Good news: Syria strike plans widening

posted at 9:21 am on September 6, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

Well, good news for Senator John McCain, anyway, who’s been agitating for Congress to give Barack Obama a much freer hand for intervention in Syria.  The Jerusalem Post picks up on an ABC News report that the strikes won’t simply be long-range missiles from naval platforms in the Mediterranean, but also bombing sorties over Syria:

Despite statements from both US President Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry that a US-led strike on Syria would be a “limited and tailored” military attack, ABC News reported on Thursday that the strike planned by Obama’s national security team is “significantly larger” than most have anticipated.

According to ABC News, in additional to a salvo of 200 Tomahawk cruise missiles fired from four Navy destroyers stationed in the eastern Mediterranean, the US is also planning an aerial campaign that is expected to last two days.

This campaign potentially includes an aerial bombardment of missiles and long range bombs from US-based B-2 stealth bombers that carry satellite-guided bombs, B-52 bombers, that can carry air-launched cruise missiles and Qatar-based B-1s that carry long-range, air-to-surface missiles, both ABC News and The New York Timesreported.

“This military strike will do more damage to [Syrian President Bashar] Assad’s forces in 48 hours than the Syrian rebels have done in two years,” a national security official told ABC News.

This raises a couple of questions about the “no boots on the ground” promise coming from Obama and John Kerry.  In order to make these kinds of pinpoint-accurate attacks with either bombers or cruise missiles, it’s usually better (although not entirely necessary) to have spotters on the ground lighting up the targets.  That means boots on the ground, even if everything goes perfectly.  What happens if our bombers get shot down over Syria?

The New York Times also reports on mission creep at the White House:

President Obama has directed the Pentagon to develop an expanded list of potential targets in Syria in response to intelligence suggesting that the government of President Bashar al-Assad has been moving troops and equipment used to employ chemical weapons while Congress debates whether to authorize military action.

Mr. Obama, officials said, is now determined to put more emphasis on the “degrade” part of what the administration has said is the goal of a military strike against Syria — to “deter and degrade” Mr. Assad’s ability to use chemical weapons. That means expanding beyond the 50 or so major sites that were part of the original target list developed with French forces before Mr. Obama delayed action on Saturday to seek Congressional approval of his plan.

For the first time, the administration is talking about using American and French aircraft to conduct strikes on specific targets, in addition to ship-launched Tomahawk cruise missiles. There is a renewed push to get other NATO forces involved.

The strikes would be aimed not at the chemical stockpiles themselves — risking a potential catastrophe — but rather the military units that have stored and prepared the chemical weapons and carried the attacks against Syrian rebels, as well as the headquarters overseeing the effort, and the rockets and artillery that have launched the attacks, military officials said Thursday.

This change is apparently intended to win approval from the McCain-led hawks:

Mr. Obama’s instructions come as most members of Congress who are even willing to consider voting in favor of a military response to a chemical attack are insisting on strict limits on the duration and type of the strikes carried out by the United States, while a small number of Republicans are telling the White House that the current plans are not muscular enough to destabilize the Assad government.

Senior officials are aware of the competing imperatives they now confront — that to win even the fight on Capitol Hill, they will have to accept restrictions on the military response, and in order to make the strike meaningful they must expand its scope.

“They are being pulled in two different directions,” a senior foreign official involved in the discussions said Thursday. “The worst outcome would be to come out of this bruising battle with Congress and conduct a military action that made little difference.”

Would it be better to come out of this with another decapitation like we managed in Libya, which leaves a failed state in its wake and radical Islamist terror networks free to operate in its wake?  It’s bad enough that we did that once, and now it looks as though we’re about to do it again, in the laughable service of bolstering our credibility.  How credible does it make the US to create havens for our enemies?

The remarkable aspect of this mission creep is that it’s taking place even before Congress authorizes a supposedly limited action in Syria.  Stephen Carter at Bloomberg warned this morning — before the mission had already started to creep from “deterrence” and “responsibility to protect” to “regime change” — than any authorization Congress grants, no matter how limited, will be seen as a carte blanche by the Obama administration:

The White House draft of a measure granting President Barack Obama the authority to attack Syria, sent to Congress last week, was far too broad. Now some critics are saying that the Senate’s rewritten resolution, approved by the Foreign Relations Committee this week, is too narrow.

Consider me skeptical. The lesson of history is clear: Whatever limiting language Congress adopts, a determined chief executive will read it to justify pretty much whatever he wants it to justify.

Presidents, when they choose, have always found ways to broaden the authority granted them by Congress, especially in matters of war and peace — where, as the political scientist Kenneth R. Mayer details in his book “With the Stroke of a Pen: Executive Orders and Presidential Power,” limiting language rarely limits.

Carter offers a number of historical lessons on this point, but this time, the White House isn’t even waiting for Congress to pass its authorization before engaging in mission creep.


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

Have a look at this link. One of my Senators has changed his tune on Syria. After what I presume was the public emailing and calling his office. Y’all might want to do the same if you are against Syria intervention.

Bmore on September 6, 2013 at 9:22 AM

On the other hand, I wrote my congressman and Senators and got nowhere. One Senator and my Representative are reliable Obama hacks and the other Senator’s inbox was full and not taking any messages. I guess they really don’t care what we think.

yesiamapirate on September 6, 2013 at 10:12 AM

I don’t think you should go around announcing that you’re a pirate. Don’t get me wrong, I like Pirate-Americans, but others might feel differently than I do. Just sayin’.

Punchenko on September 6, 2013 at 10:14 AM

@breakingpol

President Obama to address the American people from the White House on Tuesday – live video

The day before 9/11

sentinelrules on September 6, 2013 at 10:03 AM

Well Obama is living in a 9/10 dreamworld in which 9/11 never happened.

ajacksonian on September 6, 2013 at 10:16 AM

what the hell is the prez talking about right now in Petersburg. what is he saying….rambling…i don’t get it

gracie on September 6, 2013 at 10:13 AM

I think he’s making it up as he goes along. He likes to remind people he was against the war in Iraq.

Punchenko on September 6, 2013 at 10:16 AM

Have a look at this link. One of my Senators has changed his tune on Syria. After what I presume was the public emailing and calling his office. Y’all might want to do the same if you are against Syria intervention.

Bmore on September 6, 2013 at 9:22 AM

Unfortunately, I have McCain – but I’ve already contacted Flake and my representative. This is my red line – I’ve told them a “yes” vote would change my calculus.

Hill60 on September 6, 2013 at 10:19 AM

Unfortunately, I have McCain – but I’ve already contacted Flake and my representative. This is my red line – I’ve told them a “yes” vote would change my calculus.

Hill60 on September 6, 2013 at 10:19 AM

Contact them all! Melt the phone lines into the Capitol. You aren’t going to change McCain’s vote but his staff needs to know just how angry we all are about this insanity.

Happy Nomad on September 6, 2013 at 10:21 AM

He Just AGAIN referred to “MY MILITARY”. He is a loathsome piece of shite.

Naturally Curly on September 6, 2013 at 10:21 AM

I think he’s making it up as he goes along.

Punchenko on September 6, 2013 at 10:16 AM

I think you’re giving him too much credit for planning this out.

Happy Nomad on September 6, 2013 at 10:22 AM

Interesting interview by Ben Ferguson on WBAP (I didn’t catch the name but he’s an expert on Putin and has been covering the Summit)

In a nutshell he said this:

“Putin and China are getting fed up with this push by the West (US & EU) to force their cultural ideas on other nations by insisting that their definition of Human Rights trumps national sovereignty of individual nations…The commentator wondered about Obama meeting with LGBT activists in Russia and asked “So now US Foreign policy is driven by a Gay Agenda?”

He also stated that to Russia and China this push for Western Cultural Ideas that cause instability and chaos is totalitarian in nature and threatening to the national sovereignty of individual nations. Putin is concerned because many of these volatile muslim nations are bordering Russia and Russia & China have their own internal problems with Muslim insurgent populations.

How weird is that?

workingclass artist on September 6, 2013 at 10:24 AM

He Just AGAIN referred to “MY MILITARY”. He is a loathsome piece of shite.

Naturally Curly on September 6, 2013 at 10:21 AM

Really. What a filthy disgusting worthless bastard. Military members swear an oath to obey the orders of the President but it isn’t an oath of allegiance to this thin-skinned deplorable commie.

Happy Nomad on September 6, 2013 at 10:24 AM

His alligator mouth has overloaded his hummingbird rear end and he’s going to plunge us right into WWIII.

“My military”.

Like Hell.

kingsjester on September 6, 2013 at 10:26 AM

I think he’s making it up as he goes along.

Punchenko on September 6, 2013 at 10:16 AM

I think you’re giving him too much credit for planning this out.

Happy Nomad on September 6, 2013 at 10:22 AM

I think you’re right about that. :-(

Punchenko on September 6, 2013 at 10:26 AM

He Just AGAIN referred to “MY MILITARY”. He is a loathsome piece of shite.

Naturally Curly on September 6, 2013 at 10:21 AM

Yeah…But this language is typical of despots who dream of being Caesar…

workingclass artist on September 6, 2013 at 10:26 AM

So, you work with AIPAC?

Dusty on September 6, 2013 at 10:13 AM

No I do not work for AIPAC… However I am very much pro-Israel and I believe that Israel is our biggest ally in the region… Israel is thinking and rightly so that the ousting of Assad terrorist regime will deal a big blow to the Iranian islamic terrorist regime and their Hizballah terrorists… Also Israel understands very well, and despite huge media hype, that Al Qaeda terrorists in Syria are a small faction of the rebels and that they will be destroyed by the Syrians themselves once Assad is gone… The vast majority of the Syrians do not want to live under Al Qaeda terrorist seventh century rule…

mnjg on September 6, 2013 at 10:26 AM

He Just AGAIN referred to “MY MILITARY”. He is a loathsome piece of shite.

Naturally Curly on September 6, 2013 at 10:21 AM

He’s a grifting prig who wouldn’t know a Super Hornet from a Humvee.

“My military”…f**k off little tinhorn dictator wanna-be.

Bishop on September 6, 2013 at 10:28 AM

i would love to be a fly on the wall there in that 5-sdied building in arlington.

t8stlikchkn on September 6, 2013 at 9:38 AM
Due to the 20% cut under sequestration, the Pentagon is now a square. ;-0

Seriously, What we haven’t heard is just how thrilled the military is going into WWIII because of a fragile ego. And I’m not talking about the politicians in uniform with offices in the E-ring. I want to know how the CO of one of those destroyers feel about being ordered to kill innocent Syrians due to Obama’s trash talk a year ago. I want to know what one of those Marines on the USS San Antonio feel about deploying into yet a third combat zone in the past twelve years.

Happy Nomad on September 6, 2013 at 9:45 AM

gen scales, retired 2-star provided some insights, good stuff:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/us-military-planners-dont-support-war-with-syria/2013/09/05/10a07114-15bb-11e3-be6e-dc6ae8a5b3a8_story.html

t8stlikchkn on September 6, 2013 at 10:29 AM

His alligator mouth has overloaded his hummingbird rear end and he’s going to plunge us right into WWIII.

“My military”.

Like Hell.

kingsjester on September 6, 2013 at 10:26 AM

Agreed.

He’s an incompetent delusional buffoon who’s determined now…cornered by his own strutting idiocy and driven to protect his bruised ego, he is playacting on the world stage…He is in over his head and unfit.

workingclass artist on September 6, 2013 at 10:30 AM

Obama just said in response to a question from Chuck Todd is that that report is not true. I await news on whether this is a flat out lie.

The follow up question that no one will ask is: If your attack on Syria is to be precise and limited, why did you ask for an open ended authorization?

Basilsbest on September 6, 2013 at 10:30 AM

No I do not work for AIPAC…

But you understand why you’re being asked. And of course, if you did, you wouldn’t admit it.

However I am very much pro-Israel and I believe that Israel is our biggest ally in the region… mnjg on September 6, 2013 at 10:26 AM

What has Israel ever done for us, I ask again?

Akzed on September 6, 2013 at 10:30 AM

This press conference is a disaster for him. He’s pantless on the world stage.

Naturally Curly on September 6, 2013 at 10:31 AM

In order to make these kinds of pinpoint-accurate attacks with either bombers or cruise missiles, it’s usually better (although not entirely necessary) to have spotters on the ground lighting up the targets.

Well, those aren’t “boots boots”. They’re more like “covert boots”. Totally different.

Chris of Rights on September 6, 2013 at 10:31 AM

workingclass artist on September 6, 2013 at 10:24 AM

Ben Ferguson is a 20-something yr old Ole Miss graduate, whose first job was on the local radio station that runs the Disney rock feed for kids. He did an internship in Congress, and is well-connected. He does a syndicated national show on Sunday Nights, and does Dallas’s WBAP Weekday Mornings, replacing Mark Davis. He is actually out of Memphis, where he does 3 – 5 p.m. weekdays on WKIM 98.9 FM. He works for Cumulus Radio, and is now a token Conservative Pundit for CNN. His instincts are usually to support the Republican Elite, but, if he gets too much pushback, like he did supporting Boehner on Syria, he falls back into agreeing with his Conservative callers.

As long as he has himself, Ben will never be alone.

kingsjester on September 6, 2013 at 10:31 AM

mnjg on September 6, 2013 at 10:26 AM

That’s an extremely optimistic future scenario. In reality there would likely be chaos and another Libya. Best case is another Egypt where Assad-like figure with a different name takes over and re-allies with Iran and Russia.

Fenris on September 6, 2013 at 10:31 AM

Well Obama is living in a 9/10 dreamworld in which 9/11 never happened.

ajacksonian on September 6, 2013 at 10:16 AM

he knows it happened. and it was about a video. he knows.
but he DID call it terrorism the next day. ask candy.
that other 911 was our fault. just our chickens coming home to roost.

t8stlikchkn on September 6, 2013 at 10:32 AM

The strikes would be aimed not at the chemical stockpiles themselves — risking a potential catastrophe — but rather the military units that have stored and prepared the chemical weapons and carried the attacks against Syrian rebels, as well as the headquarters overseeing the effort, and the rockets and artillery that have launched the attacks, military officials said Thursday.

Our primary objective is clearly to see that chemical weapons are secure from use or theft. Why would we then attack the very forces of Assad that are charged with guarding the chemical weapons?

If we destroy Assad’s forces that are guarding chemical weapons, the weapons stores will look like a Best-Buy in downtown New Orleans during Katrina.

Idiots, morons, and imbeciles.

slickwillie2001 on September 6, 2013 at 10:32 AM

Unfortunately, I have McCain – but I’ve already contacted Flake and my representative. This is my red line – I’ve told them a “yes” vote would change my calculus.

Hill60 on September 6, 2013 at 10:19 AM

Ah yes, but did you tell them if you saw a whole bunch of yes votes moving around it would change your calculus.

Basilsbest on September 6, 2013 at 10:33 AM

Our primary objective is clearly to see that chemical weapons are secure from use or theft. Why would we then attack the very forces of Assad that are charged with guarding the chemical weapons?

If we destroy Assad’s forces that are guarding chemical weapons, the weapons stores will look like a Best-Buy in downtown New Orleans during Katrina.

Idiots, morons, and imbeciles.

slickwillie2001 on September 6, 2013 at 10:32 AM

Not just slick but exactly right. This needs to be repeated ad nauseum until even the morons get it.

Basilsbest on September 6, 2013 at 10:36 AM

Idiots, morons, and imbeciles.

slickwillie2001 on September 6, 2013 at 10:32 AM

Alternatively, people of middling intelligence who actually seek chaos in the Middle East and the eventual Islamization of Israel.

Fenris on September 6, 2013 at 10:36 AM

what the hell is the prez talking about right now in Petersburg. what is he saying….rambling…i don’t get it

gracie on September 6, 2013 at 10:13 AM

He’s in love with the sound of his own voice.

TarheelBen on September 6, 2013 at 10:37 AM

Muslim O just said he went to congress because of no imminent threat in Syria. He then stated that he acts immediately to imminent threats! Right you liar! You watched AMERICANS DIE and as of yet not responded in any way to the attack on Benghazi! No defense of Americans leaving them on their own… but World War III to promote Muslims and Al Quaida! This is the most brazen liar and manipulator ever to be in public office in my lifetime! Enough of this DUNCE! He seems to be a traitor to all that the U.S. stands for!! He should be impeached or tried for treason, seriously!

Marco on September 6, 2013 at 10:39 AM

But, we were assured, in person, by our President, on national television, on the record, that we would only be sending a message to Assad…simple surgical strikes to let Assad know that we were a bit peeved. Obama wouldn’t lie to us, that blatantly, would he?

Now…at this rate…the 1stMarDiv will be rolling across the beaches between Tartus and Latakia…over 100 miles from Damascus, of course, and in the middle of the most pro-Assad part of Syria, with Russioans all over the damn place…

Or…gonna drop the 82nd into Damascus…and they thought 6 June ’44 was the longest day…

Good Lord…mission creep on top of mission creep before the mission has even begun.

And these idiots like McCain want to give Obama carte blanche?

Because, of course, we gots to do sumpin’…

coldwarrior on September 6, 2013 at 10:39 AM

Well, those aren’t “boots boots”. They’re more like “covert boots”. Totally different.

Chris of Rights on September 6, 2013 at 10:31 AM

“Sneakers”?

Flange on September 6, 2013 at 10:39 AM

Who. Which senator. Every vote is important, and the Senate vote will have huge ramifications in the House.

matthew8787 on September 6, 2013 at 10:09 AM

Your Senators. I don’t know what State you are in. Email both of yours is my advice and of course your Rep. ; )

yesiamapirate on September 6, 2013 at 10:12 AM

That may be true. I would proceed and make them aware of your opinion via email for sure. If they don’t hear/see a push back from their constituency they will assume that there is none.

Bmore on September 6, 2013 at 10:40 AM

A few thoughts from a military perspective.
1. You dont necessarily need boots on the groud. E-8 Joint Stars does an excellent job at tracking ground targets.
2. If you are using guided ranged weapons, you dont need to get so close as to risk getting shot down.
3. Current variants of cruise missiles have both multiple targeting capablity and loitering capability. These are Einstein smart weapons on steriods.
4. Every strike of this nature has been a platform for the U.S. to trot out some new capability that the public previously was unaware of. This will likely be no different.
5. We have the capability to completely jam Syria for long periods of time. This makes their radar guided SAMs useless.
6. If we did need to get in close on some targets like mobile scud launshers, we would likely use F-15 Strike Eagles en masse to take out SAM platforms first.

paulsur on September 6, 2013 at 10:41 AM

gen scales, retired 2-star provided some insights, good stuff:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/us-military-planners-dont-support-war-with-syria/2013/09/05/10a07114-15bb-11e3-be6e-dc6ae8a5b3a8_story.html

t8stlikchkn on September 6, 2013 at 10:29 AM

Scales hates Israel. The debate is over.

/mnjg

Punchenko on September 6, 2013 at 10:42 AM

Hill60 on September 6, 2013 at 10:19 AM

Yes I understand your difficult position, though I must confess I don’t understand AZ voters. Flake should be fired, McCain retired. ; ) I’d email them both all the same. ; )

Bmore on September 6, 2013 at 10:45 AM

And these idiots like McCain want to give Obama carte blanche?

Because, of course, we gots to do sumpin’…

coldwarrior on September 6, 2013 at 10:39 AM

Sumpin’! Anything! Barry would look less like a president and more like a clueless 20-something graduate student if we do not act!

S.M.P.! Save my presidency!

Punchenko on September 6, 2013 at 10:46 AM

workingclass artist on September 6, 2013 at 10:24 AM

EU court strikes down sanctions imposed on several Iranian banks, businesses

Resist We Much on September 6, 2013 at 10:47 AM

Well, those aren’t “boots boots”. They’re more like “covert boots”. Totally different.

Chris of Rights on September 6, 2013 at 10:31 AM

“Sneakers”?

Flange on September 6, 2013 at 10:39 AM

‘Marching shoes,’ silly.

Resist We Much on September 6, 2013 at 10:49 AM

workingclass artist on September 6, 2013 at 10:24 AM

Ben Ferguson is a 20-something yr old Ole Miss graduate, whose first job was on the local radio station that runs the Disney rock feed for kids. He did an internship in Congress, and is well-connected. He does a syndicated national show on Sunday Nights, and does Dallas’s WBAP Weekday Mornings, replacing Mark Davis. He is actually out of Memphis, where he does 3 – 5 p.m. weekdays on WKIM 98.9 FM. He works for Cumulus Radio, and is now a token Conservative Pundit for CNN. His instincts are usually to support the Republican Elite, but, if he gets too much pushback, like he did supporting Boehner on Syria, he falls back into agreeing with his Conservative callers.

As long as he has himself, Ben will never be alone.

kingsjester on September 6, 2013 at 10:31 AM

I agree with you (can’t stand the pr*ck)…I just wait for Rush to come on at 11. WBAP has hired two outta town screamers Ferguson & Krock and I’d be surprised if their contracts are renewed…

I just thought what the russian expert was saying was interesting so I paraphrased it and posted it…Wish I’d caught his name so I could find out more but as I usually don’t really listen to Ferguson much I missed the name of the commenter being interviewed and the title of his book.

workingclass artist on September 6, 2013 at 10:50 AM

Scales hates Israel. The debate is over. /mnjg Punchenko on September 6, 2013 at 10:42 AM

Familiarity can breed contempt.

Akzed on September 6, 2013 at 10:54 AM

‘Marching shoes,’ silly.

Resist We Much on September 6, 2013 at 10:49 AM

I’m just praying no Taps shoes will be needed.

Flange on September 6, 2013 at 10:57 AM

workingclass artist on September 6, 2013 at 10:24 AM

EU court strikes down sanctions imposed on several Iranian banks, businesses

Resist We Much on September 6, 2013 at 10:47 AM

Caller into the Ferguson show says his wife’s father is a Col. in the Russian Army and confirmed what the expert said.

To Russians…The US is exhibiting erratic possibly psychopathic behavior creating regional chaos toppling allies in the region…he said Russia is preparing to engage the US.

Of course this was just a caller who said the Russians are concerned and expressing their concern emphatically at the summit.

Putin is seizing an opportunity created by our buffoon of a president….and obviously Putin has people who peruse Drudge?

workingclass artist on September 6, 2013 at 11:00 AM

EU court strikes down sanctions imposed on several Iranian banks, businesses

Resist We Much on September 6, 2013 at 10:47 AM

Hmmmm….

workingclass artist on September 6, 2013 at 11:02 AM

I’m not anti-Israel, either, I’ve always been a strong supporter of Israel, but I also take issue with AIPAC jumping in to bully congress to get into this fight that the AMERICAN people want NO PART OF. How does this help OUR COUNTRY? We have an incompetent, small man in the White House, a corrupt, GUTLESS congress, and this mission is ALREADY ratcheting up and it hasn’t even begun yet. I haven’t felt so hopeless in years…God help our country.

ellifint on September 6, 2013 at 11:08 AM

paulsur on September 6, 2013 at 10:41 AM

Then what?

Seriously.

After all that wonderfully designed gadgetry is expended on a target set…what happens next?

The folks who got hammered are just going to laugh it off?

Folks in nearby countries just going to go about their daily routines? Not a care in the world?

Almost every boundary in the region is artificial…imposed by Europe…with not a care about tribes, families, ethnicity’s…and vendetta runs deep in the veins out there.

Yes, I’ve no doubt that unless it all goes to hell fast, there will be no boots on the ground…well, I do have doubts, there already are…those are not Boy Scouts conducting training in Jordan and elsewhere…they are US soldiers…already on the ground.

But, when you, a john, b*tch slap a ho, you’d best make sure the pimp ain’t nowhere near…nor his homeys.

It is the what happens next…that is the major concern I have…as it appears very few are even given that a second thought…just we gonna kick some Arab butt…oh, yeah, ‘Merica!!!.

Those IED’s in Iraq and Afghanistan were not set off because the locals were thrilled into submission by our show of military prowess and technology. They hate us to death. They’ve nothing left to lose.

That’s solid motivation, in my book.

Maybe we ought to at least consider that?

coldwarrior on September 6, 2013 at 11:08 AM

Strikes against Assad terrorist regime are necessary for two reasons:

1. If we do not strike than our enemies will be greatly emboldened… Al Qaeda terrorists, Iran terrorist regime and their Hizballah terrorists, Assad terrorist regime, China, Russia, North Korea and very other enemy of the USA will be greatly emboldened…

2. A major reduction of Assad fire power will achieve a long stalemate and a long war of attrition in Syria… Assad has a superior fire power over his enemies and in order to achieve this stalemate and war of attrition his fire power must be greatly reduced…

mnjg on September 6, 2013 at 11:11 AM

What has Israel ever done for us, I ask again?

Akzed on September 6, 2013 at 10:30 AM

They failed to sink the USS Liberty after a lot of effort?

All criticism of Israel is to mnjg (anti-Semitic) as all criticism of 0dumba is to his leftarded supporters (racist) – mnjg is a clown.

AIPAC’s agenda is not America’s…

Anti-Control on September 6, 2013 at 11:13 AM

mnjg on September 6, 2013 at 11:11 AM

Put a sock in it.

coldwarrior on September 6, 2013 at 11:21 AM

1. If we do not strike than our enemies will be greatly emboldened…

An exhausted and counter-intuitive argument. They’re “greatly emboldened” as a matter of course.

You’re implying an eternal war against a perpetually emboldened mindset.

rrpjr on September 6, 2013 at 11:26 AM

Yes I understand your difficult position, though I must confess I don’t understand AZ voters. Flake should be fired, McCain retired. ; ) I’d email them both all the same. ; )

Bmore on September 6, 2013 at 10:45 AM

Oh, both senators have heard from me. McCain is a lost cause – but I want him to know how I feel on the issue. Flake is no better – his participation in the Gang of 8 pretty much makes him persona non grata. My representative is a dem – and I’ve contacted her as well.

Hill60 on September 6, 2013 at 11:33 AM

Then what?

Seriously.

After all that wonderfully designed gadgetry is expended on a target set…what happens next?

The folks who got hammered are just going to laugh it off?

Folks in nearby countries just going to go about their daily routines? Not a care in the world?

Almost every boundary in the region is artificial…imposed by Europe…with not a care about tribes, families, ethnicity’s…and vendetta runs deep in the veins out there.

Yes, I’ve no doubt that unless it all goes to hell fast, there will be no boots on the ground…well, I do have doubts, there already are…those are not Boy Scouts conducting training in Jordan and elsewhere…they are US soldiers…already on the ground.

But, when you, a john, b*tch slap a ho, you’d best make sure the pimp ain’t nowhere near…nor his homeys.

It is the what happens next…that is the major concern I have…as it appears very few are even given that a second thought…just we gonna kick some Arab butt…oh, yeah, ‘Merica!!!.

Those IED’s in Iraq and Afghanistan were not set off because the locals were thrilled into submission by our show of military prowess and technology. They hate us to death. They’ve nothing left to lose.

That’s solid motivation, in my book.

Maybe we ought to at least consider that?

coldwarrior on September 6, 2013 at 11:08 AM

Yes. There’s an arrogant assumption on the part of the REB that he can dictate the END of this engagement. He can’t.

We have no idea what the Russians might do to help Assad, in what ways Assad might strike back against us, or how and where Iran might enter the conflict.

Fill up the gas tanks on all of your vehicles this weekend.

slickwillie2001 on September 6, 2013 at 11:37 AM

1. If we do not strike than our enemies will be greatly emboldened…

By that illogic we should bomb all our enemies all the time.

Akzed on September 6, 2013 at 11:42 AM

any authorization Congress grants, no matter how limited, will be seen as a carte blanche by the Obama administration
Which is why the resolution has to fail. A resolution that only authorizes Dear Liar to make funny faces at Assad will result in troops entering Damascus, to be fired at by all sides.

rbj on September 6, 2013 at 9:31 AM

well i have al nusra front and the islamic army of iraq in my fantasy terrorist league so i am stoked. bring it on.

t8stlikchkn on September 6, 2013 at 11:43 AM

However I am very much pro-Israel and I believe that Israel is our biggest ally in the region… mnjg on September 6, 2013 at 10:26 AM

What has Israel ever done for us, I ask again?

Akzed on September 6, 2013 at 10:30 AM

Akzed on September 6, 2013 at 11:44 AM

Strikes against Assad terrorist regime are necessary for two reasons:

1. If we do not strike than our enemies will be greatly emboldened… Al Qaeda terrorists, Iran terrorist regime and their Hizballah terrorists, Assad terrorist regime, China, Russia, North Korea and very other enemy of the USA will be greatly emboldened…

2. A major reduction of Assad fire power will achieve a long stalemate and a long war of attrition in Syria… Assad has a superior fire power over his enemies and in order to achieve this stalemate and war of attrition his fire power must be greatly reduced…

mnjg on September 6, 2013 at 11:11 AM

GO AWAY!

timberline on September 6, 2013 at 11:44 AM

Akzed on September 6, 2013 at 11:44 AM

Oooh, ooh, can I answer?

Israel is an island of functioning civilization in a sea of roiling barbarians. Which is no mean feat. They are an outpost; an example of what could be. They do right by their citizens every day. Well, more than most governments do, anyway. So okay, Israel is far from perfect. They’re a bunch of socialistic true believers. But hey, nobody’s perfect, they’re in a tough spot. How do we help them?

By destabilizing the Middle East even more! Yay! (sarcasm, just in case it wasn’t clear).

Fenris on September 6, 2013 at 11:51 AM

Strikes against Assad terrorist regime are necessary for two reasons:

1. If we do not strike than our enemies will be greatly emboldened… Al Qaeda terrorists, Iran terrorist regime and their Hizballah terrorists, Assad terrorist regime, China, Russia, North Korea and very other enemy of the USA will be greatly emboldened…

2. A major reduction of Assad fire power will achieve a long stalemate and a long war of attrition in Syria… Assad has a superior fire power over his enemies and in order to achieve this stalemate and war of attrition his fire power must be greatly reduced…

mnjg on September 6, 2013 at 11:11 AM

1. You mean islamists will want to kill is….what? Deader? They already want us dead. How much more “emboldened” could they possibly get??? As for China, Russia and NoKo….so what? What would they do? Be honest, analyze the question and answer it with logic and reason. What would they do that they aren’t already doing (like trying to stymie us in the UN)?

2. Define “major reduction of Assad fire power”. How much does he currently have? How much would it have to be reduced to produce the stalemate you predict? EXACTLY which weapons, in what numbers, directed at what targets will achieve this? You can’t answer any one of these questions, and neither can our govt. You know this, and yet you insist we attack a country that has not once attacked us or our interests for reasons yet undefined.

runawayyyy on September 6, 2013 at 11:52 AM

He also stated that to Russia and China this push for Western Cultural Ideas that cause instability and chaos is totalitarian in nature and threatening to the national sovereignty of individual nations. Putin is concerned because many of these volatile muslim nations are bordering Russia and Russia & China have their own internal problems with Muslim insurgent populations.

How weird is that?

workingclass artist on September 6, 2013 at 10:24 AM

It’s very weird. I find myself siding with Russia and Putin repeatedly these days. They have the high moral ground in issue after issue, the latest being to challenge the U.S. determination to create community-activist-motivated Arab-spring-chaos in one nation after another.

The new talking point for hawks (like Rove the other day on Hannity) is that Russia is part of the “Hezbollah-Syria-Iran-Russian” axis, so we need to go in and bomb away because “we’re back to the Cold War again and we all need to get tough. Aaaarrghhhh!” Fox is pushing this meme repeatedly, of course, as is Hannity indirectly by means of the guests he invites on his shows.

The idiots and radicals have taken over, and our foreign policy along with the general state of the nation is in a state of lunacy. I don’t trust our leaders. I don’t trust the meme-pushers. Putin’s analysis makes more sense to me than Obama’s. Now that’s weird.

Burke on September 6, 2013 at 11:53 AM

mnjg on September 6, 2013 at 11:11 AM

Take a gander.

Brigadier General Salim Idris, who Sen. John McCain has called a “fine leader” and who leads the Supreme Military Council of the Free Syrian Army (FSA), which is supported by the Obama administration, told Al Jazeera in a May 8 video interview that “Israel is an enemy country” and that Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad and the Lebanese terrorist group Hizballah are “Israeli collaborators.”

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2013/09/us-backed-moderate-syrian-rebel-commander-israel-is-an-enemy-country.html

rrpjr on September 6, 2013 at 11:55 AM

I’m beginning to see the Obama Plan. Brilliant! Assad watches in amazement as Obama, Biden and Jarrett stumble all over each other and bump into walls, like a Marx Brothers movie, in a clownish preparation for war. Unable to control himself, Assad falls into hysterical fits of laughter and dies of a stroke!!!

MaiDee on September 6, 2013 at 12:08 PM

Citizens of the USA to Obama:

DON’T just “do something,” STAND THERE!!!

(sitting down and shutting up is also acceptable, as is immediate resignation)

landlines on September 6, 2013 at 12:10 PM

Strikes against Assad terrorist regime are necessary for two reasons:

1. If we do not strike than our enemies will be greatly emboldened… Al Qaeda terrorists, Iran terrorist regime and their Hizballah terrorists, Assad terrorist regime, China, Russia, North Korea and very other enemy of the USA will be greatly emboldened…

2. A major reduction of Assad fire power will achieve a long stalemate and a long war of attrition in Syria… Assad has a superior fire power over his enemies and in order to achieve this stalemate and war of attrition his fire power must be greatly reduced…

mnjg on September 6, 2013 at 11:11 AM

1. Iran is developing nuclear weapons. They are not going to be deterred by anything we do. A pin prick attack on Syria will have them laughing at our futility.

2. Why do you want to prolong the war? Not enough dead, yet?

Basilsbest on September 6, 2013 at 12:13 PM

Strikes against Assad terrorist regime are necessary for two reasons:

1. If we do not strike than our enemies will be greatly emboldened… Al Qaeda terrorists, Iran terrorist regime and their Hizballah terrorists, Assad terrorist regime, China, Russia, North Korea and very other enemy of the USA will be greatly emboldened…

2. A major reduction of Assad fire power will achieve a long stalemate and a long war of attrition in Syria… Assad has a superior fire power over his enemies and in order to achieve this stalemate and war of attrition his fire power must be greatly reduced…

mnjg on September 6, 2013 at 11:11 AM

Just please stop. Reading your posts is about to cause me to reflexively start banging my head on my desk.

Obama’s plan isn’t to topple Assad. It’s to fire a ‘shot across the bow’ to scare and warn him against further use of WMD.

You get your knickers in a twist about Assad’s purported WMD, but ignore the fact that the Syrian Rebels have admitted using chemical weapons.

You and AIPAC – I’m a huge supporter of Israel and have a family history, so you really don’t want to go down the ‘Anti-Semite!’ road with me – want us to strike Syria, but Israel says that it can defend itself and any limited strike on the US will have the perverse effect of insuring the probability that Syria, Iran, and Hezbollah will retaliate again the country to soar. Hell, even Hamas will likely take advantage.

You, Obama, McCain, Kerry, et al, are under the delusional belief that you can control events on the ground, ie, which rebels (the ‘moderate’ rebels or the Al-Nusra/AQ’s Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant) win control of the government – and you guys have a great track record: Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Egypt (the MoFoBros will NEVER seek election!) – should Assad fall without putting a massive number of boots on the ground.

You also seem to believe that we can control what happens to Assad’s chemical weapons from the air when the Pentagon has estimated that it will take at least 75,000 boots on the ground (remember the lowballing of estimated boots on the ground needed for Iraq?).

You apparently believe that a Sunni-controlled Syria is superior to one in the hands of the Alawite, which protects minorities like Christians, and won’t just fall into place within the Caliphate-building that AQ/ISIL/AQIM/AQAP/MoFoBros are engaged in across Northern Africa and the Middle East.

None of you has apparently thought what you will do if Iran attacks Israel or Russia intervenes on behalf of Assad.

None of you has apparently considered the plight of the Christians and Alawites in the event Assad falls. FYI: It’ll be genocide, as promised.

None of you has given me one national security interest other than:

1) US ‘standing in the world’ (Hey, the world isn’t behind you!)

2) The President’s credibility in the world and nationally (Hey, he made his own bed. #NoWar2SaveFace!)

3) It will embolden our enemies if we don’t act! (Riiight, cuz, like, um, ya know, that trick has worked so well in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, Algeria, Egypt, etc. Yawn. That lie don’t hunt anymore!)

4) ‘Cuz, well, it’s the Middle East, we’re the United States, and bombing is just what we sort of do there!

5) ???

Resist We Much on September 6, 2013 at 12:18 PM

Your headline was irony, right?

There is no way we should get involved in Obama’s Syrian Clusterfuck.

CatoRenasci on September 6, 2013 at 12:20 PM

Your headline was irony, right?

Because there is way Congress should get involved in supporting Obama’s Syrian Clusterf*ck.

CatoRenasci on September 6, 2013 at 12:21 PM

If we do not strike than our enemies will be greatly emboldened…

Hogwash. Russia is just looking for another reason to crap all over the US. How about we look at how thrilled the folks in Iraq and Afghanistan were when we ‘liberated’ them?

manyears on September 6, 2013 at 12:24 PM

Obowmao hid under his desk during the protests in Iran. Now his highness is running around beating his chest and wants to kill people in Syria. The only difference I can see between the two is this time he has to save face after running off at the mouth. Fail.

manyears on September 6, 2013 at 12:29 PM

Even widening the scope (scope creep) of a potential US military intervention into Syria – little will change. The US will still be seen as feckless, weak, and distrusted. This is because the time for any Western / US intervention was over 18 months ago as the Syrian Civil War was escalating, and before the AQ jihadists moved to fill the void of the lack of support for the more secular rebel forces.

In the past 4 years, the history / actions of the Obama Administration towards the region – has done little but reinforce the fecklessness and weaknesses of the Administration.

At what point will the President articulate his specific goals and aims of military action?

At what point will the President demonstrate with actions, not words (which we already have reason to distrust), a willingness to stand up to Russia, China, Iran, not to mention Assad?

At what point will the President provide us with evidence showing an understanding of the risks around escalation – and what concrete steps he is prepared to do to limit or prevent that escalation short of unilateral surrender?

The Reagan Doctrine had 4 clear conditions that needed to be met to justify US military intervention. Are all of those conditions met know – and does this President have the fortitude to see the effort through beyond just a scope creep that takes a ‘symbolic’, ‘limited’ military mission and makes it even more symbolic and less limited?

This isn’t Libya or Serbia. But I don’t think the President understands that.

Athos on September 6, 2013 at 12:35 PM

He Just AGAIN referred to “MY MILITARY”. He is a loathsome piece of shite.

Naturally Curly on September 6, 2013 at 10:21 AM

well sure it is…..just like it’s HIS IRS, HIS NSA, HIS
EPA…..except when he “reads about it in the news, like
the rest of us”

ToddPA on September 6, 2013 at 12:50 PM

He Just AGAIN referred to “MY MILITARY”. He is a loathsome piece of shite.

Naturally Curly on September 6, 2013 at 10:21 AM

well sure it is…..just like it’s HIS IRS, HIS NSA, HIS
EPA…..except when he “reads about it in the news, like
the rest of us”

ToddPA on September 6, 2013 at 12:50 PM

So, when is it going to be HIS FAULT?

Athos on September 6, 2013 at 12:51 PM

So much for “sending a message”.

Now Comrade O and JF’n Kerry simply want a war.

Okay. I have some questions.

Why are we starting a war with a nation that has not attacked us or directly threatened us?
What vital and direct US interests are immediately and actually threatened, as opposed to possible threatened some time in the future?
What is the objective?
What is the plan, exactly, to achieve that objective?
How long will it take?
What will it cost in lives and treasure?
How will we pay for it?
What are the risks and possible downsides?
What are the contingency plans?
What happens if Russia and/or Iran get involved and it escalates?
What is the “exit strategy”?
How do we expect Syria to look when we exit?
Will the UN security council approve? If not, why not?
Will NATO approve? If not, why not?
Will Congress approve? If not, why not?
What allies will we have and what will they do?
How will this war go better than the wars in Iraq and
Afghanistan?

And for JF’n Kerry… “How do you ask an American soldier or Marine to die in your war?”

I cannot see the US Congress giving Dear Leader and Lurch the go ahead to start a war with a country that has not attacked us or threatened us and that is not threatening any of its neighbors, except Israel. If we were to go to war with every nation in the region that is a threat to Israel we would be at war with the entire ME.

farsighted on September 6, 2013 at 1:04 PM

The idiots and radicals have taken over, and our foreign policy along with the general state of the nation is in a state of lunacy. I don’t trust our leaders. I don’t trust the meme-pushers. Putin’s analysis makes more sense to me than Obama’s. Now that’s weird.

Burke on September 6, 2013 at 11:53 AM

I feel the exact same way, you know the world is upside down when Putin not only sounds like the voice of reason in the general insanity that governs us these days, but he also appears like the more honorable man and leader, comparing to O. It is beyond weird, indeed.

jimver on September 6, 2013 at 1:35 PM

However I am very much pro-Israel and I believe that Israel is our biggest ally in the region… mnjg on September 6, 2013 at 10:26 AM

What has Israel ever done for us, I ask again?

Akzed on September 6, 2013 at 10:30 AM

Akzed on September 6, 2013 at 1:54 PM

“This military strike will do more damage to [Syrian President Bashar] Assad’s forces in 48 hours than the Syrian rebels have done in two years…”

Oh, I see- shock and awe is just fan freakin’ tastic when a jugeared mincing dope in the White House wants it done.

And of course when a dumbocrat is the one doing the bombing, it is in no way whatsoever the “best recruiting tool Al Qaeda has”.

Stupid mfm.

GrassMudHorsey on September 6, 2013 at 2:47 PM

Stupidly stupid. How many people will die? For 1400+ years that part of the world has had much difficulty getting along with others, including subsets of their own. Teamwork? No way.

IF the USA had gone to nuclear power in the 1980′s, IF the USA had opened its drilling – none of the planet would have been in this mess b/c we would have controlled energy. Countries would not be beholder to others that disagree with them; we’d have far less debt (then again, maybe not – the leftist DEMS cannot imagine a balanced budget let alone make one).

Talk about missing opportunities.

MN J on September 6, 2013 at 2:56 PM

Yep. Excellent point, MN J.

Bmore on September 6, 2013 at 6:06 PM

…I can’t wait to see the video!

KOOLAID2 on September 6, 2013 at 7:11 PM

“This military strike will do more damage to [Syrian President Bashar] Assad’s forces in 48 hours than the Syrian rebels have done in two years,” a national security official told ABC News.

And lay the groundwork for a killing frenzy against Christians.

VorDaj on September 6, 2013 at 8:06 PM

NOT good news. We need to “stand down” or else we are in for more trouble than we can handle. Obama needs to keep his comments and “red lines” to himself in the future.

Amazingoly on September 6, 2013 at 8:43 PM

There may not be U.S. combat “boots on the ground” in Syria, but there will be U.S. planes in the air over Syria — vulnerable to advanced anti-aircraft weaponry Syria has obtained from Russia.

Colony14 on September 6, 2013 at 9:51 PM

Ah yes, but did you tell them if you saw a whole bunch of yes votes moving around it would change your calculus.

Basilsbest on September 6, 2013 at 10:33 AM

Tee-hee.

And lay the groundwork for a killing frenzy against Christians.

VorDaj on September 6, 2013 at 8:06 PM

Groundwork is already laid and the superstructure going up; this would be putting on the finishing touches.

Given the tribalism in the ME, an attack on a Muslim nation (unprovoked, and not just in their view) by a (nominally) Christian nation would be more than enough to generate additional, possibly terminal, reprisals against the ME Christian communities.

AesopFan on September 7, 2013 at 1:30 AM

i’m very tired of seeing our men and women in body bags or with their limbs blown off or riddled with ptsd because we have kowtowed to the israeli lobbies.
gracie on September 6, 2013 at 9:40 AM

This is fringenutstuff!

Sherman1864 on September 7, 2013 at 2:42 AM

Mission creep or mission creeps or two creeps and no mission?

Sherman1864 on September 7, 2013 at 6:23 AM

I can’t tell you what goes through my mind when I see Bam hugging and wrestling with another man…..

avagreen on September 7, 2013 at 12:17 PM

Bam seems to be enjoying it waaaayyy too much. And, dumb Kerry is …..well, just out to lunch and just enjoying the limelight. Poor soul.

avagreen on September 7, 2013 at 12:20 PM

I don’t trust our leaders. I don’t trust the meme-pushers. Putin’s analysis makes more sense to me than Obama’s. Now that’s weird.

Burke on September 6, 2013 at 11:53 AM

Yes, it is.

I find myself having this same idea run through my head more than once these last few weeks.

It’s a sad day for this nation when one is forced to admire the leader of our sworn enemy nation over one’s own brain addled, narcissistic personality disordered leader in the W.H.

avagreen on September 7, 2013 at 12:35 PM

Comment pages: 1 2