All the talking heads in DC are all asking the same question. Since the President didn't seek official approval from Congress for Libya, then why is he seeking it for Syria.
I have the answer. Its about seeking political cover for the blowback that will occur when we attack.
Hezbollah will light Israel up with thousands of missiles. The Syrians will launch even more chemical attacks against the rebels. Suicide bombing would happen all over the Middle East etc...
In other words, Dempsey finally got through to the President. Additionally, with the Brits pulling out, we would be left to fight all these fires by ourselves and the President's popularity would crater.
That's it in a nutshell. The region will burn if we attack and he wants someone to hide behind. Check this out from Commentary.
According to Politico, “At the very least, Obama clearly wants lawmakers to co-own a decision that he can’t back away from after having declared last year that Assad would cross a ‘red line’ if he used chemical weapons against his own people.” And theWashington Post reports:If a Lt in the Basic School showed this type of leadership style, old warhorses like Colonel Fox would seek to get him stripped of his commission.
Obama’s proposal to invite Congress dominated the Friday discussion in the Oval Office. He had consulted almost no one about his idea. In the end, the president made clear he wanted Congress to share in the responsibility for what happens in Syria. As one aide put it, “We don’t want them to have their cake and eat it, too.”
Get it? The president of the United States is preparing in advance to shift the blame if his strike on Syria proves to be unpopular and ineffective. He’s furious about the box he’s placed himself in, he hates the ridicule he’s (rightly) incurring, but he doesn’t see any way out.
What he does see is a political (and geopolitical) disaster in the making. And so what is emerging is what comes most naturally to Mr. Obama: Blame shifting and blame sharing. Remember: the president doesn’t believe he needs congressional authorization to act. He’s ignored it before. He wants it now. For reasons of political survival. To put it another way: He wants the fingerprints of others on the failure in Syria.
Rarely has an American president joined so much cynicism with so much ineptitude.
Now we're seeing this in our Commander in Chief.
As a British ex-serviceman I feel that something went very wrong in my country last week when the PM was defeated in the House of Commons. Yes it's true, he didn't argue the case for intervention in Syria with any great skill but for us now to stand by and watch people die without raising a finger is surely wrong? Running these imperetives past the Commons/Congress is weak leadership in my opinion. For the sake of everyone I hope that the USA does intervene and doesn't make the same mistake that we have here in the UK. What I can tell you is that the people of this Kingdom now feel ashamed, which is as it should be.
ReplyDeletei totally disagree.
Deletei am so tired of seeing our forces being sent to one hotspot after another in the Middle East. once we put out the fire what do we get? blame, anger, rage --- everything but thanks.
the west cannot solve these problems no matter how horrendous they might be. its not our business. let China take a stab at being the world's policeman but i'm tired of the US fulfilling that role.
not to be disrespectful, but if the Brits had signed on to the operation it would still be 90 percent US doing the deed. and we would receive 100 percent of the blame. quite honestly the Parliament did us a favor by voting it down.
Yes Solomon, you are 100% correct in your argument.
DeleteI don't find your comments disrespectful but they are indeed 'real politik'. All those men and women who have died in Iraq and Afghanistan for a lofty ideal. Soldiers, sailor's and airmen who will not be returning to their counties and shires. Alas, they will all be forgotten by friend and foe alike. Sorry to say, we backed the wrong horse and now it's time to settle up with the bookie....
explain please.
Deleteyou want us to take action for humanitarian reasons instead of the security needs of the US. you lambast your own govt because they felt the same AND THEN you suddenly make the leap to service men that died will be forgotten by friend and foe?
that makes no sense.
Okay if congress says "F u" to the president and they don't give him support Obama will be left out to dry. He will only have the choice of intervening to stand behind his "red line" statement or not intervene and show he's got no guts. Congress might actually do something I like for once!
ReplyDeletei'm hoping Congress says no.
Deletei've never witnessed a ego driven man on so public of a stage. this will be the ultimate psychological test. does a person do what they know is needed? them swallowing their pride for the sake of the nation, instead of dragging it into another war....does he say screw it, my word is the word of the country so we have to strike as a nation so MY word is kept...
but the juiciest part will be to watch what i believe is a well laid plan to set the region on fire if he goes ahead with the attack.
consider this. Why would you put an aircraft carrier in the Red Sea for such a limited operation? the only thing that makes sense is if they're expecting tremendous blow back. additionally i know that at least two of those Burkes are ABM capable.
the only missing piece is to see what happens with the 1st Armored. if they start sending units then they're expecting hell on earth.
that's where i'm looking. either the 1st Armored or another heavy mech unit will be needed. Jordan and Western iraq is tank country. Maybe if we see elements of the 101st start moving that might mean something too. but we'll see.
Some people here thinks we are are going to a Munich 2 !
ReplyDeleteThey think that us will wait somebody else set the fire : perhaps France...
In the end it's Qatar / Arabia saudi that will win if we act.
the syrian civil war is like advanced theoretical physics and the US state dept only understands 3rd grade math.
Deletewe can't begin to even fathom the different rivalries and potential outcomes of events that we could set in motion by getting involved.
If our military is used. "Al Queda's Air Force" would be apt nose art on a B-52.
ReplyDeleteWith a Burkha covered pin up?
DeleteWhy not just paint it black.
Russian Federation reports a surface launch of a missile in the Med. confirmed Israel and US Forces fired a brace of Sparrow RIM.
ReplyDeletetesting weapons systems before a fight. Obama will strike yea/nay makes no difference, perhaps he found out who killed Steven's and companions in Bengahzi.
This is one attack that will jab the Hornets nest one time to many, the region clearly sits on the edge of the abyss, looking in to see the monster yet only glimpsing their reflection from the huge pools of blood inside.
The interesting item for me is that weak, kicked in the balls look John Forbes Kerry suddenly acquired, like someone told him when this falls to shit and blame is being laid Kerry will be numero Una on the hit parade.
We may see several high political figures get theirs in this charade.
Obama I support you only if you do a massive decapitation strike on Syria and Iran, also Saudi Arabia and Yemen. Burn the cancer out, with extreme prejudice.
Thank you. It's rare to have the benefit of such clear thinking, thoughts which are obvious to many of us but which are neglected in the stenographic government-friendly mainstream media.
ReplyDeleteBUT: (You knew this was coming.) "The Syrians will launch even more chemical attacks against the rebels" contains an unproven assumption. There is no evidence of a Syria chemical weapon attack. Russia FM Lavrov: "There are no facts, there is simply talk about what we definitely know. But when you ask for more detailed evidence, they say that it is all classified, therefore it cannot be shown to us. This means there are no such facts to encourage international cooperation," the minister told a group of students this morning. " abcnews
There is, however, evidence of a rebel chemical weapon attack. See, Saudi Arabia (Prince Bandar) is not the primary drover in this anti-Syria conflict.
correction: ". . .is the primary driver in this anti-Syria conflict."
DeleteTo me, it appears that both sides of this civil war are our enemies. For us to win, we require both sides (including Iran, Russia, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Al Queda, Muslim Brotherhood) to loose.
ReplyDelete