Syria - Message being sent

[OhioArcher]

Hey, y'all I've figured out what Obama's Syria strategy is. He took Joe Bidens advise about going out on the porch and firing 2 blasts from a double barrel shotgun.

“If we are saying in a clear and decisive but very limited way, we send a shot across the bow saying, ‘stop doing this,’ that can have a positive impact on our national security over the long term,” Obama said.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/08 ... z2dJh0dy1j

How can it be both ways? It ain't going to work on Syria anyway. This isn't a Naval war or the Coast guard chasing a boat. Syria is a dangerous, non-complying nation. That would be like shooting over the heads of a group of thugs hell-bent on taking your home away from you. It won't even slow them down...just give them more time to get into a better offensive position. Obama knows warfare as much as I know nuclear science...and that is squat. He figures this will get everyone's mind off his made-up scandals...and drag us into another unwinnable war with terrible consequences...

What I don't understand is why are we shooting from the hip on this? We have plans for every contingency under the sun...that's why there is a war planning center. And if we didn't have plans on Syria before the violence started, we sure as hell have had enough time to draft up something better than "shoot across their bow". If not, then all those military advisors and strategists need to work in a soup kitchen. Granted, they may have plans and barry is choosing to ignore them (at our peril). But this looks and sounds like a Key Stone Cops fire drill...and having an aircraft carrier task force bottled up in a cul-de-sac can end very badly...

 

[aksavanaman]

This isn't a Naval war or the Coast guard chasing a boat.

At least we (USCG) have plans and ask before we start firing our pea-shooters every 5 years

 

[GunnyGene]

This isn't a Naval war or the Coast guard chasing a boat.

At least we have plans and ask before we start firing our pea-shooters every 5 years

The whole thing looks like it's falling apart. Britain and France having second thoughts. Congress ain't happy, etc.

The Obama administration's aggressive push to punish the Assad regime for an alleged chemical weapons attack last week was running into hurdles on Thursday, as Congress demanded a say in the decision and international support began to fray.

After the U.S. failed to win support for an anti-Assad resolution before the U.N. Security Council on Wednesday, President Obama's efforts were dealt another blow as allies France and Britain indicated they might wait until U.N. investigators finish before deciding the next step.

British Prime Minister David Cameron reportedly has backed off his goal of holding a swift, single vote in Parliament on Thursday, allowing for a second vote possibly next week.

The delay in London could prevent Obama from taking any action, as his administration has said it will not act unilaterally on Syria. U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon says inspectors are leaving the country on Saturday, meaning any report from them is not likely until next week at the earliest.

But Obama is facing his own set of problems in Washington, where lawmakers currently on summer recess are beginning to voice serious consternation about the possibility of a missile strike. The administration plans to brief top lawmakers on Thursday.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/08 ... z2dMqklQW7

 

[GunnyGene]

The British Parliament just voted to NOT attack Syria. That put's bow shot Obama in a awkward position. Which led to this response from Assad.

 

[carbinemike]

Whatever will Obummer do Gunny? I don't know other than he'll make the wrong decision.

Where is the liberal outrage over a possible military strike?

British Prime Minister David Cameron lost a vote endorsing military action against Syria by 13 votes Thursday, a stunning defeat that will almost guarantee that Britain plays no direct role in any U.S. attack on Bashar Assad's government.

A grim-faced Cameron conceded after the vote that "the British Parliament, reflecting the views of the British people, does not want to see British military action."

 

[GunnyGene]

Whatever will Obummer do Gunny? I don't know other than he'll make the wrong decision.

Where is the liberal outrage over a possible military strike?

British Prime Minister David Cameron lost a vote endorsing military action against Syria by 13 votes Thursday, a stunning defeat that will almost guarantee that Britain plays no direct role in any U.S. attack on Bashar Assad's government.

A grim-faced Cameron conceded after the vote that "the British Parliament, reflecting the views of the British people, does not want to see British military action."

Don't know, but if we're lucky he'll have a complete mental melt down and be involuntarily committed to a institution. I honestly don't think his ego can tolerate his mouth much longer.

 

[GunnyGene]

A thinly veiled threat from Putin?

“I would like to address Obama as a Nobel Peace Prize laureate: Before using force in Syria, it would be good to think about future casualties,” Putin told Russian news agencies in Vladivostok during a tour of the country’s flood-stricken Far East.

“Russia is urging you to think twice before making a decision on an operation in Syria,” he said.

More: http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/eur ... print.html

 

[aksavanaman]

I feel like this whole situation is a catch 22. If BHO decides NOT to retaliate with military force he will look weak (more than he already does) delivering empty handed threats and imaginary "lines". If we do start lobbing missiles we're starting another Middle East engagement with a bleak outcome.... i.e billions spent and American lives lost.

I pick the former to be honest. I certainly don't like looking weak on the International front... but I take that over loosing more of my fellow service men and women to a country that certainly doesn't want us there either.

 

[GunnyGene]

I feel like this whole situation is a catch 22. If BHO decides NOT to retaliate with military force he will look weak (more than he already does) delivering empty handed threats and imaginary "lines". If we do start lobbing missiles we're starting another Middle East engagement with a bleak outcome.... i.e billions spent and American lives lost.

I pick the former to be honest. I certainly don't like looking weak on the International front... but I take that over loosing more of my fellow service men and women to a country that certainly doesn't want us there either.

Well, that's the rub. It wouldn't be 'retaliation' at all. There is no immediate threat from Syria. This is about us getting in the middle of a domestic dispute between assholes.

Obama let his alligator mouth overload his hummingbird ass last year with that Red Line bs, and now he's trying to avoid looking like an idiot. Too late; and he can't find a scapegoat to blame it on.

He's desperately trying to convince us with emotional arguments and pictures of dead kids, that 'intervention' is the moral high ground. If we don't punish Assad we get accused of being uncaring and hard hearted. So be it.

Btw, there's a boatload of Marines standing by on the USS San Antonio now with the destroyers on station. I can only think of one reason for that: Prep for downed pilot rescue.

Update: Obama just spoke on the news. Will seek Congressional approval. Everything is on hold till after Sept. 9 when they come back from vacation.

 

[carbinemike]

Update: Obama just spoke on the news. Will seek Congressional approval. Everything is on hold till after Sept. 9 when they come back from vacation.

Yep...he blinked. We looked like idiots before and now he's made us look worse. The muslim world, Russia and China take note...America can be made to back down when you have a inexperienced weenie in the White House. If you draw a line in the sand you have to back it up.

 

[GunnyGene]

Update: Obama just spoke on the news. Will seek Congressional approval. Everything is on hold till after Sept. 9 when they come back from vacation.

Yep...he blinked. We looked like idiots before and now he's made us look worse. The muslim world, Russia and China take note...America can be made to back down when you have a inexperienced weenie in the White House. If you draw a line in the sand you have to back it up.

2 things:

1. Congress will only be voting on a non-binding resolution regarding the use of force, not a binding declaration of war. So Obama ( as he stated), retains the authority to rearrange some of the rubble in Syria whenever he gets a round toit. Which segue's into:

2. Assad having plenty of time to move his stuff around somewhere we can't get to it and take other precautions that will make a missile and air attack a waste of time. We could crater runways and so on, but that kind of stuff can be repaired within days or a couple weeks at most. He could easily force us into a ground war if our intent is to damage him militarily.

 

[zagmp03]

Didn't we do this a couple times after both WTC bombings? And hit what? And that was against a country that didn't have a world power ally.

So, we are going to instead do this against a country that is strongly allied with a nuclear world power and a psychotic regime with a chip on its shoulder? Genius. Not only will we not hit anything, but we'll also piss off everybody east of the Greenwich line.

BTW, I found this. I think it explains how easy it is to make a wrong decision in this region....

 

[GunnyGene]

^^ Good article, but he neglected to mention all the different tribes and religions that are in the mix also.

 

[zagmp03]

That takes us even further down the rabbit-hole. No mention of Russia, Israel or Jordan either, all which have very vested interests. And then there's China....

Whatever happens, I predict stupidity. I'm sure we'll do something as ignorantly symbolic as launching TLAMs on 9/11 into a muslim country, which will incite hatred that makes the past 4 decades look like a tea party.

I just don't have a lot of confidence in rational actions happening. The best thing IMO that can happen is that we do nothing after Congress votes down the agreement and they are used as the scapegoat for not enforcing the red line. And then chemical weapons will proliferate and we'll start all over. Worst thing that can happen is the Prez ignores Congress and launches anyways, in which case, we'll still start over.

Nothing like backing yourself in a corner. Even my kids are smart enough to catch me when I do that. Sheesh.

 

[GunnyGene]

^^ Yep. Good opinion piece here about leadership specific to this. He has found a scapegoat tho: Congress, and by extension, the general public.

President Obama's Saturday speech on Syria (where he decided not to decide) offers at least five fine examples of how not to employ military power.

Consulting with Congress is, of course, exactly the right step to take before committing both U.S. armed forces and the American people to ventures overseas. But, how the president got to this point is a lesson in lousy leadership.

Lesson #1: Surprise is Still a Principle of War. If the president's priority was really to punish Assad with shock and awe, he went about it all wrong. The regime has had plenty of time to get ready--disperse assets; marshal its allies; deploy human shields; and decide how it will respond or preempt US action.

Lesson #2. Red Lines Only Work When They Are Red. The whole idea of a red line is prevent bad behavior by declaring if the line is crossed there will be swift and decisive action.

If President Obama was really serious about holding Assad accountable he should have consulted Congress before he issued a red line--not after.

In all likelihood he didn't because there was a good chance they would have said--no--and well they might.

Intervening in civil wars; getting conclusive evidence about what is going on the ground; and defining clear, achievable, realistic military objectives for punitive strikes is really hard--and the White House had no good answers for addressing any of these issues.

What happens to Obama's next red line, if Congress rejects this one?

Or will Congress have to rubber stamp a stupid red line to preserve the president's credibility? Wouldn't that just encourage Obama to make more reckless red lines in the future?

Did the White House think about any of these questions before it stated making declarations?

Lesson #3. A Shot Across the Bow Only Works if the Enemy Thinks You Are Serious About Sinking Their Ship. President Obama has already declared he won't intervene in the civil war, so any strikes will be little more than a nuisance to a regime that plans to fight to the bitter end.

Lesson #4. Victory Has a Thousand Fathers, Defeat is an Orphan. President George W. Bush had a Congressional authorization for a use of force in Iraq, a UN resolution, popular support for military interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan, and support of a broad international coalition. That mattered little when the wars did not go well.

All the legitimacy in the world will mean nothing--if military action does not turn out well. The president doesn't have a solid game plane for Syria, a resolution from Congress is not a "get out of jail free card."

Lesson #5. Think Before You Act. In terms of salvaging the president's shattered credibility as a foreign policy leader turning to Congress won't help.

A wise president would have built a coalition of support before the crisis--not waited for the crisis--then tried to build a coalition. And, failing that, then make it seem like military action is all up to Congress--and the president is just a bystander.

From Obama's perspective, ....................

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/08/ ... z2ddmOtauG

 

[carbinemike]

Good points in the article that Gunny posted above. Again, the only message now being sent is of the USA having a naïve and clueless leader. He may try and blame Congress but the damage to him is already done.

 

[GunnyGene]

Good points in the article that Gunny posted above. Again, the only message now being sent is of the USA having a naïve and clueless leader. He may try and blame Congress but the damage to him is already done.

If Obama had been alive and running China a couple thousand years ago, Sun Tzu would have assassinated him.

Warfare is a great matter to a nation;

it is the ground of death and of life;

it is the way of survival and of destruction, and must be examined.

Therefore, go through it by means of five factors;

compare them by means of calculation, and determine their statuses:

One, Way, two, Heaven, three, Ground, four, General, five, Law.

The Way is what causes the people to have the same thinking as their superiors;

they may be given death, or they may be given life, but there is no fear of danger and betrayal.


There are three ways the ruler can bring difficulty to the army:

1. To order an advance when not realizing the army is in no position to advance, or to order a withdrawal when not realizing the army is in no position to withdraw.

This is called entangling the army.

2. By not knowing the army's matters, and administering the army the same as administering civil matters, the officers and troops will be confused.

3. By not knowing the army's calculations, and taking command of the army, the officers and troops will be hesitant.

When the army is confused and hesitant, the neighboring rulers will take advantage.

This is called a confused and hesitant army leading another to victory.

 

[OhioArcher]

God help us all...we are going to be invaded by Mexico and Canada...

All kidding aside, if we were surrounded by anything other than 2 oceans, Canada and Mexico we surely would be in danger of being invaded.

We may also need to be looking at something from Korea. If I were N Korea, and if I was adamant about reuniting the peninsula, I would be gearing up for a move south right now. I would have had plans in place to move against S Korea when obamination launched against Syria. If it got ugly for the US and became more than a "shot across the bow" then move south . But obamination taking 3 steps back and wavering in the face of his "go it alone" plan could make the move south even more realistic. obamaination's wavering and cowardice is deafening. He has shown he will not follow through on his words...they are hollow. And how could the US sustain war on 4 fronts? It can't. Iraq, Afghanistan and now Syria would stretch our already thin forces to the breaking point. The US would not be able to provide adequate military support to S Korea and it would fall.

Then add China's resolve to take back Taiwan and you have a wild west time coming to the world. It all hinges on obamination's desire to get involved with a civil war in the middle east. They are looking at a small issue when they should be looking at the whole world picture.

Wake up, Barry, before you doom the rest of us. The dominos are set and just waiting for you to tip the first one...

 

[GunnyGene]

How Can You Ask a Man to Be the First One to Die for a Mistake?

Rand Paul asked that question on Meet the Press today.

Appearing on Meet The Press on Sunday, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) slammed Secretary of State John Kerry on his willingness to intervene militarily in Syria by twisting his most famous words against him.

"I would ask John Kerry, How can you ask a man to be the first one to die for a mistake?" Paul said, in reference to Kerry's famous words against the Vietnam War to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 1971.

Kerry, as a part of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War, famously said then in calling for an end to the Vietnam War, "How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?”

Kerry served in Vietnam but was subsequently accused of distorting the conduct of American soldiers in Vietnam and the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth famously cast doubt on whether Kerry deserved the medals he received for serving in Vietnam.

Paul said he did not believe American interests were involved in either side of the Syrian war.

More: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2013 ... -a-Mistake

 

[GunnyGene]

Unfortunately for Kerry, and this administrations credibility, Hitler never used Sarin or any other gas during WWII. The Nazis had a quite a large stockpile, which was captured at the end of the war, but none was ever used. A lot of it ended up in the US and other countries.

Kerry said the use of chemical weapons puts Syrian President Bashar Assad in the same category as the world's most bloody dictators.

"Bashar Assad now joins the list of Adolf Hitler and Saddam Hussein [who] have used these weapons in time of war," he said.

http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/20 ... sarin?lite