In a briefing with the press, deputy national security advisor Ben Rhodes said that any military strike on Syria would be a response to chemical weapons–and would “not [intend] to resolve the underlying political crisis within Syria.” Instead, “the underlying political crisis within Syria” would be dealt with diplomatically, he said.
As for the President, he once again underscored the very high confidence that we have that the Assad regime was responsible for the chemical weapons attack on August 21st. He reinforced the importance of upholding international norms to which all of the nations here are party to through the Chemical Weapons Convention. He noted the importance of continuing to work through the U.N., but also the paralysis that has existed in the Security Council on the issue of Syria, and therefore, underscored the importance of ensuring that there is enforcement of a norm that is so fundamental to global peace and security.
Beyond that, there was also discussion on the importance of a broader political resolution to the challenge in Syria through the Geneva II process. As we’ve said repeatedly, our military action is limited and focused on the issue of chemical weapons; it is not intended to resolve the underlying political crisis within Syria. That is an issue that we seek to address through the Geneva II track. And so the President was able to reinforce that message again last night.
The Obama administration is considering a plan to use U.S. military trainers to help increase the capabilities of the Syrian rebels, in a move that would greatly expand the current CIA training being done quietly in Jordan, U.S. officials told The Associated Press on Thursday.
Any training would take place outside Syria, and one possible location would be Jordan.
Since there are reports that the Rebels might be Al-Qaeda and may in fact be behind the sarin gas attack, I wonder if this will turn out better than the “rebels” in Egypt where everyone (not on the left) was screaming about the Muslim Brotherhood.
But, of course, Obama is GOD to the Left so they have to march to his parade like the lemmings they are.
Sept. 2, 2012, YORK, Pa. (AP) — Vice President Joe Biden said Sunday that Republican rival Mitt Romney is “ready to go to war in Syria and Iran” while hurting the middle class…
You probably could have anticipated this. When President Obama gets in trouble, he either has no idea about the wrongdoing (think IRS, FBI). Or it was someone else’s fault. (You-know-who from Texas.)
Now, we know that the red line statement Obama made as president 381 days ago about how any Syrian use of chemical weapons “would change my calculus” wasn’t really Obama’s fault.
According to Obama, although it looked just like the American president standing at the little podium with no teleprompter in the White House Briefing Room, that modest man was actually speaking on behalf of the entire world.
“I didn’t set a red line; the world set a red line,” Obama claims.
So the World that refuses to back the suddenly hawkish Obama drew the line, Syria crossed, and only Obama is going to “unilaterally” take up the fight. But that’s not his fault. How noble….Right….Cut back on the Viagra Mr. President I think you’re overdosing.
The last straw for our self-important elected representatives may have been Obama in Scandinavia talking to Congress, which last we checked meets in Washington.
Standing with the Swedish prime minister, the president on Wednesday lectured U.S. lawmakers that “my credibility is not on the line . .. America and Congress’ credibility is on the line.”
He also claimed, “the international community’s credibility is on the line.” Everyone’s credibility is in question, it seems, except the leader of the free world, who placed us where we are as regards Syria. He’s not passing the buck; he’s shoving it down everyone’s throat.
“We have to act,” he says, “because if we don’t … somebody who is not shamed by resolutions can continue to act with impunity … and other despots and authoritarian regimes can start looking and saying, ‘That’s something we can get away with.'”
Also, you should know that just because the president of the United States threatened some vague response on Syria’s President Bashar Assad should he use chemical weapons does not now put Obama’s credibility on the line should nothing adverse, in fact, happen to Assad’s regime.
But that will be the case even if Congress approves Obama’s “acting” against Syria, because it’s clear such action will be essentially cosmetic. After his for-show attack, Bashar Assad “can continue to act with impunity.”
Because we don’t “regime change” after all, that was a BUSH Doctrine. 🙂
The rest of the world’s bad guys, meanwhile, will note that Secretary of State John Kerry just told Congress he was for boots on the ground in Syria before he was against them. Then they will remind themselves that Obama’s withdrawals from Iraq and Afghanistan have drained all the political will for real war out of America.
How many different ways are there for a White House to deliver a truckload of fertilizer onto the U.S. Capitol’s steps? When Kerry first says, “I don’t want to take off the table an option” to deploy troops in Syria — then says he will “work out language that will satisfy the Congress and the American people that there’s no door open here” — legislators can smell the stink.
It’s “on the table” but “there’s no open door”?
Reuters, meanwhile, on Thursday deflated Kerry’s claims of “moderate” Syrian rebels strengthening, as “at odds with estimates by U.S. and European intelligence sources and nongovernmental experts, who say Islamic extremists remain by far the fiercest and best-organized rebel elements.”
Joshua Foust, ex-U.S. intelligence analyst on Afghanistan and Yemen, told Reuters, “Basically, the jihadists are setting up governance and community councils” within Syria “while the moderates exhaust themselves doing the heavy fighting.”
Asking Congress to stick its neck out and support a non-strategy that neither Obama nor Kerry could make the case for was always a stretch. But they’ve committed two serious Washington taboos: blame lawmakers for your own mistakes, then lie to them.
So I guess you have to pass it to find out will happen next. Sounds very ObamaCare…
This, henceforth, shall be known as Chicago Logic. Through Obama’s hindsight, what’s on the line now is the credibility of the world, which has thrice decided through the United Nations to do nothing about Assad’s chemical use. Like the Arab League. And Britain’s Parliament, which voted to join the “No’s” last week.
Also what’s also on the line, Obama declared at a Wednesday Stockholm news conference, is the credibility of the United States Congress, which until a couple of days ago had no clue it had any role in Obama’s red line drawing almost 13 months ago.
Or any role in Obama’s ill-defined, cockamamie plan to do something military sometime soon, after Syria had time to scatter its valuable military targets among the civilian populace.
As he did two years ago when launching his war to oust Libya’s dictator, the Nobel Peace Prize winner had dismissed as unnecessary and irrelevant to any military attack on Assad those elected representatives on Capitol Hill with the constitutional responsibility for declaring war. A technicality.
Finally, according to Obama’s newly-revealed doctrine, another group whose credibility is now directly on the line big-time is the American people.
You may not have realized your integral role in Obama’s off-the-cuff, red-line bluff because the elected leader of the United States has never once bothered to address the citizens of this country on the subject.
Nor actually has he done any consulting, say, through their elected representatives — until this very week when the one-time opponent of war fully realized how stark naked alone he was wanting to start another war in the Middle East. (IBD)
His last escapade turned out so well, after all…