the point that helping those rebels who wish to institute a secular democracy in Syria will help stabilize Syria in the long run, end the flow of weapons to Hezbollah in Lebanon and thus help free Lebanon from the grip of terrorists, and by both of those reduce the influence of Iran in the region. All of these help contribute to Israel’s security and would enable Syria and Lebanon to finally come to the table and sign a peace agreement with Israel. Anything good for Israeli national security is good for American national security.

There doesn’t have to be an imminent, direct threat to American national security to compel action.

solatic on March 20, 2013 at 3:19 AM

Exit question: What if Assad hasn’t in fact (yet) used WMD and O declares anyway that it’s time for the U.S. to act? What’s Assad’s incentive at that point to keep holding back?

He’s not going to hold back. He’s losing and before the end he will use everything in his arsenal, including the stuff he got from Iraq.

With Obama’s sequestration we can’t and should not do anything about it. There is no upside for the U.S. in that mess.

dogsoldier on March 20, 2013 at 5:36 AM

There doesn’t have to be an imminent, direct threat to American national security to compel action.

solatic on March 20, 2013 at 3:19 AM

I used to think as you do, but no more. You are completely incorrect, for one very important reason. The dickheads in Washington will not allow our guys to prosecute their action correctly. The ridiculous rules of engagement may be (and only maybe) appropriate for LEOs but not for warfare.

We are invested in two actions the Emperor has turned into quagmires or is it four now? NO MORE.

dogsoldier on March 20, 2013 at 5:41 AM

There doesn’t have to be an imminent, direct threat to American national security to compel action.

solatic on March 20, 2013 at 3:19 AM

I used to think as you do, but no more. You are completely incorrect, for one very important reason. The d!ckheads in Washington will not allow our guys to prosecute their action correctly. The ridiculous rules of engagement may be (and only maybe) appropriate for LEOs but not for warfare.

We are invested in two actions the Emperor has turned into quagmires or is it four now? NO MORE.

dogsoldier on March 20, 2013 at 5:42 AM

Haven’t we seen enough from the Arab Spring to know that the people who grab power from the tyrants are just as bad if not worse? We aren’t helping a bunch of Jeffersonians or followers of Ghandi. We are aiding Jihad.

jpmn on March 20, 2013 at 6:21 AM

Two puppets of the Democratic Party.

Karmi on March 20, 2013 at 8:42 AM

Mccain and Graham symbolize everything that’s wrong with the Republican establishment’s foreign policy, still trying to do things as if we were Reagan’s America when Iraq put a nail in the coffin of those ambitions.

Also, given what happened the LAST time we went into a country chasing WMDs I’d be reluctant to take action unless it actually happened live on TV. And even then, I’d question if it was staged.

After all, this is exactly the same trick Chalabi used on us in Iraq: Feed us disinformation so we’ll destroy his political opponents. I can well see either faction trying to stage an incident to blame the other one and bring the wrath of America down on it. And Republican Senators, like Pavlov’s dogs, react on cue.

pendell2 on March 20, 2013 at 9:38 AM

“How can you lot call yourselves conservatives, “pro-life”, and not see a moral imperative to help stem the flow of blood?”

I consider myself conservative and pro-life, and I do NOT see a moral imperative to get into a situation I don’t understand and “help”. The odds of us making things worse while getting our own people shot in the bargain are too high.

Many of the problems in the Middle East today can be traced directly to idealistic western mapmakers trying to make “peace” back in the 1920s after the Ottoman Empire collapsed, and we’re still sorting out the wreckage of those mistakes.

Middle Eastern problems have middle eastern solutions. And the best thing for well-intentioned pro-life conservatives to do is BUTT OUT and let the people who are actually in the situation sort it out to their own satisfaction. The first rule of medicine is first to do no harm. Not go blundering into a bad situation and make it worse. We’ve already tried that in Iraq and Afghanistan, and look how well it worked out there.

pendell2 on March 20, 2013 at 9:43 AM

To any Democrat, this would be the perfect war.

Potentially hugely costly in blood and treasure…and absolutely zero US vital interests at stake. Knock out Assad and create a vacume for…what exactly?

Tomolena1 on March 20, 2013 at 10:30 AM

Haven’t we seen enough from the Arab Spring to know that the people who grab power from the tyrants are just as bad if not worse? We aren’t helping a bunch of Jeffersonians or followers of Ghandi. We are aiding Jihad.

Aiding Jihad is the real goal, don’t you know.

hawkeye54 on March 20, 2013 at 10:59 AM

I am not sending my two sons to die in the deserts of the Middle East for Syria, Egypt or Israel. If the Jews and the Egyptians want to thrash it out, so be it.

No more shattered American bodies from IED’s and long “peace missions” that do nothing but expand radical Islam.

Bulletchaser on March 20, 2013 at 11:00 AM

These two rascals are beginning to be a professional comical tag team; one yawns and the other covers his mouth. What an embarassment to America. Who care what their dual utterance dejour is?

Don L on March 20, 2013 at 11:00 AM

Somebody please ask John and Lindsey just who in hell we’re supposed to support in that God forsaken country, and precisely why. Both sides are a gaggle of dirt bag radicals and one is as bad as another.

rplat on March 20, 2013 at 11:01 AM

Comment pages: 1 2